Anyone have chrono data for the 2020 Python?

[DirtyHarold]

Hey All,

I have been doing some research on the new Python, and I cant figure out if the velocities out of these are lower than say a 686 or GP100 or if they're on par. I saw some numbers on the older Pythons that definitely suggests they are slower but I'm unsure about the new ones, I just can't find enough data.

Anyone have any chrono data from one of the new ones they can share?

Thanks!

[rock185]

I have not seen any such data on the new Python, but have done a lot of chronographing of handgun ammunition over the last ~40 years. I don't think comparing a particular new Python to another particular, say 686 or GP100, will yield much relevant data. Apparently identical guns will yield different velocities. Sometimes a shorter barrel will yield higher velocities than a longer barrel. Your new Python could generate significantly different velocities than a buddy's new Python, etc. There is a good discussion of this by Dave Andrews in Speer manuals #9, #12 and possibly later editions.

[44 AMP]

why do you think it matters?? As rock185 pointed out, each gun is an individual, and every variation you can think of is possible. I have seen a 4" gun clock higher (barely) than an 8 inch. Rare, but it does happen.

Colts tend to be measurably "slower" on average, some say due to their tight bores, but measurably is NOT significantly, you're only looking at a relative handful of fps either way.

Any individual Colt might be faster or slower or the same as any individual S&W or Ruger. Rough general trends matter very little, what matters is what the gun in your hand does.

If you're going to base a buying decision off someone else's chrono data from a different gun, I'd say you're using the wrong priority as your primary.

[DirtyHarold]

I am grateful for your insightful comments, and I am aware that variations from one firearm to the next as well as one batch of ammunition to the next exist as with anything that is manufactured. However with today's modern manufacturing methods, especially the ones Colt has been bragging about, one would not expect to see wild variations in data from one to the next. For example if you put two Ford Mustangs on a dyno even in the same atmospheric conditions you would expect to see different albeit very close HP and TQ numbers. Hence if I can aggregate more real world data with what little I have been able to scavenge online, I can have a better idea of the expected performance.

My request still stands and I would still appreciate to see some chrono data for the new Python, if anyone has it, rather than see my request be undermined and given reasons why it shouldn't matter, etc. For example the BBTI data for the older Python shows it is significantly slower than other comparable revolvers, which would be very relevant to me. There just isn't a ton of data out there on Pythons in general let alone the new ones.

Thanks

[44 AMP]

If I had the data you are looking for, I'd share it with you. But what good is it, really? You need a bunch of data points before you can make any kind of accurate statement about the general performance of a group.

the BBTI data for the older Python shows it is significantly slower than other comparable revolvers, which would be very relevant to me.

Please help me understand your point of view, what is "significantly slower" and how is that relevant to you?

How many Pythons did BBTI test and post data for? One? (as usual), more??
Data from one gun is 100% accurate for THAT gun. It MAY be generally representative of a group, or it may be the gun at either end of the bell curve.
We don't know.

I hope you can find the data you're looking for, but the new Pythons are just that, new, there's not many out there, and I wouldn't expect any volume of data from them anytime soon.

Grabbing a couple of old Hornady manuals, I found one edition used an 8" Python for their .357 test gun, and an older one using a S&W M27 8 3/8". Between those two the Python was 100fps slower than the S&W with a 125gr bullet and 50fps slower with a 158gr.
However, the powder charges used (2400) was ALSO different between the two guns, over 2gr more with the 125 and half a grain more with the 158 shooting out of the S&W than what was shot from the Python....

I've personally shot the same ,357 ammo from 3 different 6" barrel handguns and gotten a 100fps difference between the high and low guns. Its not usual, usual is a smaller difference, but its not so rare as to be unheard of.

I don't know what you expect the data (when/if you get it) to tell you. From where I sit, it would tell me the performance of that one individual gun tested, and little else.

[pete2]

Older Colt guns had tighter bores than S&W had. I would expect higher velocities from the tighter bores. I have not tested them. I don't care. I have chronoed loads for power factor for a state match. Also to check .38 & 9MM to satisfy my curiosity. I ran some.45 ACP, same head stamps on my Bullseye loads had pretty uniform velocities. Mixed brass is all over the place, maybe 100 FPS. Mixed was still accurate enough for IDPA, I did not try it at 50 yards.

[44 AMP]

I would expect higher velocities from the tighter bores. I have not tested them.

Actually I would expect them to be slightly slower. Once you get a good seal with the bullet, reducing the bore diameter only adds friction. And, given a fixed amount of pressure to work with, greater resistance to the bullet going down the barrel seems quite likely to result in a slightly lower velocity.

