|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
February 7, 2013, 03:06 PM | #26 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,523
|
Quote:
FWIW the change to MIM corresponded with the introduction of flat-faced hammers and frame-mounted firing pins on centerfire models. This change was also made to reduce cost. (Rimfire Smiths had used frame-mounted pins for many decades, although the design was slightly different.) Actually, S&W Performance Center guns and some of the recent "Pro Series" lineup utilize traditional-style forged and hand-fitted lockwork, but this is consistent with the general gist of this thread; these guns are substantially more expensive than standard-production Smiths because production costs are higher, and are only sold in small numbers because relatively few buyers are willing to shell out the extra coin.
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak |
|
February 7, 2013, 05:21 PM | #27 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 15, 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,566
|
It is all about bottom line. It is a lot easier to make money making semi-autos. Grab the parts out of box and put them together. A monkey can almost do it. They still sell them for 1000.00 plus each. AND don't forget AR's, same thing.
I'm surprised S&W and Ruger still sell revolvers. Not prices are really rising on them. |
February 7, 2013, 06:33 PM | #28 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2010
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 3,318
|
Winchester, thats a very fine looking 5 screw. You are probably right. I'm unfamiliar with 50's era Smiths. I do have a model 27-2 which is a fine revolver, but I wouldn't put it in the same class as a python.
|
February 7, 2013, 08:48 PM | #29 |
Member In Memoriam
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 24,383
|
"I think in the 60's and 70's a lot of people thought of the Ruger kinda like they think of the Taurus now."
IMHO, not the same situation at all. When Ruger introduced their first DA revolver, c. 1973, they had a solid reputation for quality and reliability built on their .22 auto pistols, their single action revolvers, and their long guns. Reports of problems with any Rugers were almost non-existent, and few if any quality control issues were ever raised. Not everyone liked the Ruger DA revolvers, but not many warned against them or called them "junk." Unfortunately, there have been many reports of problems with Taurus guns, and Q/C issues continue to surface. I have little doubt that the majority of Taurus guns are well made and serviceable, but too high a percentage seem to have troubles, and the result is that many prospective buyers shy away from them. Jim |
February 8, 2013, 01:57 AM | #30 |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,677
|
TIMES, and tastes change...
High quality (Python) and discontinued add up to collector status. Demand seems high, and prices ARE high, because the supply is limited, and growing every smaller as time passes.
According to some I know (who were there), Colt dropped virtually all their revolvers because of cost vs profits. Colt execs at that time were (according to reports) more concerned with playing golf and their military contracts. They believed they had a lock on making M16s. Turns out they were wrong. I recall quite clearly in 73 (or maybe it was 74) looking at two revolvers at Moran's Sporting goods in Hudson Falls. One was a Colt Trooper Mk III for $188. The other was a S&W Highway Patrolman for $140. I asked my father what made the one woth more than the other. His answer was "only the letters C O L T". Also at this time, the S&W M29 had an MSRP of $283.50. And you could get one, today, for about $400. OR you could pay the MSRP and wait about 2 1/2 years for delivery. Colts are nice guns, for the money. The Python is a very nice gun, for the money. N frame Smiths (personal favorite) are great guns, for the money. Colt let their snakes crawl away, because they didn't think it was worth it to keep making them. Right or wrong, it was a done deal a long time ago.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
February 8, 2013, 02:41 AM | #31 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 6, 2011
Location: Burien,WA
Posts: 897
|
IMHO i think Colt might start making the Snake guns again if all the magazine cap gets past, because if there is mag cap in place, the 6-8 rounds of .357, 44, or 44 Spl. sound more appealing than 10rnd. or less of 9MM, 40 or 45.
__________________
Rugers:SR1911 CMD,MK 3 .22lr 6",Sec. Six '76 liberty .357 4",SRH .480 Ruger 7.5",Mini-14 188 5.56/.233 18.5", Marlins: 795 .22lr 16.5",30aw 30-30 20",Mossberg:Mav. 88 Tact. 12 ga, 18.5",ATR 100 .270 Win. 22",S&W:SW9VE 9mm 4",Springfield:XD .357sig 4", AKs:CAI PSL-54C, WASR 10/63, WW74,SLR-106c |
February 8, 2013, 05:28 AM | #32 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 21, 2000
Posts: 4,193
|
Quote:
You REALLY want a Python, don't you?
__________________
Pilot |
|
February 8, 2013, 09:34 AM | #33 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,523
|
Quote:
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak |
|
February 8, 2013, 12:33 PM | #34 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 9, 2009
Location: North Alabama
Posts: 8,273
|
costs
I'd always heard unionized labor costs, about the same time they lost the M16 contracts too.
|
February 9, 2013, 11:42 AM | #35 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 11, 2004
Location: Redwood City, Ca.
Posts: 4,114
|
It was a number of things over years...
