Post by oddshooter on Jan 13, 2019 11:41:53 GMT -5
Growing up in Texas, I have many Colts, and love several of them. The vintage models reek of history, like an old trunk. My 8" Python is as sweet as they come. My old Cobra snubbie is light and a joy to carry.
However, Colt today just stumps me. Why the King Cobra? Of all the models Colt has succeeded with, why did they not pick a model that shooters wanted? I have never heard any buzz on the King Cobra except it was a snake gun.
It makes me think I may have missed something. Or it's just Colt management screwing up a beautiful dream. With that name, COLT, it seems like you would really have to be complacent to ruin such a good thing.
Being candid, I too disliked the GP100 displacing the Six series at Ruger. Seems like several companies want to march backward, but can't see where they're going.
“.... why did they not pick a model that shooters wanted?” ----Prescut
Spent a day not long ago with Ben “Bear Man” Kilham and an engineer, both veterans of Colt. The engineer (Kilham also has worked in this capacity, and is an excellent gunsmith) described some of the post-Python development to make a double action which would be assembled without any hand fitting. The M-16 was engineered this way, which requires adherence to a tight specification package to produce COMPLETE INTERCHANGEABILITY of parts, a mandate of the government specifications. According to this gentleman, in 1968 Colt produced 50,000 M-16's per month. (Although a plural doesn’t call for a hyphen, I use hyphens in gun nomenclature because some manufacturers hang lower case “S” at the end of a model. The hyphen is to prevent confusion.)
To eliminate hand fitting of revolvers was not so easy. One of Colt’s Mark series was the result, and it was all interchangeable----except for the PAWL, which required hand fitting. A problem with hand fitting is not just longer assembly time, the job requires SKILL & EXPERIENCE. I imagine this new King Cobra is meant to eliminate hand fitting. Ruger basically eliminated hand fitting in the LCR, which is about as pretty as a baby buzzard and as tough as its mother.
Any pocket revolver has first to go up against the tried & true Smith & Wesson J-frame, with its extreme track record for reliability when the chips are down and for shooting to Point of Aim (POA). Ruger is right behind. Colt muddied the water with sloppily manufactured aluminum frame belly guns. A proper Colt belly gun is a work, while the rough ones aren’t worth a Charter Arms. The bar for a proper belly gun is set high, and this has been so for generations. Since a belly gun has very limited tactical utility, it should not have to satisfy precise accuracy. However, to take a ride on me it has to shoot straight, for which a man silhouette @ 100 yards will do. And since Smith & Wesson has supplied this degree of marksmanship for generations, there is no reason to settle for less now.
Factory management is both the reason production happens and the reason quality falters. The engineer mentioned above described the reaming of a TAPERED BORE in Python barrels. There was a bit of alchemy to reaming a hole which narrows toward the muzzle a couple thousandths inch. (Grooves are cut with a broach, and don not taper.) When the Python barrel man left Colt, the tapered bore technique departed with him. Also described, a man whose sole job was to CASE CARBURIZE frames for the Single Action Army. A one-man operation, the craftsman knew the old process. That’s all he did, case harden the soft Peacemaker frame. Way I hear it, there weren't enough frames to keep him busy every day; he left, and his process with him.
Revolvers bespeak a human integrity, which I won’t argue here. Suffice to say, the genre is far from obsolete, so it is good to have competitive examples from which to choose. David Bradshaw
Last Edit: Mar 10, 2019 10:12:41 GMT -5 by bradshaw
This has become a fascinating thread. Bradshaw, oddshooter, vmaxsplat, all really informative contributions. I have to admit, my fascination with Colt stems from being Texan, and having a love of history. However, I often feel as though the consumer is taken advantage of simply based on the name Colt. I would like to either see prices brought down to current quality levels, or quality levels brought up to current prices. Still, regardless of Colt's historical roller coaster of bankruptcy, I do value the few I do possess. And I have absolutely no complaints with my tried and true Rugers and Smiths.
Just got back from Shot Show where I fondled this gun a lot. It is nothing like the original which I used to own. That being said it is a nice gun. Feels good in the hand and has a nice action. Of course when you figure how many people have throttled this gun like I did its not hard to see why its smooth. All in all a good little gun. Just nothing like the original. I questioned rep. about the possibility of a Anaconda come back. He said it looks good. We will see.
My LGS got one in today so I went in to check it out. Needless to say it came home with me. I am not a Colt guy so I have no prior feelings about what the company used to be. Looking at it from strictly a new gun standpoint this one is really nice. It's got a super smooth action, locks up like a vault and the finish is spotless. I have been looking for a S&W 60-10 now for 2 years and I'm giving up the hunt.
I have a Ruger SP 101 3" that I dearly enjoy. It's a 357 and I've put a Meprolight front night sight on it, and it shoots to POA. It's not going anywhere, however, the new Colt 357 with six rounds, same size and weight, better action and with easily interchangeable front sights, is causing some consternation to the Ruger as it nestles in it's paddock in the steel barn.
In short, if they shoot good and hold up to 357 the new Colt could win a place in the stable.
For you guys that have handled or purchased one of the new King Cobra’s, is there room on the top strap to put an adjustable sight on top? And is the front sight replaceable? Because, if a guys going to drop money for one, I might just as well make it mine and what it should have been (within reason, and that argument has gone on already).