I Don't Think I Buy The "Too Expensive To Make Colt DA Revolvers" Arguement Anymore

[Joe_Pike]

You given good example on why it CAN be done but none on why it SHOULD be done.

That hasn't stopped new manufacturers from introducing new 1911s.

[TennJed]

Originally Posted by Joe_Pike

That hasn't stopped new manufacturers from introducing new 1911s.

But if you read my whole post you will see I am talking about market and profit. It seems companies like Ruger and Remington are doing just fine because of the market

[Redhawk5.5+P+]

So Joe Pike, would you buy one? And what's you cost ceiling? $2500?

It's all about put your money were your mouth is.

[Joe_Pike]

So Joe Pike, would you buy one? And what's you cost ceiling? $2500?

It's all about put your money were your mouth is.

Well, if you read my very first post you will see that I would have no intention of buying a Colt DA revolver if they started making them again. I do honestly believe that there is a market for $2,500 Colt DA revolvers even if I am not part of that market. If people were not willing to put there hard earned money into high end products, there would be no Rolex watches, Bentley automobiles, Leica cameras, etc. Wilson combat sells $3,000+ 1911s all of the time, so, I don't think a $2,500 revolver would be a hard sell for some folks.

[Redhawk5.5+P+]

Well, if you read my very first post you will see that I would have no intention of buying a Colt DA revolver if they started making them again......

.........Wilson combat sells $3,000+ 1911s all of the time, so, I don't think a $2,500 revolver would be a hard sell for some folks.

Well, I guess I did skim over your OP. Your right, "Some" might" fork out $3000 or even more. Some just might not be enough to justify all the tooling or retooling, after all they are in the business of making money and I doubt it's going to be an old fashion revolver. Most shooters are mostly semi auto people.

So what's your point?

[Winchester_73]

Your right, "Some" might" fork out $3000 or even more. Some just might not be enough to justify all the tooling or retooling, after all they are in the business of making money and I doubt it's going to be an old fashion revolver. Most shooters are mostly semi auto people.

So what's your point?

The point is that Colt isn't making them just because they're expensive to make. Its because of the COMBINATION of expensive to make PLUS inferior quality for the money. If a S&W is $1000 and a Colt DA is $2000, it will not be twice the quality, or even better quality at all. This goes back to something I've always said about a Python, they were never how people "remember" them today or they would not have quit making them.

I don't care what anyone says about how great Colt DAs were, if the crap that people toss out about them was true "best DAs ever made" they obviously would have a market share in the way Rolex and Randall knives do. Their inferior lockwork design coupled with an old manufacturing process(es) made them too expensive to build, and when a S&W for $400 is as good as a $600 Colt, well no one is going to buy the Colt. That's the truth in all of this. In addition, they were never a cut above S&W. Maybe they were before 1853 lol.

I like Colts, and I have a good one or two. "When the legend becomes fact, print the legend" is how I feel about the opinion of older Colt DA revolvers. I think their pre war stuff is incredible, but we also are not talking about their pre war stuff. Heck, even to the 70s their stuff was nice. But a point was reached where their missteps caught up with them, and they couldn't support themselves anymore by even saying "hey, this is a Colt!" because people wanted something better for their money, something that they could get for less from somewhere else.

Colt could do the same. A small but very profitable business for those willing to pay for the legend. They already do that with the SAA, so they must know by now that it works.

Their legend doesn't come from their DA line as much as their SA revolvers and early autos. So no, introducing an over priced over hyped DA revolver for 2x as much as a Ruger or S&W would not be a seller. Why buy it? The SAA is different since Colt introduced it, and the CAS, and how they're easier to make due to the simpler lockwork than a DA revolver.

[kcub]

Why couldn't they at least bring back the Trooper or the Anaconda?

[Winchester_73]

Why couldn't they at least bring back the Trooper or the Anaconda?

Well that would be a good idea on one condition: that those revolvers were intended to directly compete with S&W and Ruger. Colt isn't IMO capable of making DA revolvers that are substantially better than whats already out. Keep in mind that they've been out of that DA market for a while, and in that time the competetion improved their processess steadily. Colt would be starting over and unless they could make the anaconda and ask as much as say a Redhawk or S&W 29, its not worth doing.

[Winchester_73]

Actually, I was thinking about my previous post and it probably wouldn't be a good idea anyways. Ruger and S&W have the market so dominated that after the initial "wow colt is making DAs again" wore away, they would have to offer a very well designed gun since they are competing with well established DA companies in Ruger and S&W. It probably would be a tough task for them to make something that would make them enough money for them to stay competitive with the established. Not saying its impossible either though. Part of me would like to see them come back, and another part of me says, "but what would it be?" it could end up being a very costly venture and if they were poor quality, it would take down sales of their 1911s and SAAs because people wouldn't really say "well hey, their DA is crappy, but the 1911s and SAAs and what not are awesome!" people would steer away from them as a company at that point. They have something working for them now with their offerings, and the old saying if its not broke then don't fix it applies here.