The 1940s... During WWI Colt received a number of contracts from the government and production was geared to war time needs. They had about 15,000 workers on 3 shifts in 3 factories producing over 600,000 1911s, the Colt New service in 45 acp, other revolvers for the war and importantly the M1917 water cooled machine gun. Before the war Colt had stopped production of the SAA due to low sales. During the war they set the machinery for the guns and the tooling outside in the elements where it was destroyed. Other guns met a similar fate or production of stopped, the M1903 and 1908 pocket hammerless semis, the OMM revolver, the Colt Woodsman 22 and others. By various accounts Colt management somehow squandered a lot of the money it made during those years and from 1945-47 not much was built. It had alienated it's workforce and many older workers quit. Others were laid off and by the early 50s the company was on the verge of bankruptcy. The military announced that it would move away from the 1911 and go to a new handgun in 9mm with an alloy frame, a higher round count and da/sa. Colt responded with the Colt Commander which became a commercial success but was not what the Army wanted. Costs kept the military from moving to a new gun at that time but from 1948 on no new 1911s were made for the U.S. military. Colt did not pursue the da/sa concept. The 50s Their poor financial performance hurt their ability to compete in the growing police market where they had been neck and neck with S&W for decades. S&W took the lead in law enforcement revolvers and never gave it up. It lost on both sales and service. Western movies took off like a shot after the war and quick draw and cowboy shooting gained a hold. Ruger and Great Western began selling a lot of guns and the SAA was not in production. Colt lost a share of that market it never regained. When it did return to the SAA it did not innovate. This allowed Ruger to grow in the da revolver market a few years later and take a bite of Colt's law enforcement market. Just as their Mark I 22s took a bite of that market from Colt. In 1955 Colt merged with Pratt and Whitney. They also released the Python in a serious bid to win back some of what they had lost. In 1956 they began production of the SAA again as well as runs of commerative guns. The conglomerate that owned Colt reorganized as Colt Industries. the 60s and 70s Robert McNamara shut down Springfield Arsenal. Colt began production of the M16. Production for the wars in South East Asia meant money. It would make over 5 million copies of this rifle and sell them worldwide. Colt developed the AR15 carbine, the SCAMP, the XM148 grenade launcher and more. It introduced the series 70 1911s. It revamped the design of some revolvers but was still losing share in the law enforcement market. S&W was developing a line of da/sa pistols some of which the military was using in Viet Nam. Law enforcement showed some interest in S&Ws semis. Colt ignored the da/sa market. It's profits were coming from the military. The 80s Colt ownership brought in a new management team in the early 80s which according to the court records provoked a strike in an effort to break the union (which had been formed in the post war period). The strike began in 1985. Replacement workers produced enough guns to keep things going in the plant though quality greatly suffered. The union lost the strike on the picket line but won in the courts 5 years later. The military went to the Berretta 92 which opened the floodgates for the "wonder nines". S&W made a killing in the police market and Colt had nothing to compete with. 2nd and 3rd generation S&Ws were in the holsters of half the cops in the U.S. within a few years. The wheelgun market in law enforcement was done for. A few years later Glock showed up. Colt took heavy blows. In the late 80s reveling from blows Colt was on the verge of bankruptcy. The union, the state of Connecticut and a group of investors (led by the Zilkha group) bought out Colt and rescued it. Colt lost the M16 contract to FN but retained the lucrative contract for the M4. The Zilkha group brought in new management which tried to get into the da/sa market with the Colt Double Eagle and the All American 2000. Both flopped. The 90s By 1992 Colt was again near bankruptcy and in 94 was bought out entirely by the Zilkha Group. They brought in new management in the form of Rod Stewart brought over from Chrysler with no gun experience. They spent millions on trying to develop "smart gun" technology and pandered to the anti gun forces. Stewart replied to criticism of the money lost on "smart guns" by saying he was not a "gun nut" this provoked a boycott by the NRA and others which hurt Colt badly for years. Stewart was fired. The rise of the action shooting sports had led to many, many requests from shooters to upgrades to the 1911. Colt ignored these. In the late 1990s an outfit called Kimber began producing 1911s with many custom add ons at a reasonable price and began eating Colt's lunch so to speak. Springfield followed. Colt was hurt badly. The da revolvers were falling by the wayside. Colt had tried to upgrade (simplier designs, lower cost as with the Lwman) but too many mis-steps hurt them. Production of the Python was transferred to the Custom Shop. In 2004 Colt reorganized again. Still owned by the Zilkha Group Colt was split into two companies. One military and law enforcement the other for the civilian market. Both sides, particularly the military, make money. tipoc Last edited by tipoc; February 9, 2013 at 11:51 AM. |
February 10, 2013, 03:50 AM | #36 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 28, 2005
Posts: 227
|
Wow. I've heard some of that before, but never in that much detail. With that much incompetent leadership, it's a miracle they're still around at all.
|
February 10, 2013, 10:07 AM | #37 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 12, 2005
Location: Bora Bora
Posts: 932
|
I don't know, I think S&W is more than capable of bluing a revolver just as deep and lustrous as any of the snakes.
