We've had threads recently about the Charter Arms .44 Special Bulldog, but I have a couple of questions for those who own one or who have owned one in the past.

What is the trigger pull like? If I bought one, new or used, it would be a range gun, so it would need a decent trigger pull to make it enjoyable to shoot.

Are there production years that should be avoided? I favor used revolvers, but it looks like they've been through a few ownerships since the Bulldog appeared in the 70's, and I wonder if they had periods of bad quality product.

Photos, as we know, are always welcome.

The bulldogs are not unusual in revolvers: they can be improved by competent (not DIYS) trigger work. They are usually a bit rougher than from the factory Colts or S&W revolver triggers, but not always.

Find a competent gunsmith to do the work.

I had one right after they caught "Son of Sam" killer.
Only had it for about a year, too much recoil even with standered loads.

__________________
Only difference Fool/Mule-ears

I summed it up on my blog:

The Charter Arms Bulldog 44 Special | The Desert's Edge

Cliffnotes:

Trigger pull new: 12.3 lbs after I broke it in: 11.4 lbs. After about 600 rounds now: 10.7 lbs.

It's hard to quantify recoil because everyone is different. I don't think it recoils bad at all except when I run the heavier 240+ loads through it. The sub 240 gr loads are easy to shoot target loads and not bad at all for full power self defense or woods loads.

As for what to buy or avoid:

1st Generation 1964 – 1991: OK to buy. Issues: loss of the front sights, sharp edges on the cylinder releases, and weapon failures due to reloading the lighter big bore revolvers beyond what they were capable of. Issue with used ones because of this.

2nd Generation 1992 – 1999: Avoid at all costs. Quality took a nose dive Note: There are apparently some old stock acquired after the bankruptcy marked CHARTER ARMS CORP over STRATFORD CONN that was completed and shipped by CHARCO during this time frame.

3rd Generation 2000 – 2005. Quality is good and improvements have been made. Note still weapon failures due to reloading the lighter big bore revolvers beyond what they were capable of. Issue with used ones because of this.

4th Generation 2005 – Present same as above.

Just remember, these are sub $400 revolvers, not $700+ pieces. You get what you pay for. I truly believe they are worth the money and a great buy.

In my personal opinion they are carry guns to train with, not range guns. If you want a range gun buy a redhawk or M29 and shoot Specials out of it.

eb07 knows what he is talking about. I remember the gun when it appeared in, I believe, the early 70s. It was shootable with the only .44Spl factory load back then, the 246gr LRN.

Unfortunately, as eb07 points out, people immediately started asking, "Will it take the Keith load?" IIRC, this was a 240 or 250gr SWC ahead of 17.5gr of 2400 in solid head cases. Why people would think that such a heavy load should be shot in a 19oz gun is beyond me.

In a good example, it's a carry gun, not a range gun. I would restrict it to .44Spl factory loads, not Buffalo Bore, and leave the heavy handloads to heavy handguns.

Yep. Guys began putting shovels full of 2400 under 250gr hardcast, then shot them out of a sub 20oz firearm.

Then of course promptly complained that frames were stretching, guns were out going out of time, barrels were twisting loose, and things were generally breaking. Or they complained about recoil and sold or traded in their weakened bulldogs to some unsuspecting person who then experienced these things and proclaimed them as junk. The internet has amplified this.

They are what they are, a sub $400 lightweight budget carry gun that are rough out of the box, need a smoothing or break in to get the gritty feeling out. They aren't made to shoot hot loads in excess at the range. They are made to carry and to train with. Not to push thousands of hot rounds through. I am sure with care, cleaning, and maintenance as well as a proper diet, a Bulldog will outlast you.

The Charter has gotten a bad rap because of this. Please note this is rightly so with any Charter stamped CHARCO Ansonia, CT. They were quality nightmares that helped tarnish the Charter name further. They truly did make junk.

Every manufacturer has quality issues. Charter is no different. People will get lemons. But I believe the Keith loads combined with the lightweight budget gun attributed to the reputation more than it should have.

Charter makes a great budget revolver. It isn't a safe queen, it isn't a collectable. It is what it is.

I have an early example, non-factory ported. Not bad with factory 246 gr RNL, a mite worse with 240 gr SWC and 7.5 gr Unique. A decent trigger but shot low to the sights due to the porting. I wouldn't hesitate to carry it.

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220

I recently posted my experiences with a used Taurus 445 in .44 Special:

http://smith-wessonforum.com/firearm...post-17-a.html

Taurus and Charter Arms have been victimized by a lot of bad press (some deserved, some not) based on QC and the proliferation of (mis)information online. Neither brand is on par with Colt or S&W, but that's no different than comparing a 6-cylinder Mustang with a Shelby. Both Taurus and CA fill the big bore snub niche that many of us are interested in. Until S&W re-enters the fray with something comparable to the Bulldog, we're left with few options to choose from. If you get a CA or Taurus and it works for you, then you're good to go. I have wanted to patronize CA for several years based on the large caliber snubs, but the new examples I handled were spotty at best, and I didn't want to buy a NIB project.

__________________
I'm with the banned ...

Yes, you really did cover it all. Thanks to you and everyone who replied.

I like to experience the products of different handgun manufacturers. On the other hand, some of these experiences haven't been good.

This is a great read, and very informative. It's nice to see that S&W enthusiasts can still find reliability and function in other brands of big bore snubs since we don't have much to choose from. I think the CA's price point is key (much as it was for my used Taurus 445). $400 isn't buying any S&W .44s, but it can be money well spent for something that is sturdy and goes bang. This review has made me rethink my previous impressions of the CA line, and as $ permit, I'll check into a Bulldog again and see if I can bring home a nice functional example. Another thing to consider regarding bang for the buck ... since the Bulldog and 445 are "budget" priced and designed exclusively for CCW, there's not much to worry about with getting one dinged up, or having some unrefined aspects to it. If something negative happens, then the investment will not result in a case of buyer's remorse as if a Colt or S&W was damaged.

__________________
I'm with the banned ...

I absolutely love my Bulldog (Latest Gen Shelton w 2 1/2" barrel). The trigger pull is surprisingly smooth (after a good cleaning and some rounds down range), the single action pull is down right crazy light! It is very accurate - mine seems to like lighter bullets, i.e. 180 gr JHP, cast 208 gr WC, 214 gr cast SWC, 200 gr FRN etc. though 240 Berry's PFP's shoot quite well too. It is reliable and easy to shoot. As others noted, I keep the loads reasonable, a bit stouter than the standard/original 246 gr factory loads. It is my daily carry during the warm months and virtually invisible with an IWB holster and tee shirt. I have heard some folks comment that it is best to "carry often, but shoot sparingly", however after 1000 + rounds it is still tight, accurate and a blast to shoot. Perhaps those comments are the result of people pushing large quantities overly hot loads. At $379 out the door, I am happy as pigs in dirt with the Bulldog.

Be well

Just bought one of the Bulldog .44 Classics back during the recent NRA Convention. I've shot it with several loads including light handloads, cowboy action shooting ammo and more serious SD loads like the Federal 200 gr. SWCHP. I took off the rubber grips it came with and installed wood, the recoil didn't bother me with any of the loads fired. As others have said, it's a $400 +/- gun, trigger pull until broken in is gritty and rough...it isn't a range gun...carry a lot, shoot enough to be proficient. I pack mine quite a bit off duty.

Attached Images

0624141439-1.jpg (44.1 KB, 33 views)

__________________
S&WCA #2815
Gun Scribe