New Colt Revolvers!!!!!! - Page 4

laytonj1 · December 31, 2016, 12:55 PM

Quote:

I've never owned a Colt and don't plan on ever owning one made in the last 70 years.

LOL. That's because they cost more than $200.
Bashing a gun you have never seen and is not even on the market yet... yeah.... Truthteller my a@@.

Jim

SaxonPig · December 31, 2016, 01:16 PM

Truth Tellers- First of all please don't call me pig. My member name is SaxonPig, not pig. Calling me pig is insulting and I know you don't intend to offend a fellow forum member intentionally.

You seem a little touchy bout this. I am not trying to start anything. You don't like Colts or anything else that's fine. You have every right to your opinion and your preferences. I just don't see any need to jump in with negative comments when we already know how you feel.

Have a blessed New Years.

UncleEd · December 31, 2016, 02:39 PM

It'll be a plus in the revolver world.

A six-shot D frame sized gun is virtually ideal in handling and in concealed carry.

Handling a J-frame and a D-frame sized revolver are two different worlds and while I'm very much a Smith man, I've always liked the mid sized Colts.

Colt seems to be wisely jumping into the end of the revolver pool which Kimber hoped to capture but heck, where are the Kimbers.

I'd love to see the lock work diagrams and I'm eager for test reports.

As stated, the Smith J frames do nothing for me although I do have a Model 36. When it comes to Rugers, I love the GP 100 but to me the 5-shot SP 101 has always been clunky, heavy and with way too difficult a DA trigger (might as well just use and carry a K-frame Smith).

Truth be told if Colt came out with a Python just like the ones produced in the 1960s and put a magical $500 price on it, complaints would arise that its timing was somewhat sensitive and not suitable to rough DA usage like a Smith 586.

Pond, James Pond · December 31, 2016, 02:59 PM

Quote:

My thoughts are Smith and Ruger have been making DA revolvers that way for decades now where Colt hasn't. Smith and Ruger employees know how to build them where the Colt employees don't, so there's an experience gap and a learning curve that Colt's going to have to go through.

Whilst a lot of what Truthteller has said rings true I will point out that Kimber also has had no revolver building experience (not even historically speaking) yet they seem to have turned out a decent product if initial reports are anything to go by.

So it is always possible that these will be nice pieces and worthy of the admiration of old.

**OldMarksman** · December 31, 2016, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Hey, if it's all about that extra round, Armscor/Rock Island .38 is a 6 shooter. Costs about $250 after shipping and FFL transfer.

I have played with one in a store. It didn't impress me.

I carried a model 642 for a while and relegated it to a back-up role. I did not like the trigger pull. Tendonitis and arthritis conspire annoy me.

The new Colt, or the Kimber, would also serve for backup--both to mitigate the risk of a malfunction and to give me a left-hand pocket gun to carry while driving.

Which one? That would come down to grip, trigger pull, and dollars and cents. Haven't handled either one of them.

TruthTellers · December 31, 2016, 03:49 PM

Quote:

The new Colt, or the Kimber, would also serve for backup--both to mitigate the risk of a malfunction and to give me a left-hand pocket gun to carry while driving.

Which one? That would come down to grip, trigger pull, and dollars and cents. Haven't handled either one of them.

Nor I, but I would estimate that the Kimber will hold up without issues for thousands upon thousands of rounds longer than the Colt will because it's built for the .357 and the Colt isn't.

I think between the two, the Kimber beats the new Colt and would be a great choice, if you're willing to put up with the slightly heavier weight and bulk.

Driftwood Johnson · December 31, 2016, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Someone who spends $1500 on a Colt is putting that right in the safe and you know what? Guns should be bought to be shot. I know, some must think that sounds silly.

Sometimes you simply don't know what you're talking about, but that does not prevent you from posting ignorant comments. Not everybody who spends that kind of money on a firearm puts it away as a safe queen. I can tell you I don't.

