If you're torn between the colt python vs smith and wesson 686, you're essentially trying to decide between two of the greatest .357 Magnum revolvers ever built. It's a classic debate that's been happening across gun store counters and firing lines for decades. On one hand, you've got the "Snake Gun" legacy—the polished, premium feel of the Colt. On the other, you have the Smith & Wesson 686, which many consider the definitive workhorse of the revolver world.
Neither of these guns is "bad," but they definitely appeal to different types of shooters. I've spent enough time behind the triggers of both to know that the choice usually boils down to what you value more: refined elegance or rugged, predictable reliability. Let's break down how these two icons actually stack up when you're out at the range.
A Bit of Backstory on the Rivalry
To understand the 686, you have to understand why it was built in the first place. Back in the day, Smith & Wesson's K-frame revolvers (like the Model 19) were the gold standard for police work. They were light and easy to carry, but they didn't always play nice with a steady diet of full-power .357 Magnum loads. They'd eventually "shoot loose" or experience forcing cone issues.
The 686 was the answer. Built on the larger L-frame, it was designed specifically to handle a lifetime of hot magnums without breaking a sweat. It was the "blue-collar hero" of the 1980s.
The Colt Python, meanwhile, was always positioned as the "Cadillac" of revolvers. When it launched in 1955, it wasn't just a tool; it was a piece of craftsmanship. With its iconic ventilated rib and full-length underlug, it looked like nothing else on the market. It was hand-fitted, expensive, and carried a level of prestige that Smith & Wesson never really tried to mimic.
The Trigger: Two Different Worlds
When people talk about the colt python vs smith and wesson 686, the trigger is usually the first thing they bring up. It's also where the guns feel the most different.
The Python is famous for its "leaf spring" action. On the older models, this resulted in a double-action pull that was incredibly smooth but had a noticeable "stacking" effect. This means the weight of the trigger pull would slightly increase just before the hammer dropped. Some shooters love this because it lets them know exactly when the gun is about to fire. The modern 2020 Pythons have refined this significantly, offering a pull that feels like it's moving on ball bearings. It's elegant and refined.
The Smith & Wesson 686 uses a coil spring. The double-action pull on a 686 is typically very consistent from start to finish. It's predictable and "snappy." In single-action mode—where you cock the hammer manually—both guns are phenomenal. Usually, the S&W will have a slightly more "glass rod" break, while the Python feels just a tiny bit softer. Honestly, if you're just shooting at the range, you'll probably find the S&W trigger easier to master quickly, but the Python trigger feels more expensive.
Aesthetics and Build Quality
Let's be real: looks matter. If you're dropping over a thousand dollars on a piece of steel, you want it to look good.
The Colt Python is, in my opinion, the most beautiful revolver ever made. That ventilated rib on top of the barrel is legendary. Whether you get the classic Royal Blue (if you're looking at vintage) or the modern high-polish stainless, it catches the light in a way that makes other guns look dull. The lines are sleek, and the grips usually have that classic medallions that scream "premium."
The 686 is a different kind of handsome. It's chunky, beefy, and looks like it could survive being run over by a truck. It's got a satin stainless finish that's practical because it doesn't show fingerprints or minor scratches as easily as the Colt's mirror finish. It feels like a tool meant for a professional. It's the kind of gun you aren't afraid to take into the woods or carry in a holster all day.
The Infamous "Hillary Hole"
I can't talk about the 686 without mentioning the internal lock—often mockingly called the "Hillary Hole" by enthusiasts. Most new Smith & Wesson revolvers have a small lock hole just above the cylinder release. Purists absolutely hate it. They think it ruins the lines of the gun and worry about it accidentally engaging (though that's extremely rare).
The new Colt Pythons do not have an internal lock. For many buyers, that's a huge selling point. The Colt maintains its classic lines without any "lawyer-mandated" safety features cluttering up the frame.
Shooting Experience and Ergonomics
When you actually get these guns to the range, the colt python vs smith and wesson 686 debate gets even more interesting.
The 686 is a very comfortable gun to shoot. Its grip geometry fits a wide variety of hands, and because it's so popular, there are approximately a million aftermarket grip options available. If you don't like the factory rubber or wood, you can swap them out for ten bucks at a gun show. The 686 also uses a "push" style cylinder release, which most people find more intuitive.
The Python uses a "pull" style cylinder release. It takes a little bit of muscle memory to get used to if you've spent your life shooting Smiths or Rugers. The Python's grips are also a bit wider. For people with larger hands, the Python feels like a dream. For those with smaller hands, it can feel a bit like holding a 2x4.
In terms of recoil, both guns handle .357 Magnum like champs. The full underlug on both barrels adds weight out front, which helps keep the muzzle down during rapid fire. However, the Python's bore axis feels a little different; to me, it feels like it pushes straight back into the palm more, while the 686 has a tiny bit more flip. It's a marginal difference, though.
Reliability and Durability
There's an old saying that a Colt is a gun you show your friends, but a Smith is a gun you show your enemies.
Vintage Pythons had a reputation for being "finicky." Because they were hand-fitted, they could eventually go out of timing if you shot thousands of heavy magnum rounds through them. "Out of timing" means the cylinder doesn't line up perfectly with the barrel, which is a big deal.
The new 2020 Pythons have supposedly fixed this. Colt simplified the internals and used stronger steel. They claim it's a much more durable gun than the original.
The 686, however, has nothing to prove. It's been a tank since day one. You can feed a 686 the hottest loads you can find until the cows come home, and it'll likely keep ticking. If something does go wrong, almost any gunsmith in the country knows how to fix a Smith & Wesson. Finding a "Colt guy" is getting harder and harder these days.
The Price Tag: The "Colt Tax"
This is usually the deal-breaker for most people.
You can generally find a brand-new Smith & Wesson 686 for somewhere between $850 and $1,000 depending on the barrel length and the specific model (like the 686 Plus, which holds seven rounds instead of six).
A new Colt Python is going to set you back at least $1,300 to $1,500. If you're looking for a vintage Python from the 60s or 70s in good condition, you're looking at $2,500 to $4,000 or more.
Is the Python $500 "better" than the 686? Strictly in terms of putting holes in paper, probably not. But you aren't just paying for the performance; you're paying for the name, the finish, and the fact that you own a Python.
Which One Should You Buy?
At the end of the day, deciding on the colt python vs smith and wesson 686 comes down to your personal goals.
Buy the Smith & Wesson 686 if: * You want a rugged, reliable tool that you can shoot every single weekend. * You prefer a consistent, predictable trigger. * You want to save a few hundred dollars for ammo. * You like having endless options for holsters and grips. * You want the option of a 7-round cylinder (686 Plus).
Buy the Colt Python if: * You've always wanted a "Snake Gun" and won't be happy with anything else. * You appreciate high-end machining and a mirror-like finish. * You want a gun that will likely hold its value (or appreciate) over time. * You hate internal locks on revolvers. * You want the smoothest double-action pull on the market.
Personally? I think every serious shooter should eventually own both. But if I had to pick just one for a literal "end of the world" scenario, I'd grab the 686. If I were headed to the range to show off and enjoy the finer things in life, the Python wins every time. They are both masterpieces of steel, and honestly, you can't make a wrong choice here.