Colt Python – The ExhaustNotes Blog

Thoughts on the 9mm Double Charge Issue

By Joe Berk

A few days ago I blew up my 9mm Springfield Armory 1911. It was hellaciously frightening. I wrote a blog about it and I’ll provide a link at the end of this post. My initial conclusion was that I had committed the cardinal reloading sin: I double charged a case. Instead of the intended 5.4 grains of Accurate No. 5 propellant, I cycled the round twice at the charging station and I inadvertently loaded 10.8 grains. I know what you are thinking and that’s okay. If I read about somebody doing this, I’d think they were a dumbass, too. I’ll get back to that later.

5.4 grains of Accurate No. 5 behind a 125-grain powder coated bullet is good. 10,8 grains is not.

Thinking about the double charge issue more, several additional thoughts emerged. Were there other possibilities?

One other possibility is that instead of the failure being due to a double charge, it might have been a squib charge (which would lodge a bullet in the bore) followed by another round. This was dismissed for several reasons:

- - I knew it wasn’t preceded by a squib charge because the prior round felt normal.
  - If it was a squib charge, the following round probably would not have chambered. Squib charges resulting from no powder and pressure being provided by the primer only (in a handgun) tend to push the bullet into the barrel a very short distance (the bullet doesn’t go into the barrel far enough to allow another round to chamber).
  - The were 5 holes on the target, which is the number of rounds I had fired.
  - The barrel was not bulged (TJ inspected it and pronounced it good).

Count them: 5 holes on the target. The fifth hole is the one at the bottom. This bullet was tumbling due to its low velocity. When the case blew out, the pressure vented elsewhere.

A friend asked if I could have seated two bullets in the case. I set bullets (one on top of the other) next to a cartridge case. I think you can see that seating two bullet in the case is not possible. The bottom bullet would set higher in the case than you see in the photo below (the web near the case base and the thickness of the case “floor” would cause it to seat much higher in the case). I would not have been able to seat the second bullet even if there was no powder in the case.

A photo showing that two bullets in a single case is not possible.

I pulled the bullets in the photo above from two cartridges using an inertia bullet puller. Both had exactly 5.4 grains of Accurate No. 5 propellant, which is what I intended. These are the pulled bullets on top of their cartridge cases:

125-grain powder coated bullets pulled from their cases and then placed back on top of their cases.

After I pulled the bullets and put the powder back in each case, you can see the level at which the right amount of propellent (5.4 grains) sets in the case.

5.4 grains of Accurate No. 5 in 9mm cartridge cases.

I wondered: Would a double charge (i.e., 10.8 grains of Accurate No. 5) fit in a cartridge case without it spilling out of the case? The answer is yes. I took the powder from one case and poured it in the other. The case can easily hold 10.8 grains of Accurate No. 5. Take a look:

10.8 grains of Accurate No. 5 in a 9mm cartridge case.

It would be better if the powder was bulky enough that it would spill over the case rim if I double charged it. I know that my 9mm Unique load sits higher in the case (my Unique load for the 125-grain bullet is 5.0 grains).

Trickling 5.0 grains of Unique onto the powder scale.

Here’s what 5.0 grains of Unique looks like in a 9mm case:

5.0 grains of Unique in a 9mm cartridge case.

The question then was how much Unique can a cartridge case hold? I was specifically interested in determining if a double charge of Unique would overflow the case. To answer this, I completely filled a 9mm case with Unique and weighed that amount of propellant:

A 9mm cartridge case completely filled with Unique.

I weighed the amount of Unique held by a completely-filled 9mm cartridge case. The filled 9mm case held 7.9 grains of Unique.

Weighing the Unique held by a completely-filled 9mm case.

A completely-filled 9mm cartridge case can hold a hair over 7.9 grains of Unique propellant.

A double charge of Unique would be 10.0 grains. I concluded that a double charge of Unique would overflow the 9mm case, and this would provide an additional safeguard against an inadvertent double charge. I was careless enough to not notice a case double-charged with Accurate No. 5. I’d like to think I wouldn’t be careless enough to miss powder spilling out of the case, as would occur with Unique. The next time I load 9mm ammo, it will be with Unique.

You might be wondering about the numbers here. Bear in mind that Unique is a less dense propellant than Accurate No. 5. 10.0 grains of Unique occupies more volume than does 10.8 grains of Accurate No. 5.