And I am not even going to repeat the uncalled for, rude, nasty comment you made about Hilary Clinton.

For what it's worth, I will not be buying any of the new revolvers made by Colt, there are plenty of great old ones still out there. I feel the same way about S&W, I don't buy any of their new revolvers.

But I am glad to see that Colt is dipping its toe in the water of the modern double action revolver market.

jackmoser65 · December 31, 2016, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Nor I, but I would estimate that the Kimber will hold up without issues for thousands upon thousands of rounds longer than the Colt will because it's built for the .357 and the Colt isn't.

I think between the two, the Kimber beats the new Colt and would be a great choice, if you're willing to put up with the slightly heavier weight and bulk.

That's an interesting theory. Wrong-headed, misguided and rooted in uninformed opinion but interesting nonetheless.

roashooter · December 31, 2016, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Quote:
I've never owned a Colt and don't plan on ever owning one made in the last 70 years.
LOL. That's because they cost more than $200.
Bashing a gun you have never seen and is not even on the market yet... yeah.... Truthteller my a@@.

Jim

this sums it up

TruthTellers · December 31, 2016, 04:13 PM

For all I've said in this thread, I'll say that I am excited that Colt is coming back to the DA revolver market with something. The more competition, the better, the more options available to people, the better.

My issue is with people and the Colt company themselves treating whatever they make as if it's just so good and better than everything else on the market that it's literally priceless. Hey, if you've tried what S&W, Ruger, Taurus, and whoever else makes a revolver today and you just couldn't hit with it or didn't like some aspect of it and the Colt tickles every fancy that was originally left unsatisfied by something else, good for you, I'm glad you got what you wanted or were looking for.

But don't tell me that just because I haven't touched it that I can't talk it down for previous faulty products made by the company before, the high price, or some people's ridiculous claims of alleged superior quality.

Somehow it's wrong for me to scoff at a new Colt, (which I'm not, I'm scoffing at the fanboyism) but it's just fine for many others here to bash something like Hi-Point for the way it looks or the materials it uses when they've never shot it.

Again, it's the one uppers who sound like millionaire playboy's on the golf course talking about their newest gizmo and someone has to bring up their even betterer gizmo to be higher than thou. Be happy you have something you like, but don't try to tell me it's like Gillette, the best a man can get.

**OldMarksman** · December 31, 2016, 04:16 PM

Quote:

...I would estimate that the Kimber will hold up without issues for thousands upon thousands of rounds longer than the Colt will because it's built for the .357 and the Colt isn't.

"Buit for...?" Well, it is chambered for the magnum cartridge, but so was the Colt Magnum Carry. And so was the original S&W Combat Magnum, but it wasn't really very durable when hot loads were used.

Which one will last longer will depend upon load paths, the stress on various areas of the frame and cylinder, material characteristics, dimensional details, the behavior of gases from the barrel cylinder gap, and possibly other things.

None of us have the information to draw any conclusions on that.

"Thousands upon thousands"....? Who on Earth will fire that many?

Quote:

I think between the two, the Kimber beats the new Colt and would be a great choice, if you're willing to put up with the slightly heavier weight and bulk.

Not a very informed opinion, without having examined either one.

TruthTellers · December 31, 2016, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Not a very informed opinion, without having examined either one.

It's an opinion formed with what I know about both guns on paper. That opinion can change, but for now I'm giving the first round to Kimber on points.

Maybe the Colt will come back and win on a TKO.

Radny97 · December 31, 2016, 04:22 PM

As the OP I'm confused by so many people having already formed an opinion about the new Colt. So far I can only count one poster who has handled one. Not shot, not owned, handled. No one else. So all other opinions are essentially based on a single magazine photograph. So little is known how can such strong opinions even be formed yet? Seems a little premature to me.
Btw I really appreciate the comments from DPris. Very informative!

arquebus357 · December 31, 2016, 04:27 PM

Truthtellers

You missed the clearly superior Charter Arms snubbies.

