Thanks for all the replies.
I admit I'm not a real wheel-gun man. And the fact I didn't feel a significant difference between the smoothness of the Python and the Anaconda is probably more to do with me than the guns.
All shots were DA: no SA for comparisons. No dry firing either.
Don't get me wrong: I liked all of them. But I think I'd have to shoot as much with revolvers as I do with bottom-feeders to be able to identify the nuances of the trigger pulls.
I guess its' like what I tell my wife about wine: I'm not refined enough to tell the difference between a $7 bottle of wine and a $70 bottle.
I think this can easily apply to me and revolvers.
I guess I was a bit biased, as I assumed I'd notice a significant difference in the trigger or lock-up of the Colt pistols vs the others.
And compared to the 3 Ruger revolvers I own I still didn't feel anything that jumped out at me.
Now, with bottom feeders I can feel the creep in the trigger, the crispness [or not] of the break, and the trigger pull consistancy, with DA/SA, DAO/Striker or SA pistols. I've tuned quite a few of the triggers [with proper sear fixtures and stones] to achieve the trigger pull I desire.
So i am not completely unaware of what a smooth trigger feels like, in bottom feeders. But I expected to feel some sort of difference that would be noticeable between the Colt revolvers and the others.
The S&W had been tuned so that is not a fair real-world comparison, but the Ruger hadn't been, and they both felt 'good'.
If I get a lot of money and want an heirloom revolver I'll look for a Python. In the mean time I'll shoot the snot out of my GP100, SP101 and SRH. And, when I feel like stepping down a notch, I'll break out my wife's dad's Rossi 951.