The challenge now is what to do about the approximately 1400 rounds of 9mm and .45 ACP I already have loaded on the Lee Turret press. I thought I might be able to quickly screen the rounds by weight, but that’s not going to work. The weights of the powder, the brass case, and the bullet all vary, with the bullet (as the heaviest item) having the greatest variation. On the 9mm cartridges, I found that the weight variation of the completed 9mm cartridges varies from 192 grains up to 198 grains. The powder charge is 5.4 grains. If a cartridge weighs 198 grains, would it just be at the upper edge of the weight distribution with the correct single charge, or would it be a 192-grain cartridge with a double charge? It’s even worse on the .45 ACP rounds, because the weight variability of the completed cartridge is more than the 9mm, and those powder charges are in the range of 5.0 grains or 5.4 grains (they are lost in the case compared to 9mm ammo). I can’t take the chance that there’s another double charge in there. I’m breaking down and checking every cartridge. It’s a lot of work, but it’s better than blowing up a gun.

This is the .45 ammo I loaded on the Lee turret press. It’s 700 rounds. I have another 700 rounds of 9mm ammo similarly loaded.

You might be wondering what it’s like to get back on the range after blowing up a gun. I was afraid I might return with a very serious flinch (you know, when you jerk the gun in anticipation of it firing). I’m happy to report (and maybe brag a little bit) that I’m just fine. I had my 9mm S&W Shield out with ammo that I tore down, checked, and reloaded, and I also had my Colt Python (in which I shot .38 Special wadcutters).

An S&W 9mm Shield target shooting the 5.4 grain Accurate No. 5, 125-grain powder coated bullet load described in this blog.

A Colt Python target shot with 148-grain powder-coated wadcutters. I’ve done better and I’ve done worse.

At this point, I’m convinced that I screwed up and double-charged the 9mm round I wrote about last week. TJ (of TJ’s Custom Gunworks) disassembled the gun and pulled out the case you see in the photo at the top of this blog. There was a lot of pressure in there (about 10.8 grains of Accurate No. 5’s worth, actually). Like I said in the earlier blog, it’s an opportunity. More good news is the barrel wasn’t damaged. Even more good news is that TJ is doing an action and reliability job on my 1911. TJ is replacing the two piece guide rod (two-piece guide rods are a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist) and doing a few more good things to this pistol. I’ve already purchased and received replacement grips and a new 9mm magazine. I’ll provide an update in a couple of weeks after I get the 1911 back, and I’ll do another blog on what it’s like disassembling and reassembling 1400 rounds of reloaded ammo.

Stay tuned!

Please click on the popup ads!

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

More reloading and firearms stories are here!

A 110-grain Python Load

I’ve owned three Colt Pythons. Back in the ‘70s I had a blue 6-inch Colt Python and another 6-inch nickel-plated one (they were only about $250 back then, and I could buy them for even less through the Post Exchange). Both those Pythons went down the road, and yeah, I’m sorry I sold them. Who wouldn’t be?

Please click on the popup ads…it keeps us going!

These days, I have a 6-inch bright stainless Colt Python, the new model, and I love it. It’s the one you see in the photo above. I’ve been to the Colt factory to see how they are made, and both the Python’s design and its production are impressive. I’ll let you in on a secret: The new Pythons are better guns. I shoot my Python a lot. In the last few months I’ve been hitting the range with it at least a couple of times every week. I’m old school, I guess: I prefer a revolver to a semi-auto, and I prefer .38 Special and .357 Magnum over 9mm. Your mileage may vary. I know what I like.

Winchster 110-grain jacketed hollow point bullets waiting to be seated and crimped.

I remembered that back in the day I found a 110-gr jacketed hollow point bullet with 10.0 grains of Unique (the max load in the Hornady manual in the 1970s) and it was extremely accurate in my blue steel Python. I mean, like one-hole accurate. Accurate enough to keep that load in my memory for five decades.

Fast forward 50 years and you’ll find me scrounging for reloading components on a fairly regular basis. On one of those scrounging expeditions Rick Phillips (of Phillips Wholesale) had Accurate No. 5 propellant in stock. It’s a handgun powder, and Rick told me that Accurate No. 5 has a burn rate about like Unique. Hmmm. Unique, huh? That stuck in my mind, mostly because I had some 110-grain .357 pistol bullets in my components stash: I had Winchester jacketed hollow points, and Hornady jacketed hollow points. I bought a bunch of the Winchester bullets during the Obama years when everything was scarce, and I was down to one unopened bag of 100. I had an unopened box of the Hornady 110-grain bullets, too.

Winchester, if you’re paying attention, this bag was 15 bullets light.

I loaded the last of the Winchester bullets recently using some junk 357 brass. I have Unique, but I wanted to see if I could get good results with Accurate No. 5. Rick’s comment about Accurate No. 5 being about like Unique stuck in my mind. The max load on the Accurate site for 110 grain bullets is 11 grains, so I loaded some at 10.1 grains and some at 10.5 grains, both with magnum CCI primers.

Winchester shorted me on that last bag of 100 grain bullets. The last bag I had was unopened, but it had only 85 bullets in it. I wrote to Winchester customer support, and they responded with an answer that was left blank. I wrote to Winchester again after receiving the above non-answer for an answer, but I’m not holding my breath.

The results with both the Hornady and Winchester bullets were great. Here’s a 5-shot group at 50 feet with 10.1 grains of Accurate No. 5 and the Winchester bullets. This was the best group this morning, but they were all good.

That’s how we like to do it. I know the brass is dirty. This was a quick and dirty test. The laod was 10.1 grains of Accurate No. 5, a CCI 550 primer, and Winchester’s 110-grain jacketed hollowpoint bullet. The distance was 50 feet.

The 10.1 and the 10.5 grains of Accurate No. 5 loads shot about the same from an accuracy perspective, but the 10.5 grain loads made the primers flatter, so I’ll load the 10.1 grain load the next time I reload this ammo. No sense burning up more powder and stressing the gun and the brass if there’s no accuracy improvement. It’s already excellent at 10.1 grains.

Rugged, reliable, regal, and rewarding: Today’s Colt Python.

The Winchester bullets looked cruder than the Hornady bullets but I think they maybe had a slight accuracy edge. I went online to buy more, but I learned Winchester discontinued them. One of my buddies had two bags and he gave them to me, but the odds of me ever getting any more are slim. Hornady, Speer, and Sierra all make JHP 110-grain bullets, but nobody has any in stock. I have 85 left of the Hornady bullets (I used 15 of the Hornady bullets to make up for the ones Winchester shorted me) and now, an additional 200 Winchester bullets. You still owe me 15 bullets, Oliver.

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

Boudreau Powder-Coated Bullets and Accurate No. 5

Another day on the range, and another set of test results. These are the first loads I’ve tried with Boudreau’s 158-grain powder-coated semi-wadcutter bullets. I loaded the Boudreau bullets into .38 Special cases for evaluation in a Colt Python and a Smith and Wesson Model 60. My first reloads were with Accurate No. 5 powder.

158-grain Boudreau bullets in candy green. Boudreau’s makes a good bullet.

Fresh .38 Special reloads. The candy green color goes well with brass cases.

These days, you take what you can get when it comes to reloading components. I previously developed accurate .38 Special loads with Bullseye, Unique, Power Pistol, and WW 231 propellant (you can read about them on our Tales of the Gun page), but I haven’t previously loaded .38 Special with Accurate No 5. It was the only powder my reloading shop had in stock, so I bought a couple of bottles to try.

Finding data for powder-coated bullets is a bit dicey, and it’s even more difficult with Accurate No. 5. There’s load data on the Accurate website, and they recommended a load range of 5.3 to 5.9 grains for this powder with a 158-grain powder-coated bullet. I loaded at 5.4 grains (0.1 grain above the minimum) to try in both my Colt Python and my Model 60 Smith and Wesson (both of which have been massaged with custom triggers from good buddy TJ’s Custom Gunworks).

Colt Python results at 50 feet. Not bad for an initial load. Subscribe to the ExNotes blog for future load tests.

Smith and Wesson Model 60 load results at 50 feet. This is not too shabby for a snubnose revolver.

I recently tried Boudreau’s 9mm 125-gr bullets and I was very pleased with the results (you can read about that here). I’m just getting started developing loads for the .38 Special with the Boudreau powder-coated bullets.