Seriously though, Charter has never received credit for saving the .44 special with their Bulldog.

And no...I don't presently own a Charter or do I work for them. I did own one their old stainless long barrel 357's at one time and thought it was right up there with the big boys.

**Aguila Blanca** · December 31, 2016, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TruthTellers

My issue is with people and the Colt company themselves treating whatever they make as if it's just so good and better than everything else on the market that it's literally priceless.

What have you been smoking?

Since you don't like Colts and presumably don't follow the market, it might surprise you to know that most 1911 fans understand that Colt currently offers probably THE best bang-for-the-buck pistols in the 1911 marketplace. Yes, you can find entry level 1911s for less -- but not THAT much less, and the ones selling for less don't have forged frames and slides, and use a lot more MIM small parts. Considering that Colts are made in Connecticut, USA, by union workers and are competing at the lower end against guns made in the Philippines, Brazil, Turkey, and who knows where else -- I think your characterization of the Colt is both unfair and quite wrong.

Super Sneaky Steve · December 31, 2016, 06:43 PM

Colt should have made it a hammerless model.

jackmoser65 · December 31, 2016, 08:10 PM

Quote:

But don't tell me that just because I haven't touched it that I can't talk it down for previous faulty products made by the company before, the high price, or some people's ridiculous claims of alleged superior quality.

You're judging them based on the distant past, purely out of ignorance. The guns they CURRENTLY build are of very high quality.

A little bird told me you only own one gun, an 1858 replica. Is that true? Have you really learned everything you know from Google and YouTube? If so, do you really think your opinion holds any water compared to those of us who have been shooting for decades and have owned dozens of revolvers?

You have no credibility.

Stephanie B · December 31, 2016, 10:17 PM

Lot of electrons being bandied about about a gun nobody's yet gotten to shoot.

As for the Kimber, how many are out there? I've not seen one, even at a "master Kimber dealer."

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

puppyface · December 31, 2016, 10:56 PM

I don't like the fiber cereal red light district front sight. Its a Colt. Put a damn front sight on it.

Purple Bikerr · December 31, 2016, 11:24 PM

QUOTE-"Thousands upon thousands....? Who on earth will fire that many?"

Well, I have a S&W 640 Centennial (.357 J-frame) that I have put over 5,000 rds. of full house magnum loads through.

Stephanie B · January 1, 2017, 07:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by puppyface

I don't like the fiber cereal red light district front sight. Its a Colt. Put a damn front sight on it.

Latest word is that the front sight can be changed with an allen key.

**OldMarksman** · January 1, 2017, 11:03 AM

From Mark Keefe, AmericanRifleman.org, today's date:

Quote:

...Some changes [from the Detective Special] include trigger geometry. When you look at the new cobra you can see that the trigger rides on a pin more centrally located in the frame. And it is straighter than one might expect. Colt wanted to use the trigger of the Python as the baseline for what it wanted in the new Cobra. They have graphs, charts other tests that resemble a pathological liar’s polygraph test saying that they have determined this revolver’s trigger is right in there with the well-regarded Pythons. I would add, perhaps, that looking at how the bolt and hand are put in, there may just be less chance of this gun going out of time like a Python.

As expected, the Cobra single-action trigger pull was absolutely superb. The double-action pull, while smooth, was still a double-action pull. I was able to easily keep the sights aligned while drawing that trigger back. But, then again, I've shot some revolvers. I think that when this gun gets into shooters’ hands, one of the most immediate things that will be noticed is the re-contoured frame. Essentially Colt’s engineers changed the frame’s backstrap so that the trigger finger moves more in a straight line. It is not a radical change, but a useful one, I believe.

From what I have read, the trigger of the Kimber K6A is pretty good, too.

Targa · January 1, 2017, 12:06 PM

Looks nice but a little pricey, MSRP anyway. Looking forward to seeing a medium frame .357 from them.

