I got this instead of a Colt Python

[Mistered]

Python vs S&W 686. Not much difference

Actually a LOT of difference - depending on your point of view.
The Python has the 'looks' but S & W is no doubt superior mechanically and with ease of repair and parts availability.
Pythons are beautiful guns but are not particularly 'rare' and are priced unreasonably high.

[North Country Gal]

Have always lusted after a Freedom Arms SA after having handled a few in various gun shops. Just could never afford one. I do know that the FA revolvers rule in the revolver classes in the silhouette game (but so did Dan Wesson 15s, back in the day.). Have heard that the FA 357s are especially accurate, but, you know, I have owed so many truly accurate 357s, including Ruger SAs, Smiths and, now, my Dan Wessons that I would be hard pressed to justify spending three times the cost to only maybe get a touch more accuracy from a Freedom Arms 97. Oh, would love to have one, but, honestly, it would be mostly just to say I have one.

As for the 9mm Korth, how do you like messing with moon clips? One thing about shooting 9mm or 45 ACP in single actions is no moon clips needed.

[markiver54]

Python vs S&W 686. Not much difference

Actually a LOT of difference - depending on your point of view.
The Python has the 'looks' but S & W is no doubt superior mechanically and with ease of repair and parts availability.
Pythons are beautiful guns but are not particularly 'rare' and are priced unreasonably high.

NCG, you may have already addressed this in the past, if so I apologize, however, if not, could you post your comparison of the Python vs 686?
To my knowledge, only differences are possibly a bit smoother action on the snake, ( which may be ), hard for me to believe though, as slick as my 686 is. Secondly, which way the cylinder rotates is redundant, and personally, I like pushing my cylinder release rather than pulling it. Beyond that, all I see is the better/glamorous finish on the Pythons being their only advantage...not looking for a ' safe queen ' !
I like to use my guns.

[dddrees]

Have always lusted after a Freedom Arms SA after having handled a few in various gun shops. Just could never afford one. I do know that the FA revolvers rule in the revolver classes in the silhouette game (but so did Dan Wesson 15s, back in the day.). Have heard that the FA 357s are especially accurate, but, you know, I have owed so many truly accurate 357s, including Ruger SAs, Smiths and, now, my Dan Wessons that I would be hard pressed to justify spending three times the cost to only maybe get a touch more accuracy from a Freedom Arms 97. Oh, would love to have one, but, honestly, it would be mostly just to say I have one.

As for the 9mm Korth, how do you like messing with moon clips? One thing about shooting 9mm or 45 ACP in single actions is no moon clips needed.

I've yet to fire 9mm as of yet. However my understanding is the way they have manufactured the cylinder moon clips aren't necessary. If I get a chance I might try to take a picture of the cylinder.

[North Country Gal]

Would be very interested to see how they make a star extractor work with a 9mm cartridge. Do let us know if it works without moon clips and how they do it.

[North Country Gal]

Mark, the difference is really the way the vintage Colts were produced versus a newer model of DA like a Smith 686.Vintage Colts like the Python and even vintage Smiths were made with a lot of hand fitting of parts. This has always been part of the attraction of vintage guns. Folks like the idea of guns made this old way. But hand fitting of parts has always been the Achille's heel as far as being able to make a gun folks can afford and still being able to make a profit. A lot of gun companies have gone belly up, trying.

The Colt Python was Colt's flagship 357, just as the Model 27 was Smith's. Both got the best in terms of fitting and polishing from their respective makers. The Python, though, depended more heavily on parts being specific to the Python, whereas S&W used many of the same parts, across the board, for so many of their revolvers, keeping model specific parts to a minimum. This gave S&W a huge advantage as to servicing their guns and keeping things profitable. In fact, you can still gets parts and service from Smith on a vintage S&W Model 27. You can keep those old vintage Smiths running for just about forever. Not going to happen on parts and service from Colt on Pythons. That shipped has sailed. If you do buy a Python and it needs work, you better darn sure find a real gunsmith who knows vintage Colts. Not a gun you turn over to Bubba.

By the time the 686 rolled around, Smith was still in the black and making a profit, but Colt was struggling. Smith did a much better job of transitioning into modern production methods than Colt. In fact, you can still buy a CNC produced Smith Model 27 that will shoot right there with the old ones. May not have the allure of the vintage Model 27s, but it is still very much a Model 27. The Colt Python, though, is now history and only available as a very highly priced collectible. Oh, yeah, you can spend the big bucks to get a piece of that history and that vintage Colt name, but don't make the mistake of thinking that money is necessarily going to get you a better shooting gun. That's not what the collectible market is all about.

[dddrees]

Would be very interested to see how they make a star extractor work with a 9mm cartridge. Do let us know if it works without moon clips and how they do it.

The ejector is not the same as what I have on my other DA Revolvers. Here's a review that speaks to it's ability to work without moon clips but does not go into detail however.

https://www.handgunsmag.com/editorial/f ... ies/137779

[markiver54]

Thank you very much NCG. That brings a lot of clarity on the subject. Would rather have a revolver of equal accuracy and serviceability that could potentially outlast me than the expensive show piece.
If I ever have an issue, I can send it straight to S&W, or just find a good gunsmith.

[Mistered]

The ejector is not the same as what I have on my other DA Revolvers. Here's a review that speaks to it's ability to work without moon clips but does not go into detail however.

The Korth cylinder is recessed (much like early S & Ws) and has spring loaded 'flanges' that allow the rimless 9mm case to seat in the cylinder then the flanges spring forward under the rim and then extraction is similar to a rimmed cartridge.

Hopefully it works as reported on the Korth as it has been tried on a couple other brands of guns will less than positive results, probably due to powder residue building up in this area.

[dddrees]

The ejector is not the same as what I have on my other DA Revolvers. Here's a review that speaks to it's ability to work without moon clips but does not go into detail however.

The Korth cylinder is counterbored the cylinder (much like early S & Ws) and has spring loaded 'flanges' that allow the rimless 9mm case to seat in the cylinder then the flanges spring forward under the rim and then extraction is similar to a rimmed cartridge.

Hopefully it works as reported on the Korth as it has been tried on a couple other brands of guns will less than positive results.

Thanks for the explanation.