9mm ammo reloaded with Boudreau’s powder-coated bullets.

You may have noticed that Boudreau’s Bullets is now an advertiser on the ExNotes site. I like the product and we want to share the knowledge with you. You can call the number on their site; ask to talk to Ralph. He’s very knowledgeable and you will be in good hands.

Don’t forget to click on the pop up ads!

Lee Ermey’s Guns Go To Auction

R. Lee Ermey was the real deal. A United States Marine and a drill instructor hired to advise the actors in Full Metal Jacket who was so impressive in showing the phonies how to be a real Marine the folks in charge hired him to play the role (or so the story goes; there are various versions floating around). We’ve all seen the movie; I watch it every time it airs.

What grabbed my attention is that the late R. Lee Ermey’s gun collection is about to go up for auction. I looked through the guns listed out of curiosity to see what Gunny Lee had, and he had good taste in firearms. Lee Ermey owned a lot of shotguns, a few handguns, and a few rifles.

Here are a few of the Gunny’s guns that got my attention.

The first is a Colt Python that is part of a three gun cased set Colt offered several years ago (the set included a Python, a Single Action Army, and a black powder revolver). What’s interesting to me is that Gunnery Sergeant Ermey used his Python (it’s got the scratches and finish wear showing that).

Another one that’s interesting is the Model 62 Winchester. I have one of those that my Dad left to me; he bought it when he was a kid. One of these days I’ll do a blog on it.

And one more of the many that are going on the block. It’s a 1932 Mosin. If you’ve spent any time on the ExNotes blog, you know I love shooting my Mosins. Gunnery Sergeant Ermey was a man who knew his guns.

You can view the complete Lee Ermey auction here. I’ll be watching the auction as it unfolds, especially on the Mosin pictured above. It’s likely it will quickly go beyond my pay grade, but you never know.

More Tales of the Gun!

Never miss an ExNotes blog…sign up here for free!

A TJ Trigger for My New Python

As I mentioned in a recent blog, good buddy TJ (of TJ’s Custom Gunworks) reworked the trigger on my Colt Python. The original single action trigger had a lot of creep, it was heavy, and what surprised me most of all was that it actually cocked the hammer another few degrees before it released. I was getting a little double action when firing single action.

That bothered me enough to call my contact at Colt Manufacturing, and I think he was surprised when heard about it, too. He checked with his engineering department, and the word came back: They had to do that to meet the California and Massachusetts drop test requirements. I checked the California regulation and it requires dropping a loaded, cocked revolver from a height of 1 meter six times on a concrete surface without the gun firing inadvertently. Think about that. Dropping a loaded and cocked revolver, a .357 Magnum, onto a concrete floor. Six times.

Me? I’m going with an alternative approach. I’m not going to drop my loaded, cocked, .357 Magnum revolver on a concrete surface even once. It’s kind of a common sense approach, one that the politicians in California and Massachusetts apparently think we can’t be trusted to take.

A loaded revolver. Cocked. Dropped. Six times. Onto a concrete floor. What were they thinking?

I’m not one to to argue Darwinism versus Divine Creation (we don’t do politics or religion here on ExNotes), but here’s a thought. Maybe someone who drops a cocked, loaded, .357 Magnum revolver on a concrete surface six times, well, maybe Darwin was on to something. Maybe that person needs to be culled from the gene pool. Before you get your shorts in a knot, though, remember my preface: It’s just a thought.

Anyway, back to the main attraction, and that’s the trigger job TJ did on the new Python. TJ took photos of the Python’s internals (the complete parts interface is shown above in the large photo). The photo below shows what was causing the trigger creep and the hammer movement during a single action trigger pull:

That’s the hammer on the left, and the trigger on the right. You’ll notice that the hammer’s sear area (denoted by the red arrows) is kind of rough and it contains a hooked ledge of sorts. That’s what was rotating the hammer back a few more degrees when the trigger was actuated in the single action mode.

TJ modified the sear to eliminate the hooked ledge and create the angles and surface finish the Python trigger-to-hammer interface deserves. That’s what you see below.

Before he improved the sear interface, the Python’s double action trigger pull was 9 1/2 lbs; it is now 9 lbs. The single action trigger pull was a very creepy 5 1/2 lbs; now there is no perceptible trigger or hammer movement before the hammer is released and the trigger breaks at a very clean 2 1/4 lbs. The upgrade completely changes the character of the new Python. I can’t imaging anyone buying a Python and not wanting to have the trigger cleaned up in this manner. TJ is the guy to do it.

The next big question is: Did the new trigger a make a difference in how the Python performed? Hey, you tell me. Here are two 5-shot groups shot at 50 feet with the improved trigger:

Those two groups were shot with my go-to .38 Special target load (a 148-grain wadcutter and 2.7 grains of Bullseye prepared on my Star reloader). The group on the left measures 0.680 inches; the one on the right measures 0.830 inches. Some of the .357 Magnum loads performed just as well. I’ll share all my Python load testing results in a near-term future blog. I didn’t adjust the sights during my load testing because I’d be moving them with each new load; I’ll zero the gun when I’ve selected the load I want for the Python. I am a happy camper; these are phenomenally good results.

You might be wondering about now why you’d need a trigger job on a $1500 handgun. Folks, this isn’t Colt’s fault. They’re doing what they have to in order to meet a requirement imposed by people who don’t understand what they are doing. Don’t get upset with Colt. Do the right thing and vote.

If you have a Python and you’re not happy with the trigger, take a look at TJ’s Custom Gunworks and drop TJ a note. Trust me on this: You’ll be glad you did.

More Tales of the Gun!

Never miss an ExNotes blog!

More gun porn? Check this out!

Colt’s New Python Range Tested

The Colt Python is an iconic handgun that stands out as the pinnacle of the gunmaker’s art. They were originally offered by Colt as their premier .357 Magnum revolver in a run that spanned decades and offered several variants: Blue steel, nickel-plated steel, brushed stainless steel, bright stainless steel, and barrel lengths of 2 1/2, 4, 6, and 8 inches. For a brief period, they even offered one chambered in .38 Special only. That all ended a few years ago when the revolver market subsided and black plastic, semi-auto 9mm gangbanger guns held sideways took over the silver screen (there’s absolutely no accounting for some folks’ taste, I guess). Then, in a surprise move, Colt introduced a re-engineered Python last year, in stainless steel only, with either a 4 1/4-inch or 6-inch barrel. I had to have one, and about a month ago, I scratched that itch.

The new Python carries a hefty $1499 price tag and they are just about impossible to find. And when you do see one, it is always substantially above MSRP. I don’t see the prices coming down on these guns, either. The original Pythons sell for $3K or more (mostly more), and with guns in high demand now and for the forseeable future, I think you’ll always always be able to get your money out of a Python if you ever wanted to sell it. I don’t see the prices going anywhere but up, and like I said, it is near-impossible to find a new Colt Python. But I know people in high places, I got a hell of a deal on my Python, and I am enjoying it enormously. Just looking at it is fun.

I went to my gun club a few days ago to shoot the new Python for the first time, and in a word, it was spectacular. I’ll get to that in a second.

My Python has a 6-inch ventilated rib barrel. The revolver is polished stainless steel and it looks great. The roll marks on the new Python are very similar to the original Pythons. Very classy, in my opinion.

One of the reasons Colt stopped making the original Pythons a few years ago is they were too expensive to manufacture, as they required too much hand fitting of the revolver’s internal components. Colt’s re-engineering effort made all but one internal part capable of being CNC-machined to final dimensions, and in the modern Python hand-fitting is required for only one component. What that did was dramatically improve the double action trigger pull, and somewhat degrade the single action trigger pull. The double action trigger is short and sweet, and the hammer travel is only about half what it used to be. The single action trigger pull is, well, different. Read on, my friends.

Help us keep the content coming: Please click on the popup ads!

Single action, by design on the new Python, has a some take-up and you can actually see the hammer move a little further to the rear when you squeeze the trigger shooting single action. Think of it as a single action trigger that adds a little bit of double action to the dance before it releases the hammer.

I thought there was something wrong with the revolver, but my contact at Colt told me the new Pythons were designed that way to meet the California and Massachusetts drop test requirements. It is definitely not a “breaking glass” single action trigger; it’s closer to pulling the trigger on a Glock (that’s not intended to be a compliment). Double action, though, is absolutely outstanding. It’s a shorter pull than any other double action revolver I’ve ever fired and I like it. I suppose some people might think it’s a good thing that the gun meets the drop test requirements of left-leaning governments. Me? I’d go with Door No. 1 and refrain from dropping my loaded $1499 revolver.

Anyway, the single-action trigger threw me for a loop, but I adjusted to it quickly during a dry firing session. I don’t notice it anymore, and as you’ll see below, it sure hasn’t hurt accuracy.

Fit and finish on the new Python are top notch. You can see that in the photos on this blog, which I shot during and after an extended range session. I probably should have taken pictures before I fired the new Python (when the gun was factory immaculate), but hey, it is what it is.

The new Python has a red ramp front sight, which I like. There is no white outline rear sight (it’s plain black). The combination works well, as the targets you see here show. The Python also has a recessed crown, unlike the original one, which was flush. The recessed crown better protects the bore.

My first shots were 50 rounds I put through the gun using my standard .38 Special target load (2.7 grains of Bullseye and a 148 gr wadcutter, loaded on my Star reloader), all fired single action. I shot from the 50-foot line and it was windy as hell. I had to stop a few times to walk downrange and add more staples to the target because it was starting to come loose, and the target stand was swaying toward and away from me as the wind rocked it. I was shooting, literally, at a moving target.

A complete box of .38 Special wadcutter ammo…50 rounds fired at 50 feet firing single action. All those extra staples were needed to keep the wind from tearing the target off the stand.

I was surprised (and pleased) at how stunningly accurate the new Python is. I hadn’t touched the sights, and it was punching holes right where I wanted right out of the box. It put an entire box of ammo into the bullseye with a standard 6:00 hold and the sights left as they came from the factory. That’s a first for me, and I’ve been doing this a long time. The bottom line: The new Python is accurate.

.38 Special ammo loaded with 148-grain wadcutter bullets. The bullet’s “wadcutter” nose profile cuts a clean hole in the target. I used mixed brass shooting the new Python for the first time.

Then I shot another box of 50 cartridges (using the same .38 Special target load I used for the target above), but this time shooting double action. Let me make the point again: These two boxes were the first time I ever fired the new Python. Here’s my second 50 rounds on the target, fired double action.

Another 50 rounds at 50 feet, this time shooting double action. Not too shabby, if I do say so myself. The new Python’s double action trigger is superb.

Eh, one shot went out of the bullseye (it’s that one in the 9-ring, just outside the 10-ring, on the right). Like I said, it was windy out there. But still, for me, this was phenomenal double action shooting. It’s the best I’ve ever done shooting double action, actually.

Then I thought I’d try two 5-shot groups on the 50 foot standard pistol target with .357 ammo (all targets shown here were shot at 50 feet). As you know, a .357 Magnum handgun can shoot either .357 Mag ammo or .38 Special ammo. I brought along some of my standard 357 Magnum reloads (15.7 grains of Winchester 296 powder and a 158 grain Hornady jacketed hollow point bullet). This is a load I’ve been using since my Army days and it does well in any .357 Magnum revolver I’ve ever owned. It came from the pamphlet Winchester published in the 1970s for their powders. It performed superbly well in the new Python.

.357 Magnum shots at 50-foot targets. Point of aim was 6:00 for all shots. Bring it on…fire and brimstone…the new Python handles full power .357 Magnum loads well.

It’s easy to forget how powerful the .357 Magnum cartridge is unless you fire it back-to-back with the .38 Special. The .38 Special is a very manageable cartridge with moderate recoil, especially in a big, heavy, 6-inch handgun like the new Python. When I shot the .357 Magnum loads, I was instantly reminded that the .357 is a real barn burner. Think big recoil and lots of muzzle flash and blast. It was cool, and the big Python handled full power magnum loads well.

As I already mentioned, it was very windy and gusty on the range (two tractor trailers were on their side on I-15 when I drove out to the club). I was the only guy out there (I’m probably the first guy to visit our range with the new Python, too). On a calm day, I’m sure I could do better than the targets you see above.

I finished up another box of .38 Specials shooting 158 gr cast flatpoint Hursman bullets (also loaded with 2.7 gr of Bullseye), shooting at one of those green star target things you throw on the ground (my daughter bought it for me a few years ago and I think the thing is going to last forever). I walked it out to 50 yards with repeated hits, and I’ll bet I didn’t miss but two or three times out of 40 or so rounds.