It MAY increase accuracy due to a "tighter grip" (rifling digging in deeper)but that, I would think would be a matter of each individual gun and bullet combination

[pete2]

I was thinking higher pressure due to tighter bore would equal higher velocity. Again, I haven't tested it. Might do it someday, I have a 6" Python, 19 and 28. It would be an interesting test. S&W run about .357, Colts .355 to .366. I also have an old 4" .38 Trooper could run against a 15. I haven't found Colt guns to be more accurate than S&W or Ruger.

[44 AMP]

I was thinking higher pressure due to tighter bore would equal higher velocity.

When all else is qual, the harder you push, the faster you go. But in this case, all else is not equal. The oversize bullet is a tighter fit, which means it takes more pressure to move it down the barrel, compared to the regular load.

Since the available pressure has to "work harder" to push the bullet down the barrel, it might not reach the same speed as the same load being fired in a barrel where the bullet fit isn't as tight.

Might not. That's the principle, but reality in guns is a bell curve, and while most things will fall in the middle of the possible range there are always some at each end.

One point about chrono data, its from individual guns. Testing a gun, or two of one make & model against others only really tells you about what those guns do, not about what ALL the examples of that make & model will do. For that' you'll have to test a lot of guns, to get a statistically valid sample.

you should test your Python against your S&Ws and anything else, not to "proove" anything about Pythons in general, but just to see what your guns do. They might do exactly what you expect, OR they might do something that surprises you.

As an example of what can happen (not what will, but what can) a some time back I tested 3 different 6" barrel .357s. The load was a hot 125gr JHP near the top of the listed data in the Speer manual current at the time.

A 6" S&W model 19, a 6" S&W model 28 and a 6" Desert Eagle.
The 19 belonged to a friend, and he shot it over my Chrony. Somehow, he doubled the gun. (fired two shots when only one was intended). At that point we stopped shooting that gun. The 4 unfired rounds fell out normally but the two fired cases had to be driven out of the cylinder with a rod and small hammer. That ammo might have been ok in a different K frame, but in his gun it was TOO HOT!. The Chrony read 1620fps. (this was above what the loading manual said)

Same ammo, fired by me, from the Model 28. 6 shots, one at a time. stout! Chrony avg was 1670fps. Cases ejected normally by hand.

Same ammo from the Desert Eagle, full mag, 9 shots, avg 1720fps. Function was flawless.

All three guns turned in velocities higher than the loading manual listed and the ammo was too hot in one, but fine in the other two. Doesn't mean anything about what other guns will do, only, that's what those guns did, that day.
A bit of an eye opener, that was...

[Pumpkin]

Duplicate those numbers with a 357 Sig!

[DirtyHarold]

This is where my question stems from - and before I say it, please, I'm not interested in hearing once again about how my opinions are wrong.

1) We own property, about 35 acres where I am able to take up to 250 yard shots if I wish. Sometimes just for fun I'll go out with a handgun and see how far I can reach out. In doing so I have discovered (not surprisingly) how much projectile velocity has to do with holdover. In my experience I have had an easier time hitting say a balloon with faster projectiles than the slower ones. Again this is just my experience, yours may vary.

2) In my state, the region where I hunt I have to use a straight walled cartridge for whitetail of which I am an avid hunter. 357 is great for whitetail, given it is at proper velocity. Some of the velocity numbers I have seen out of the older pythons I would not feel comfortable using for hunting because they are pretty slow. The GP100 seems to usually have pretty fast numbers compared to the older pythons, so I am wondering how the NEW pythons stack up.

I just get frustrated with the common theme in the gun community where any time someone asks a question about anything all these self proclaimed experts come in and say "do this instead....that shouldn't matter" and so on, whereas I am simply asking if anyone has chrono'd a new python and if so what the data was. I'm just waiting for someone to come in now and for example tell me to get a 44 magnum like an Anaconda - if I wanted to do that I wouldn't be here asking this question.

Ok, I'll get off my soap box....

[DirtyHarold]

Adding to my #2 comment above, harvesting a deer with a 357 revolver is a bucket list item for me. I've gotten plenty of deer, mostly with a crossbow, but I want to get one with a revolver because I think it would be cool.

I compare it to where some people hunt with a compound or even a long bow. Sure they could use a crossbow, but that's not the point.

[reddog81]

With a 148 DEWC and 2.8 grains of Bullseye my 6" Python got an average of 825 FPS and 5" GP100 got 738 FPS. The GP100 has about 7,000 rounds of mostly .38 Special through it and the Python was basically new. Only one cylinder was tested with each gun with my Labradar.

I was kind of surprised at the 87 FPS difference but It is probably common for there to be that much difference between guns and the Python has an extra 1" of barrel.

[wild cat mccane]

No. I agree with you.

But you got a very obvious problem in any forum with your question.

Colt Python owners isn't a big group, and it's generally not a gun shot a lot like the 686 or GP100. We know GP100s tend to run higher velocity than the 686.

I bet the Python would match the 686. The difference between the GP100 and 686 isn't great. Two guns only, but Luckygunner shows the difference between the two that is generally accepted as likely going to happen between the Ruger and the S&W: https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/r...barrel-length/

I can't imagine the Python dipping bellow the 686 for any mechanical reason.

I don't have your answer, but not a dumb question either. Just likely not going to get a Python owner who is actually shooting it a bunch like the 686 crowd. Then get enough Python owners to create an actual idea of Python variation? Just isn't going to happen.

[jmr40]

The oversize bullet is a tighter fit, which means it takes more pressure to move it down the barrel, compared to the regular load.

I don't know the correct answer. Primarily because I'm more experienced with rifle loads than handguns. But with smokeless powder anything you do to increase resistance causes the same charge of powder to increase pressure.

So, the tighter fit should, in my opinion, give you the needed increase in pressure to get more speed. That is the generally accepted reason why rifle match barrels typically shoot faster than common factory rifle barrels.

That is also why you reduce the powder charge with heavier bullets. If I load 165 gr bullets in my 30-06 with the same powder charge as I used with 150 gr bullets it may well be a dangerous overload.

Now bullet length matters. For example a 200 gr bullet fired from a 35 Whelen will achieve more speed than a 200 gr bullet fired from a 30-06 even with the same powder charge. It's because the 200 gr 35 caliber bullet is shorter with less surface area touching the barrel. And less resistance.

[DirtyHarold]

Here is a reply I got from a Facebook group. I did reply asking for actual velocity numbers:

"Yes, I just ran my 2020 4.25" python over my LabRadar this weekend, I'll post the results tonight. Oddly enough, when I ran 158gr SWC (L) (basically 38 Special), my 4.25" python was FASTER than either my 6" 686 or my 5" Model 27 using the same ammo. Shooting 357 Mag reloads (158gr XTP over No. 9), the 6" 686 was faster than the python, but by only about 25 fps or so, not nearly as much as I would have expected with a 2" barrel advantage."

[wild cat mccane]

LuckyGunner showed that the difference between 4" and 6" isn't nearly what we all believe or calculate too

[DirtyHarold]

Right. I just like the 6" which is why my question pertained to this one. For what I would use the python for, the 6" would better suit me.

[44 AMP]

How many guns do you need to test to make a statically significant sample??

If you're going to claim "4" does A, 6" does B and 8" does C " or Colt's do X, S&Ws do Y and Rugers do Z" how many guns do you need to test to prove something is a general trait and NOT the difference between individual guns?

Two or three doesn't do it.

[pete2]

I'll note that once a bullet enters the bbl it is squeezed down to the bbl diameter, I would still expect the tighter bbl to give higher velocity. No real way to prove it as revolvers vary so much you'd have to have test bbls with no cylinder gap to prove it one way or the other.

[Nick_C_S]

I cant figure out if the velocities out of these (the new Pythons) are lower than say a 686.

I don't know about the new Pythons. But I know about my 6" bbl Python (blue) purchased new in 1983.

I also have 686's with 3", 4", & 8-3/8" bbls.

I chronograph a lot. And my 4" 686 consistently outperforms the 6" Python regarding bullet velocity. It's so across the board, that I simply quit testing with the Python. I don't know why. I've never spent any amount of time wondering. It just is and I'm good with that. What I can tell you is that I haven't shot my Python nearly as much as my 4" 686 (or any of my 686's, for that matter).

[FrankenMauser]

My brother just tested one.
Velocities were on par for same-length barrels in other brands.

[RoyceP]

No but there was a chronographed test of a 2021 Python in one of the gun magazines I buy recently where the writer compared it to his 1970's Python. The new one had tighter chambers and rifling and had higher velocity than his old one. Sorry I tossed the magazine after reading it about a week ago.

If it matters to you then buy one and handload it to get the desired velocity.

[DirtyHarold]

Here I got my own data!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HajjitheDoberman]

I have 3 new Pythons, one 6-inch and two 4.25” models. I have several chronograph files. If you want me to email them to you, just pm me. If you have a specific load you would like to see, let me know and I’ll see if I can provide it.
I can post the files here, but doubt that the admins would approve. If a Moderator says ok, then I’ll post a few every so often. They look like the attachment.