[vyse.04]

I think Colt is happy with their current place in the market. Most shops have a small selection (if any) of Colts, and that has a way of driving up the prices. They have always seemed to prefer the law enforcement/military contracts as well, and there isn't much of a market for revolvers in either area anymore. I don't see Colt ever moving firearms in the same volume as Ruger/S&W, and that certainly wouldn't help their decision to jump back into making DA revolvers.

[kcub]

The Anaconda is more "Smithlike" in that it has no stack in its DA trigger.
It is beautiful, smooth, does not have a goofy lockhole in its side nor any lawyer disclaimers uglying up the barrel. So, yeah, I'd say it could compete with S&W and Ruger no problemo.

[Redhawk5.5+P+]

Winchester_73


You said a mouth full, I read every word you wrote on this OP.

Totally makes perfect sense on top of everything I wrote.

TBS, one other note, I was talking to an old timer at the range with a S&W M52 ($$ .38spl auto) at the time. He told me Colts are great guns, just don't drop it on the ground.

I didn't ask, but I know about Rugers, after falling off a cliff, don't run them over with an M1 tank, but they still might fire.

[seeker_two]

If everyone who's calling for Colt to make revolvers would be satisfied with a revolver that is a simplified, CNC'd, MIM'd lockworked revolver that, at best, would resemble what Armscor is making now, then Colt might reconsider getting back into the business.....

....either that, or have Colt import the Armscor revolvers, polish them a little, and sell them under their brand. That's worked for a number of companies before.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by MrBorland

My guess is that even if they were interested, the machinery & tooling (assuming they still even have it) would need some serious updating to compete in the marketplace. That's some serious capitol investment for a small market. It's likely the same reason we don't see others (Freedom Arms, for instance) making quality DA revos.

And, in fact, they don't have it (the machinery and tooling). If you should be fortunate enough to be granted a tour of the Colt factory, as I was a couple of years ago, near the entrance there is (or was, when I was there) a HUGE empty space right in the middle of the factory floor -- with people and machines and pallets of raw and finished parts all around this wasteland. "So what's going on here?" I asked. The answer was, "That's where the Pythons used to be made, but when we discontinued that line we cleared out all the machinery. We haven't decided yet what's going to replace it."

In fact, the last time I was there Colt had just brought a couple of new CNC machining centers on-line. It's my understanding that since then they've added a number of additional CNC centers, and those machines are large. It would not surprise me at all if I were to go back and see that the former DA revolver area is now occupied by CNC machining centers for the 1911 and Mustang lines.

[Pointshoot]

This is a Good subject - dealing with basic economics. It not only comes down to whether an action may be profitable (building DA revolvers) but also whether that is the best place to spend one's resources. I imagine that Colt management has decided that they can get a better return on their resources from other products - even if their old d.a. revolvers would be profitable. - - I wonder if their SAAs are profitable. I can see where history and public relations might be a factor in producing those guns even if they didnt turn much of a profit for the company. Unfortunately, much of the shooting public has moved away from d.a. revolvers. Except for the small population of big game handgun hunters and J-frames for self defense (and cowboy action s.a. guns) people are semi-auto orientated.

[Sharpsdressed Man]

Ultimately, a watch should keep good time; that is what it is for. Unfortunately, it is the same for guns. While a Colt Python or Diamondback are classy, intricate, and well crafted pieces of art, they do not keep time as well, or are as durable as the more pedestrian Ruger or S&W revolvers. It is like comparing a fine mechanical watch, to a digital. The mechanical watch cannot keep up with technology, and while there are people who appreciate finely crafted things, most people just need the correct time.

[Pointshoot]

Sharpdressedman - is right on with his statement IMO. Not to get too far off the subject, instead of the expensive and beautifully crafted mechanical watch- nowadays I find myself more often wearing an electronic G-Shock. Its far more rugged than the mechanical watch (I can shoot heavy magnums with it on), waterproof, keeps accurate time down to the second, corrects itself automatically every day by checking the atomic reference, and I never have to wind it or change batteries since it is solar powered. On top of all that, its a lot cheaper than a fine mechanical watch. For guys who love fine mechanical watches, more power to 'em. Whatever you enjoy. Consumers will spend their dollars based on their own personal priorities. Its the same with watches or with revolvers (as Freedom Arms has proven with its guns).