There were no malfunctions of any kind in the approximately 150 rounds I fired through the new Python. No light strikes, no misfires, and no jams. And like I’ve been saying, accuracy was stellar. It’s almost like the new Python is laser guided.

A prancing pony…the rampant Colt logo that has adorned Colt firearms for more than a century and a half. Long may it live!

You know, there’s an old saying: You get what you pay for. To that, I would add the qualifier: Sometimes. In the case of the new Colt Python, this is one of those times. I love the new Python. It’s an iconic firearm and if you are thinking about getting one, my advice is this: Do so. You won’t be disappointed.

You can see our earlier blog on good buddy Python Pete’s 8-inch, original Colt Python here. And please check out our other Tales of the Gun stories here.

Never miss an ExNotes blog!

Need targets? Order them the way we do and have them delivered to your door!

Want to load your own ammo? Here’s a good place to get started in the reloading game!

Check out our resurrected Star reloader for prepping high-quality .38 Special ammo!

Want to see more on .38 Special and .357 Magnum accuracy loads in a Ruger Blackhawk? Check this out!

Keep us afloat: Please hit those popup ads!

The new Colt Python

Colt’s ad for the new Python. I have high hopes for this gun.

The Colt Python was the king of the handgun world back in the ’60s and ’70s. It was the Rolls Royce of revolvers. I owned two of them at different times in the mid-’70s. I bought one while I was deployed overseas in Korea (we could actually order guns through the base exchange) and it was delivered to me in Korea. I paid something like $150 for it back then, and it was sleek…deep bluing (Colt called it Royal Blue), a 6-inch barrel, and then I had to worry about bringing it back to the US. I was told I would need a certificate signed by the Director of the Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Bureau and I could only imagine how long that would take, but it didn’t take long at all. I submitted the request and three weeks later I had a hard copy (this was the 1970s) signed in ink by the actual top guy at the ATF. That gun came back to America with me in a duffel bag. I remember that 10 grains of Unique behind a 110-grain jacketed hollowpoint Hornady tore one ragged hole at 25 yards. It was phenomenally accurate.

I traded that Python for a new Ruger No. 1 in .30 06 and a couple of boxes of .30 06 ammo, and I still have that rifle. But back at Fort Bliss I missed the Python. Good buddy Roy told me I could order one through the Fort Bliss Rifle and Pistol Club, so I did (this time in nickel, but still a 6-incher). It was stunning, with flawless nickel plating and a absolutely jewel-like, luxurious look. The I sold that one when I moved to Fort Worth. It was not my brightest move ever. I’ve done a lot of dumb things in my life. This was definitely one of them.

Colt quit making the Python several years ago, and prices went through the roof. An original Python goes for something around $3k, give or take a K or two (almost always to the north). Big bucks, and way more than I want to spend.

Pete’s Python. It’s one of the originals, and it is phenomenally accurate.

I sort of got the Python fever again a few months ago when good buddy Python Pete let me take a few shots with his vintage 8-inch barreled Python. It was the accuracy that got me excited. These were great revolvers. I wrote about that day here.

And then suddenly, just a few weeks ago, Colt announced that they were reintroducing the Python, and it would retail at $1500. That was a good thing, I thought. It’s still pricey, but a new Python would be great. Maybe when the supply exceeds the demand prices might drop, I thought.

I want the new Python to succeed. A frontline company like Colt (an iconic name if ever there was one) deserves nothing less.

A Pair of Prancing Ponies…and that first No. 1

Good buddy Python Pete and I went to the range a few days ago to let loose with a pair of prancing ponies (that is to say, Colts), in both revolver and automatic flavors. The auto was my tried-and-true bright stainless Colt Government Model 1911; the wheelgun was Pete’s stunning 8-inch Colt Python. Both are stunningly beautiful and both are good shooting guns.

A custom bright stainless Colt, with Baer barrel, Millet sights, and a few other nice touches.

I bought the 1911 you see above at a pawn shop brand new back in the mid-1980s for just over $500. Colt no longer offers bright stainless steel guns, so I guess you could say mine is collectible, and when you see bright stainless Colt 1911s come up for sale (which doesn’t happen very often), prices start at $2,000 and go north from there. I guess you could say I made a good investment (except I won’t ever sell it).