Jim Watson · January 1, 2017, 12:24 PM

I hope they sell a barge load of them and expand the lineup to include a 4" New Viper (Really a Police Positive Special, but a Colt DA has to be a snake these days.) and an adjustable sight New Diamondback. And .22 LR and WMR ammo is getting available, how about a nice New Diamondback Convertible? Ooh.

I hope somebody - preferably as contractor to Colt - stamps out some of those hammer shrouds that used to be available for D Colts. This size gun is an overcoat pocket pistol for me, and should be snag resistant.

I hope the trigger does not feel like a Python*. The defunct SF VI/DS2/MC line has a superior DA. I wish I had bought one of those, but I was focused on the Kahr auto which was also new at the time.

*Don't get on my case about the wonderful Python trigger. I have two Pythons that I shot extensively in PPC, IPSC and IDPA competition without wearing out as the Internet tells me should have happened, but both had extensively - and expensively - reworked double actions.

mk70ss · January 1, 2017, 12:36 PM

Can't speak about the new, upcoming Colt, but I have a new Kimber K6s and it is superbly done. Great fit and finish, stout, great sights, and not a sharp edge on the gun. And the trigger is like a gun that's been professionally tuned out of the box.

I love that Colt is getting back in the double action wheelgun gun game. The more choices we have, the better. I loved the old DS and Magnum Carry guns. I hope the new stuff they make is as good or better.

January 1, 2017, 12:36 PM	#100
mk70ss Senior Member Join Date: January 12, 2008 Location: Tennessee Posts: 1,598	Can't speak about the new, upcoming Colt, but I have a new Kimber K6s and it is superbly done. Great fit and finish, stout, great sights, and not a sharp edge on the gun. And the trigger is like a gun that's been professionally tuned out of the box. I love that Colt is getting back in the double action wheelgun gun game. The more choices we have, the better. I loved the old DS and Magnum Carry guns. I hope the new stuff they make is as good or better. __________________ Say when.....

December 31, 2016, 01:16 PM	#77
SaxonPig Senior Member Join Date: April 24, 2006 Posts: 1,900	Truth Tellers- First of all please don't call me pig. My member name is SaxonPig, not pig. Calling me pig is insulting and I know you don't intend to offend a fellow forum member intentionally. You seem a little touchy bout this. I am not trying to start anything. You don't like Colts or anything else that's fine. You have every right to your opinion and your preferences. I just don't see any need to jump in with negative comments when we already know how you feel. Have a blessed New Years.

December 31, 2016, 02:39 PM	#78
UncleEd Senior Member Join Date: April 13, 2013 Location: N. Georgia Posts: 1,150	It'll be a plus in the revolver world. A six-shot D frame sized gun is virtually ideal in handling and in concealed carry. Handling a J-frame and a D-frame sized revolver are two different worlds and while I'm very much a Smith man, I've always liked the mid sized Colts. Colt seems to be wisely jumping into the end of the revolver pool which Kimber hoped to capture but heck, where are the Kimbers. I'd love to see the lock work diagrams and I'm eager for test reports. As stated, the Smith J frames do nothing for me although I do have a Model 36. When it comes to Rugers, I love the GP 100 but to me the 5-shot SP 101 has always been clunky, heavy and with way too difficult a DA trigger (might as well just use and carry a K-frame Smith). Truth be told if Colt came out with a Python just like the ones produced in the 1960s and put a magical $500 price on it, complaints would arise that its timing was somewhat sensitive and not suitable to rough DA usage like a Smith 586.

December 31, 2016, 04:13 PM	#85
TruthTellers Senior Member Join Date: October 22, 2016 Posts: 3,888	For all I've said in this thread, I'll say that I am excited that Colt is coming back to the DA revolver market with something. The more competition, the better, the more options available to people, the better. My issue is with people and the Colt company themselves treating whatever they make as if it's just so good and better than everything else on the market that it's literally priceless. Hey, if you've tried what S&W, Ruger, Taurus, and whoever else makes a revolver today and you just couldn't hit with it or didn't like some aspect of it and the Colt tickles every fancy that was originally left unsatisfied by something else, good for you, I'm glad you got what you wanted or were looking for. But don't tell me that just because I haven't touched it that I can't talk it down for previous faulty products made by the company before, the high price, or some people's ridiculous claims of alleged superior quality. Somehow it's wrong for me to scoff at a new Colt, (which I'm not, I'm scoffing at the fanboyism) but it's just fine for many others here to bash something like Hi-Point for the way it looks or the materials it uses when they've never shot it. Again, it's the one uppers who sound like millionaire playboy's on the golf course talking about their newest gizmo and someone has to bring up their even betterer gizmo to be higher than thou. Be happy you have something you like, but don't try to tell me it's like Gillette, the best a man can get.

December 31, 2016, 04:22 PM	#88
Radny97 Senior Member Join Date: July 8, 2015 Posts: 1,021	As the OP I'm confused by so many people having already formed an opinion about the new Colt. So far I can only count one poster who has handled one. Not shot, not owned, handled. No one else. So all other opinions are essentially based on a single magazine photograph. So little is known how can such strong opinions even be formed yet? Seems a little premature to me. Btw I really appreciate the comments from DPris. Very informative!

December 31, 2016, 04:27 PM	#89
arquebus357 Senior Member Join Date: December 19, 2016 Location: Atlanta, Georgia area Posts: 455	Truthtellers You missed the clearly superior Charter Arms snubbies. Seriously though, Charter has never received credit for saving the .44 special with their Bulldog. And no...I don't presently own a Charter or do I work for them. I did own one their old stainless long barrel 357's at one time and thought it was right up there with the big boys.

December 31, 2016, 06:43 PM	#91
Super Sneaky Steve Senior Member Join Date: August 9, 2011 Posts: 1,250	Colt should have made it a hammerless model.

December 31, 2016, 10:17 PM	#93
Stephanie B Senior Member Join Date: March 1, 2008 Location: NWern SE Missouri Posts: 339	Lot of electrons being bandied about about a gun nobody's yet gotten to shoot. As for the Kimber, how many are out there? I've not seen one, even at a "master Kimber dealer." Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

December 31, 2016, 10:56 PM	#94
puppyface Senior Member Join Date: October 29, 2013 Posts: 161	I don't like the fiber cereal red light district front sight. Its a Colt. Put a damn front sight on it.

December 31, 2016, 11:24 PM	#95
Purple Bikerr Member Join Date: March 24, 2013 Posts: 31	QUOTE-"Thousands upon thousands....? Who on earth will fire that many?" Well, I have a S&W 640 Centennial (.357 J-frame) that I have put over 5,000 rds. of full house magnum loads through.

January 1, 2017, 12:06 PM	#98
Targa Senior Member Join Date: March 20, 2014 Posts: 2,084	Looks nice but a little pricey, MSRP anyway. Looking forward to seeing a medium frame .357 from them.

January 1, 2017, 12:24 PM	#99
Jim Watson Senior Member Join Date: October 25, 2001 Location: Alabama Posts: 18,541	I hope they sell a barge load of them and expand the lineup to include a 4" New Viper (Really a Police Positive Special, but a Colt DA has to be a snake these days.) and an adjustable sight New Diamondback. And .22 LR and WMR ammo is getting available, how about a nice New Diamondback Convertible? Ooh. I hope somebody - preferably as contractor to Colt - stamps out some of those hammer shrouds that used to be available for D Colts. This size gun is an overcoat pocket pistol for me, and should be snag resistant. I hope the trigger does not feel like a Python. The defunct SF VI/DS2/MC line has a superior DA. I wish I had bought one of those, but I was focused on the Kahr auto which was also new at the time. Don't get on my case about the wonderful Python trigger. I have two Pythons that I shot extensively in PPC, IPSC and IDPA competition without wearing out as the Internet tells me should have happened, but both had extensively - and expensively - reworked double actions.