The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Revolver Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 13, 2012, 04:15 AM   #26
Redhawk5.5+P+
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 4, 2012
Location: NV
Posts: 743
Holy cow KyJim, I'm not a coltaphile, but wow!
Redhawk5.5+P+ is offline  
Old July 13, 2012, 07:01 PM   #27
Bob Wright
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 10, 2012
Location: Memphis, Tennessee
Posts: 1,245
Royal blue. I have no use for stainless. Do like some of the older nickeled revolvers that show their age.


Bob Wright
Bob Wright is offline  
Old July 14, 2012, 04:06 AM   #28
skeeter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 30, 1999
Posts: 858
The reality now is that the bright stainless guns get the highest prices by far followed by the matte stainless and then the blue. Most people who have the Eletroless nickel Pythons and are not original owners think they have matte stainless guns. I wanted to buy 2 different matte stainless Pythons and the guns turned out to be Electroless nickel. In both cases the owners were not the original owners and they did not have the original boxes. You can tell because the stainless pythons have a "S" inside the extractor housing under the barrel or under the star extractor and/or when you take the grips off there may be a "S" but it will be in one of these places.

As far as I am concerned a bright stainless, especially with white Ivory grips, looks awesome followed by matte or blue. I have no desire at all for the bright nickel guns as they can not be buffed out when scratched or worn and something like Hoppes #9 will lift the nickel off. That is the reason Colt stopped making the bright nickel guns when they came out with the way more durable bright stainless.
skeeter is offline  
Old July 14, 2012, 05:42 AM   #29
youngunz4life
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2010
Location: United States of America
Posts: 1,877
I always go stainless but thats just me. looks aren't everything
__________________
"Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!" -Admiral Farragut @ Battle of Mobile Bay 05AUG1864
youngunz4life is offline  
Old July 14, 2012, 08:01 AM   #30
kcub
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2010
Posts: 879
E nickel is more valuable than stainless because they were only available for a year or so and are rare. They were discontinued with the advent of the stainless.

Personally I think the e-nick Pythons are gorgeous; but then I could say that about all of them.
kcub is offline  
Old July 14, 2012, 12:05 PM   #31
dgludwig
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 12, 2005
Location: North central Ohio
Posts: 4,449
The Royal Blue finish is what floats my boat. Any maker today can nickel a gun or polish the steel or matte the blue but the days of Colt Royal Blue (or Smith & Wesson "Brite Blue" for that matter) on a production factory gun, sadly, are long gone.

KyJim: those are some beautiful classic Colts you have there.
__________________
ONLY AN ARMED PEOPLE CAN BE TRULY FREE ; ONLY AN UNARMED PEOPLE CAN EVER BE ENSLAVED
...Aristotle
NRA Benefactor Life Member
dgludwig is offline  
Old July 14, 2012, 09:06 PM   #32
mrbentley57
Member
 
Join Date: February 10, 2012
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 55
Royal Blue by a landslide. I just love that deep rich blue. They don't really make them like that anymore.
mrbentley57 is offline  
Old July 14, 2012, 10:51 PM   #33
357 Python
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 7, 2007
Location: Charlottesville, VA
Posts: 575
I have 2 in my favorite finish, Royal Blue.
357 Python is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2013 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09498 seconds with 9 queries