A few years ago the front sight popped off my 1911, so I took it to a local gunsmith to have it restaked. That repair lasted all of 50 rounds, and I realized I needed to see an expert. That’s when I hooked up with TJ’s Custom Guns, and I had TJ revamp the Colt. It’s got a Les Baer match barrel, an extended one-piece guide rail, an engine turned chamber (I love that look), high profile/high visibility Millet fixed sights, and TJ’s exclusive high reliability tune. That last little bit means that my Colt 1911 will reliably feed any bullet configuration (semi-wadcutters, hollow points, etc.) and it will work no matter what. Folks, I’ve put tens of thousands of rounds through my 1911 since TJ massaged it, and it’s never had a failure of any kind (no failures to fire, no failures to feed, and no failures to eject…it just goes and goes and goes).

On to the Python. I’ve known good buddy Pete for more than 30 years (we sort of grew up together in the aerospace industry). Pete owns a Colt Python, a gun that is arguably the finest revolver ever made. His is the super-rare 8-inch model, too.

Revolver royalty…the stunning Colt Python. The Colt Python is perhaps the finest revolver ever made.

Colt no longer makes the Python, probably because they were too expensive to produce. The fit and finish are superior, and the feel of the thing is just sublime. It’s a .357 Magnum, one of the world’s all time greats, and a cartridge that dominated the police market before 9mm became all the rage. Colt revolvers were hand-fitted and involved lots of custom assembly, and I suppose it just didn’t in with the need for low cost manufacture in a market dominated by black plastic 9mm handguns. No, the Python is from another era characterized by highly polished blue steel and finely figured walnut, an age in which I felt more comfortable. Seeing a Python on the firing line again was a treat, and when Pete asked if I wanted to try the big Colt, he didn’t have to ask twice.

Pete and I had four handguns with us (the two mentioned above, plus a SIG 9mm and my Rock Island Compact 1911). I shot my two 1911s offhand for a while, and then I tried my luck with Pete’s SIG and the Python. It was fun.

You can argue about a good automatic being as accurate as a high-end revolver, but you won’t convince me. The Python is a tack driver.

I fired 5 shots of “nothing fancy” factory ammo with the Python, and the accuracy was superb. The targets don’t lie, folks.

I’ve owned two Pythons in my life, and both were back in the 1970s. When I was in Korea, I found out I could order one though the Base Exchange at a substantial discount. I couldn’t believe what the nice lady was telling me at the Kunsan AFB Exchange, so I ordered a 6-inch blue steel Python for something like $150 (it sounded too good to be true). Incredibly, it came in the mail to me in Korea. Before I rotated home, I had to submit a form through the Army to get permission to import the revolver back to the US. I did that, and a few weeks later I had a letter signed by the Director of the Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Bureau allowing me to bring my Python home. It went into my duffel bag, I produced the letter when I went through Customs in San Francisco, and that was that. Better times.

You know how it goes with these things. When I was back in Texas shortly after my stint in Korea, I saw a Ruger No. 1 single shot rifle in .30 06 I couldn’t live without, and I traded the Python for it (the guy at the store through in a couple of boxes of .30 06 ammo, too). Then I felt a void in my life because I no longer owned a Python, so I ordered another one (this time a 6-inch nickel-plated model) through the Fort Bliss Gun Club. It was under $200. Then I traded that for something else (I can’t remember what). Ah, the mistakes we make. But maybe they weren’t all mistakes. I’ve sent a lot of lead downrange with the Ruger No. 1 over the last 45 years, it’s one of the most accurate rifles I own, and it has stunning walnut.

The Ruger No. 1 in 30 06 I traded the Kunsan Python to get. It’s a 200th Year Ruger. I miss the Python, but I love my ’06 No. 1. Some day I’ll do a blog on this rifle.

Today, Colt Pythons typically sell for something in the $3,000 to $4,000 range. Pete’s would command even more, because it’s the 8-incher, which is a rare item. I’ve asked Pete if he wanted to sell his, but all I got in return was a smile. That’s probably just as well; I couldn’t afford it at today’s prices.

Whoa! More gun stories? You bet, and they’re right here!