Two examples below that are excellent revolvers, affordable, deeply blued and only lacking the mystique of the snake series. |
February 10, 2013, 11:11 AM | #38 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: February 19, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,323
|
Quote:
S&W was also struggling during this time period. Quote:
Now I am waiting for Taurus to up their QA/QC and consistantly produce a high quality product. Then they can begin to move up into the ranks of Ruger and S&W with revolvers. Last edited by 22-rimfire; February 10, 2013 at 11:22 AM. |
||
February 10, 2013, 05:54 PM | #39 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 11, 2004
Location: Redwood City, Ca.
Posts: 4,114
|
Quote:
The boycott against Colt after it's President denounced "gun nuts" and the debacle of the smart gun really lasted for years. It hurt their overall income and caused them to jettison guns that were not selling well. Colt did not have the money to advertise in the gun mags for several years from about 2000 to 2011. This hurt them. Some magazines simply did not review new Colt guns for years. The rumor was spread that Colt was out of business or had gone bankrupt. The rumor was deliberately spread. Look in the archives here or on the 1911 forums etc. under "What happened to Colt?" or "I heard Colt closed" threads. Quote:
tipoc |
||
February 10, 2013, 07:35 PM | #40 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2008
Location: Pittsburgh PA
Posts: 2,863
|
Quote:
No hablan ingles? I owned a Python and I've handled many. They're not what they're cracked up to be. Its people who are new to revolvers who insist that the Python is the pinnacle. 5 screw 357s are harder to find than Pythons, therefor many people know less about 5 screw 357s. I definitely like pre 27s better. However, I do want an early first generation Python, only because its a collectors item, not because its the "Rolls Royce" of revolvers.
__________________
Winchester 73, the TFL user that won the west Last edited by Winchester_73; February 10, 2013 at 10:04 PM. |
|
February 11, 2013, 02:26 PM | #41 |
Member
Join Date: June 12, 2012
Posts: 18
|
Grant Cunningham and Massad Ayoob send hugs to Python's haters:
http://www.grantcunningham.com/blog_..._delicate.html http://www.grantcunningham.com/acc-rifle.html Honestly, I'm ashamed to read some things that have been written here. Netto Last edited by Netto; February 11, 2013 at 02:42 PM. |
February 11, 2013, 03:25 PM | #42 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 28, 2010
Posts: 645
|
Netto, this is Python Haters Central. I ignore them all the way to the bank every time my snakes keep increasing in value. The market has spoken loud and clear.
|
February 11, 2013, 07:16 PM | #43 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2008
Location: Pittsburgh PA
Posts: 2,863
|
Quote:
I don't hate Pythons and I actually collect Colts. My opinion is simply to give credit where credit is due.
__________________
Winchester 73, the TFL user that won the west |
|
February 11, 2013, 07:17 PM | #44 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2008
Location: Pittsburgh PA
Posts: 2,863
|
Netto
Thanks for sharing biased opinions on Colt DA revolvers. That really added to the discussion.
__________________
Winchester 73, the TFL user that won the west |
February 11, 2013, 07:43 PM | #45 |
Member
Join Date: June 12, 2012
Posts: 18
|
Winchester73,
And your opinion, does it add something? Cunningham and Ayoob have years of work recognized by several police officers around the world, and you? Please tell me your qualification because I'm curious. By the way, I'm a Police Officer and a Happy User of Colt Pythons. Netto Last edited by Netto; February 11, 2013 at 08:44 PM. |
February 11, 2013, 10:38 PM | #46 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2008
Location: Pittsburgh PA
Posts: 2,863
|
Quote:
Quote:
Most police officers know almost nothing about guns. Just like many dealers don't know a lot of things. Just because you carry an H&K, Sig or Glock, and you have to qualify once per year, does not mean you know anything about this subject. I suppose you enounter a lot of naive people who assume you know revolvers because you carry a polymer auto; well I'm not most people. If they were as good as you say, why would Colt cease production? Its like a mystery, until you think about it...
__________________
Winchester 73, the TFL user that won the west |
||
February 11, 2013, 11:41 PM | #47 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 28, 2005
Posts: 227
|
I despise that article by Cunningham. He pretty much states, "Pythons aren't high maintenance, they just require more care, the occasional tune-up by a gunsmith and a little babying."
|
February 11, 2013, 11:45 PM | #48 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2008
Location: Pittsburgh PA
Posts: 2,863
|
Quote:
__________________
Winchester 73, the TFL user that won the west |
|
February 12, 2013, 06:13 AM | #49 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 24, 2008
Posts: 2,604
|
I read the Cunningham article and while there is a difference, it's still a pretty fine line between "requires regular maintenance because the parts wear out" and "delicate".
|
February 12, 2013, 08:45 AM | #50 |
Member
Join Date: February 5, 2013
Posts: 38
|
Add me to the Pythons are overrated crowd. I've owned several and they were beautiful guns, but the lockwork takes a backseat to S&W in my opionion. S&W lockwork just holds up better. I've seen far more timing issues with older Colts than S&W's of the same vintage.
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|