[Wildcat Creeker]

Instead of cluttering up another thread, I am starting a new one because I have not seen my question discussed. The new Pythons do not have the cylinder retention nub on the frame. So what keeps the cylinder from coming off the yoke or crane when the cylinder is opened from the frame?

 

[Joni Lynn]

The cylinder on an older Python will stay on the crane or yoke when removed from the revolver frame. It has to be disassembled to separate the pieces. The new ones are similar in design. They're not like a S&W in that regard.

 

[Wildcat Creeker]

The cylinder on an older Python will stay on the crane or yoke when removed from the revolver frame. It has to be disassembled to separate the pieces. The new ones are similar in design. They're not like a S&W in that regard.

Then why do the older Pythons have the nub? I have owned only one Python, many years ago and for a very short time. I don't recall ever removing the cylinder.

 

[Joni Lynn]

No clue but the cylinder on mine doesn't fall off. I have little to no knowledge on why things are designed the way they are. My best guess is as a failsafe. All of my Pythons are the older ones and they as well as my 1954 model 3 5 7 have that nub on the frame.

 

[Joni Lynn]

By leaving that off of the frame on the 2020 model I would imagine it reduces production costs by a measurable amount.

Let me add that if you are removing the yoke/crane and cylinder, the thing that looks like a screw in the same place it would be on a S&W is in fact a nut and has another part or parts underneath of it.
Also if taking one apart it's helpful to use your camera and take photos of everything both before and after removal. The older Pythons aren't quite as easy as a S&W to tear into.

Best wishes.

 

[Wildcat Creeker]

PK, thanks Joni Lynn. On S&Ws, if that nub was not there, when you open the cylinder, it could fall off the yoke spindle. I am not familiar with all the correct parts terminology, but I think you will understand what I am talking about. I just wondered if one of the changes Colt made to the new Python was the way the cylinder was secured to the yoke.

 

[Mark Anderson]

The older Pythons aren't quite as easy as a S&W to tear into.

I would call this an understatement.

 

[Joni Lynn]

A S&W can almost be taken apart and reassembled in the dark, a Colt requires attention and remembering just where everything went and it what order. I much prefer S&W when it comes to putting them back together.

 

[Mark Anderson]

Your comment reminded me of the time I tried to take one apart, got the side plate off, was following Kuhnhausen's book. The book made it look easy enough. I ended up putting the parts in little zip lock bags and taking it to my gunsmith to put back together. He had a good laugh on that. I decided I just shoot them and clean them, I don't work on them.

 

[GoetzTalon]

 

[jcc7x7]

I would call this an understatement.

To say the least!

 

[zChambers]

This video does a good job of discussing the differences between the old and new Pythons

 

[Wildcat Creeker]

Watched the video. I thought I read the issue with the cylinder not turning was the side plate screw(s) backing out just a little causing the failure of the hand to engage the ratchet properly.

 

[Old Sea Dragon]

Very interesting analysis. To my untrained eye the new action inspires more confidence. As a long time Smith shooter I short stroked the first Ruger I bought a couple of times but in those instances it bound up the cylinder and trigger. This is a different diagnosis of the problem than Colt and other members have put forth but an easy problem to look for if one has a gun that develops this problem. Thanks for posting