Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Senator_Blutarski

You’ve obviously never seen the inside of a Colt revolver, much less the fit and especially the finish on a Python.

The metallurgy of the Python doesn’t enter into the issue. The metals used in the 60’s are largely the same metals being used today in firearms, with some additional options offered in the stainless alloys. AISI 4140 was plenty good enough back then and is still more than good enough today. if you want to case or color case a firearm, AISI 8620 is what you’ll likely be using.

The problem for Colt in replicating the Python is twofold:

1. The “bank vault lockup” of the Python (and the tighter lockup of Colts in general) was the result of hand-fitting several critical components in the Colt DA revolver design. The rebound bar in the Colt design was where it all came together, in a multi-faceted boss on the right side of the rebound bar which possessed a number of angles that timed the lockup and rebound of the lockwork. This is where Colt revolvers get their reputation for “finicky” lockwork. S&W made it easier to achieve an adequately tight lockup more cheaply with machined-to-size components by splitting their revolver actions into two springs. Colt’s design, using only one flat mainspring to power both the hammer and trigger rebound in the revolver, makes the fitting of tenths of a thousandths of an inch rather critical.

2. The finish on a Python, the legendary “Royal Blue” blue job, required polishing that cannot be done by machine. It has to be done by hand, and skilled hands at that. The things that amateurs look for in a polishing job is “is it shiny enough?”

The things that professionals look for in a gun polishing job is “are all the features and corners still there when that level of polish has been achieved?” You can tell when a hack polishes a gun for a blue job, any blue job. The corners, features and edges are all rounded off. They went to town with a damn buffing wheel and they blew off all the stuff that they didn’t know someone was looking for. The result is a gun with washed-out features to (in an extreme) what I would call a “melted” appearance.

People who think that hand fitting and polishing can be replicated by machine are the same people who buy vastly over-priced guns, and then are disappointed when they learn what to actually look for in a high quality gun. Machines can’t get into the nooks and crannies, machine-finished guns aren’t finished on the insides, etc.

There’s a reason why the market of high-end guns is narrow - there’s just not that many people who know their ass from a warm rock when they’re looking at a gun. People who appreciate the highest levels of quality are looking for quality in very specific areas of a gun, and then they don’t see that quality and attention to detail, they won’t pay up.


28 posted on 05/24/2014 11:39:14 AM PDT by NVDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]


To: NVDave; All
My post 17 was serious (.17 ammo shelves coincidentally are now bare). I will not buy another gun I cannot readily get ammo for. I'm surprised Ruger can still sell a single 10/22.

Gun manufacturers, start manufacturing ammo now!

53 posted on 05/24/2014 7:29:01 PM PDT by Cold Heart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson