Colt Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
807 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Python(2-1/2\", Circa 1964): Were many of these short barrel\'s made in 1964?

Python(2-1/2")barrel(Circa 1964):

1)Does anyone know if there were very many(Blued)2-1/2" barreled Pythons made in 1964? Or, were these produced in large quantities, in normal production?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,971 Posts
Re: Python(2-1/2\", Circa 1964): Were many of these short barrel\'s made in 1964?

I don't believe they were made in large quantities in any year.

------------------
Dick

The watchwords for all mankind are.....Liberty and Freedom.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,720 Posts
Re: Python(2-1/2\", Circa 1964): Were many of these short barrel\'s made in 1964?

I agree with DB that production of the 2.5-inch Python probably never was high. I would guess that the 2.5-inch was always the lowest produciton of the standard bararel lengths (the uncommon 3-inch was not a "standard" length in my opinion.)

The 2.5-inch Python was introduced in 1963 so you have a fairly early one. Mine (311XX) shipped December 9, 1063 to the famous Rifle Ranch of Prescott, Arizona as a single gun shipment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
807 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Re: Python(2-1/2\", Circa 1964): Were many of these short barrel\'s made in 1964?

JudgeColt:

1)Thats very interesting about the 2.5" Python being introduced in 1963, as I wasn't aware of this fact!

2)My 2.5" Python(Circa 1964)has a serial number of #335xx, which is very close to the serial number of your 2.5" Python! I'm wondering, just how close our Pythons might have been from each other?

3)I haven't picked up my 2.5" Python yet(As the 10 day waiting period isn't over yet!)but, I don't know if it would be worth getting it lettered from Colt(Or, not?)?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,720 Posts
Re: Python(2-1/2\", Circa 1964): Were many of these short barrel\'s made in 1964?

As to how close your new Python is to mine, even with my limited math skills, I make yours about 2400 guns later than mine.

You close with a statement about not knowing whether it is worth it to get a factory letter. (Does adding a question mark to a declaratory sentence make it a question?) If that statement was meant to be a quesiton, how can anyone else know if a factory letter would be "worth getting... (Or, not?)" to you? A factory letter will cost $75 and take about four months to get. Only you can decide if whatever the letter might show is "worth it."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
807 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Re: Python(2-1/2\", Circa 1964): Were many of these short barrel\'s made in 1964?

JudgeColt:

I apologize for using wording in my question that might have confused you? My reference to whether or not obtaining a letter on my 1964 2.5" Python, was mean't only in the sense, that if there was something known to be "Unique" about these very early 2.5" Pythons-then, in that case, I'd want to go for a letter? I was just assuming that maybe there was some historical knowledge out there, regarding these early 2.5" Pythons that could lead me to seek a letter from Colt? I didn't mean to imply that I wanted somebody to determine if I'd want to spend $75 for a Colt letter(or, if it would be worth it to me, to do this?)? I should have chosen better wording for my question? Anyway, I appreciate your attempt to answer my question, under these circumstances? I am getting older-and, my brain does "Fumble" things, once in awhile! Yikes!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,720 Posts
Re: Python(2-1/2\", Circa 1964): Were many of these short barrel\'s made in 1964?

Colt38, apparently you do not understand what you get with a Colt letter, which is not much. A Colt factory letter provides the configuration in which the gun left the factory (model designation, serial number, caliber, barrel length, finish, type of stocks), to whom it was shipped on what date, along with how many similar guns were in the same shipment. Sometimes, the records do not have all the information, in which case, the letter will say: "Not listed."

The letters normally do not comment on the rarity of the gun, or the like. If there is some special-order feature, such as an "adjusted pull," the letter will mention it, and usually give the work order number.

If you ask something specific, like how many 2.5-inch Pythons were made in 1964, you will not get an answer.

For example, I have now seen three Colt Marshal revolvers WITHOUT the "M" suffix on the serial number said to be present on all Marshal revolvers. Not really expecting anything, I asked Ms. Hoyt to comment on that issue (the three Marshal revolvers I have seen without the "M" suffix) when I sent for a letter on a 2-inch Marshal without the suffix. All she said was "Colt records indicate that the serial number of Marshal revolvers included an "M" suffix." She even added an "M" suffix to my serial number in the letter, and my Marshal does NOT have the "M" suffix. It letters as a 2-inch Marshal so I am sure the records are wrong about the "M" suffix, at least sometimes, such as my gun. I do not believe any Marshals have the suffix, but have only seen three so may be wrong. Apparently Colt records have somehow been entered using an "M" suffix, perhaps to distinguish the serial numbers IN THE RECORDS ONLY (but not on the guns) from the Official Police revolvers that are in the same serial number series.

One time a similar question resulted in being sent a photocopy of a page from the Wilson/Sutherland "The Book of Colt Firearms" as the answer (one wonders about copyright issues), which was no answer of course. (Wilson/Sutherland says the Marshal has the "M" suffix ,which obviously is not always true.)

If the basic information mentioned above is worth $75 to you, which it is to me, then get a letter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
807 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Re: Python(2-1/2\", Circa 1964): Were many of these short barrel\'s made in 1964?

JudgeColt:

Thankyou very much, for your excellent explanation, regarding what getting a Colt letter on a gun, is all about! And, you are right, that I didn't really understand what would(Or, would not be included)in obtaining such a letter, from Colt's?

Since I knew that Colt's $75(Or, higher!)fee for their letter, was much greater than the $30 that S&W charges, I was leary of requesting such a letter for any of my Colt revolvers, unless I could(Somehow)ascertain
whether or not there might be something unusual or unique enough, to warrant requesting such an expensive letter from Colt's? Based upon the information that you have given me, I'm now much more "Enlightened" regarding what is involved in the process of getting a letter(And, what might be contained in it?)than I was, up until now! You have been very helpful(And, I appreciate it!)!

[This message has been edited by Colt38 (edited 05-02-2005).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,483 Posts
Re: Python(2-1/2\", Circa 1964): Were many of these short barrel\'s made in 1964?

Judge;good theory on the "M"suffix,and I agree with the M maybe being in the factory records,but NOT stamped. I have a blue 4" Marshall,and NO "M",yet is in the correct range. I have probably looked at another 5 Marshalls over the last two decades,and none were stamped with an M.

Bud
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
907 Posts
Re: Python(2-1/2\", Circa 1964): Were many of these short barrel\'s made in 1964?

Sorry to hijack this post Colt38, but to chime in on the Marshal, I also believe the "M" serial is fictitious. Example:

 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,720 Posts
Re: Python(2-1/2\", Circa 1964): Were many of these short barrel\'s made in 1964?

Bushwhacker and lonewolf, it is great to be among believers in the lack of the "M" suffix on Marshal revolvers. I should have asked for support years ago!

I cannot believe that Ms. Hoyt will not address this issue, but she will not. I am going to try again based on the support you have given me. I just cannot get over her listing my serial number in the letter with an "M" suffix when I specifically told her there was not one present. I guess she is just reporting what the record shows, so maybe I am attempting something impossible if the records have the "M" suffix. Frustrating.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top