[Aguila Blanca]

Looking ahead, one of the facts of life about the old Colt DA revolvers was the amount of hand fitting required. And much of that need was a result of so many of the parts being made by people running old machines and making each part -- the machine operator had to stop turning the wheel at the exact same place for each part, or they weren't all the same size.

I can't help but think that the advent of CNC machining should make it much easier for Colt to economically produce (or REproduce) those fine revolvers with a lot less hand fitting required, for the simple reason that they can produce parts to a much finer tolerance.

[Slopemeno]

Think about the *financial* decisions Colt would make if they wanted to bring the Python back...

Frame. Intricate machining with a sideplate, or cast frame like a GP-100? The GP-100 frame has to be cheaper, so that's what we'll go with. I'd probably outsource (quietly) the casting to Pinetree in AZ. Keep that to yourself, please.

Lockwork? Well, the later Troopers, Security Sixes and GP-100s have the Python lockwork BEAT on parts count, fitting required, and simplicity, so GP-100 style is the choice.

Do we make the crane assembly resemble the old Python? Well, it did only have one point of lock-up...

Pretty soon you see why a modern DA revolver looks like that. The manufacturer has to leverage technology, not hand fitting labor, to make a profit.

Buy a GP-100, and spend the other $1000 having a premium action job and a Shilen premium barrel fitted.

[James K]

"Colt has been discussing bringing a DA revolver back sometime in the future, and my belief is that when they do, it'll probably be a Magnum Carry small frame type DA revolver."

If Colt does bring back a DA revolver, it would be of the new design, and made with MIM parts, because in spite of the ranting and raving they simply could not afford to make the old design revolvers today. But then, the ranters and ravers would scream that Colt was making junk and refuse to buy Colts. (Since they already refuse to buy from Ruger or S&W or Taurus, they are stuck with high quality RG 10's, I guess.)

Just in case you folks flunked Econ 101, the issue is not how much a gun costs retail, it is how much it costs the company to make. Retail price can be subject to customer pressure to some extent; manufacturing cost is fixed. If the amount the manufacturer can sell to the distributor for is under what the item costs to make, the company can either make the product a different way or go broke.

JIm

[johnbt]

"a lot less hand fitting"

Even if there's less grunt work, it still takes the exact same level of skill to properly finish a part and fit it to the gun. Like the famous Italian shotgun maker said, the only important file stroke is the last one.

John

[Redhawk5.5+P+]

Aguila Blanca

I can't help but think that the advent of CNC machining should make it much easier for Colt to economically produce (or REproduce) those fine revolvers with a lot less hand fitting required, for the simple reason that they can produce parts to a much finer tolerance.

To make a better Colt is to make the best Colt of all Colt's. No?

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by Winchester 73

The point is that Colt isn't making them just because they're expensive to make. Its because of the COMBINATION of expensive to make PLUS inferior quality for the money. If a S&W is $1000 and a Colt DA is $2000, it will not be twice the quality, or even better quality at all. This goes back to something I've always said about a Python, they were never how people "remember" them today or they would not have quit making them.

Yes, they would. Colt stopped making DA revolvers because they (under previous management) essentially decided to not sell guns (other than the iconic SAA) to "civilians" (meaning non-military and non-LEO. Since the military and the cops weren't interested in DA revolvers in quantity, that's why they stopped making them. When they go back into selling guns to "the people," they had sold off or melted down the tooling for the DA revolvers so they couldn't just fire up the assembly line again.

Now that they've gone in big for CNC machining centers, it would be a lot easier to build those revolvers again. Negligible down time for setting up an "assembly line" -- just punch a Python program into a CNC machine, mount up a frame blank, and push the button.

[BerdanSS]

The only reason that comes to my mind when I think about it:

Why would I buy a "new" python for probably $1800+ that would most likely be as crappy as the other sluff they put out (and put their name on) now, when I can go to the gunshow that comes around every three months and buy one of the 95%+ "old" pythons (ya know, the ones that are completely unmatched by any other DA .357 in the world) that are laying on about every fourth table for $1100-$1400? I wouldn't wiz in a tin cup for one of their "new" SAAs. I'd just buy a US firearms and be miles ahead for less.

My buddy picked up a stainless 6" python last year, 90% or better finish practically unfired with the original box and continents and really nice "blonde" wood grips for $1200 and change. and his Brother got a 100% 8" anaconda the year before that for most likely hundreds less than a "new" one would go for if they every produced such a thing.

[DPris]

Oh no, it's incredibly more complex than just punching "Python" into a CNC machine.
That's one of the most ill-informed and naive statements I've ever seen in any thread on this subject.
Denis