The Father
·Butcher ? Well they probably do know how to handle their meat.
Wry, that is a beautiful example you snagged. Congratulations on it.
It can be said that I have a thing for .357s, I own seven of them, two Uberti SAAs, a Colt New Service, a Colt 3-5-7, two Pythons, and a S&W .357 (pre Model 27 if you're into applying later model numbers to older guns). Talking about the double action guns, to me the Colt revolvers are superior to the S&W, the Smith .357 is a fine gun, and most people would love it. The SA pull on every one of my Colt double actions is better than the SA pull on my Smith. They break more cleanly and are all lighter.
The Smith is no slouch, though, it's better than average. The one place that truly objective people may say the Smith is better is in the DA trigger. That is because the Smith trigger does not stack in DA.
I grew up with Colt revolvers, and I like the stacking trigger, I know exactly where the trigger is going to break and hold it at that point just before the break. I always felt this gave me an edge in bullseye matches.
I guess I'm the exact opposite. After years of owning, shooting, and collecting Colts I finally bought a nice mid 50s Smith, and I don't know what the fuss is about.
Here are my medium frame DA .357s:
From top; 1954 S&W .357, 1976 Python, 1977 Python, 1954 Colt 3-5-7.
Ooh yummy 3 5 7 there Waltese!
So I think I know why I wonder why it's so special. I see the Colt trigger as smooth but heavy feeling due to the stacking. It seems unnatural to me with my Smiths just being steady the whole way. I know when a Smith breaks the same way you feel about the Colt stacking. The stacking just seems a bit odd to me. What I do like is the vault like lockup of the cylinder. That's a distinct advantage for accuracy if the timing is dead on, and with a Python it usually is.....
A hand load consisting of a case-full of Hodgdon H110 or a heavy charge of 2400 under a 158-180 grain bullet would build up a good head of steam in that long-snouted barrel of Wryfox's Uberti. A person would have a potent "side arm" indeed if he could contrive to tote it.
I've thought about picking one of those up a time or two, but I can't ever justify it to myself.
Years ago, I did buy a hugely impractical gun just because it was fun, and I do love shooting it. Sadly, it seems I've not saved a photo of a target from it. It is a rather accurate revolver, especially when you consider the sights on it are rudimentary. The Armi San Marco, Walker! A true hand cannon weighing in at over 4# unloaded. The third picture offers up a 6" Python for a size reference.