How would you rate the quality of Charter Arms products? Comparable to S&W? Not that I am getting one soon, but I am entrigued by the Charter Arms Pit Bull in .40 S&W. Your feedback is greatly appreciated.

__________________
otis

I've always been interested in the Charter Arms Bulldog .44 but mixed reports regarding reliability have kept me from buying one. However, models made during certain years are reported as being better than others. From what I've read it's probably more hit-or-miss than S&W in terms of reliability and quality control. It's been a while since I've followed anything Charter Arms has done so maybe it's changed recently. Hopefully someone with more knowlege will chime in.

Otis - I owned a .44 spl Bulldog, and a .22 Pathfinder. Both were decently made. Not to the quality, or fit and finish of a S&W or Colt, but serviceable, and reliable.

The Pathfinder was not very accurate. The Bulldog shot well, and I carried it quite a few miles hiking in the woods, loaded with a stiff 240 hard cast SWC load.

These were 1980's guns, and I cant vouch for current production.

Larry

I am interested in a .45 Pitbull. This morning I saw a .38 spl Charter Arms at a pawn shop. It was typical of their products, they seem to work well but lack the fit, finish and stainless steel quality of Walther, Smith & Wesson or Colt.

I have a few years old Bulldog .44spl SS. I find it a good gun and well worth the money. Fit and finish is fine, shoots accurately for a cloose range defensive gun.
I prefer the classic .44 model over the others.

I had wanted one of the original 3" .44 Bulldogs for many years, yet struggled to find one where the condition of those I found and the price I was willing to pay intersected. I finally, through impatience, bought a NIB current production stainless Bulldog Pug.

The action was smoother than I expected, a bit heavy, but lightened up and got even smoother with a modicum of tweaking. Unfortunately, the lockup...and the alignment of the cylinder to the barrel...was such it did not inspire confidence. A range trip would ultimately tell the tale.

Halfway through the second cylinder of lead-bulleted, factory-equivalent reloads, I noticed excessive blast and spitting from the barrel-cylinder gap. Inspection revealed a good sized wedge of the forcing cone broken away on the port side where the misalignment caused bullets to impact. A call to Charter's CS resulted in a faxed shipping label and home it went.

10 days later it reappeared with a new barrel installed and the entire revolver so full of machining grit and shavings I could barely cycle the action. The alignment of the barrel/cylinder was improved, but still far less than perfect. A+ for speed...D- for quality. After the necessary complete strip and flush, the subsequent range trip resulted in light firing pin hits and misfires. I rectified that problem myself, and additional testing has resulted in no further problems, although the lockup still concerns me.

I haven't put more than a hundred rounds through it since, the vast majority standard velocity loads. I did try approximately 20 rounds of the "Skeeter Load" and the little pistol handled it just fine, although recoil was becoming noticeable. It will take much more to resolve my distrust.

It currently resides in the cabinet above our toilet in case I'm disturbed while....reading. Hey, if it's good enough for Taffin, it's good enough for me. I still covet an original 3".

Roe

Charter Arms doesn't come anywhere close to S&W quality in any way you want to measure it.
I currently own 2 Bulldog Pugs and while one is ok, the SS one is a dog. I use it as my truck gun becuse if it is stolen, I wouldn't care.

Have had many more of their products in the past and while they have been serviceable, comparing them to S&W is like comparing a Dodge to a Ferrari.

Charter Arms has a quality all their own.
Geoff
Who would take a Taurus, Rossi or Rock Island 200 series first.

I have a 38 undercover that stays in my truck most times. It does go bang and a lead comes out. That's about all I say about a Charter when compared to any Smith

Otis - I'm very pleased with my 2 1/2" stainless Bulldog. Bought it new a few years ago. Approaching the 2,500 round count. It barks everytime the trigger is pulled, has a very decent trigger pull (got better after a few range sessions) is very accurate and makes big holes. It's become my primary carry weapon and is a compact, light weight, easy to carry revolver. Is it a refined as my 4" 629? Heck no! But at less than half the price, I wasn't expecting S&W workmanship. I think folks sometimes equate low prices with poor quality. But in my experience the newer CA is not the "cheap" *** some claim they are. I view CA revolvers as low priced, high value weapons/tools. I would not hesitate to recommend the new CA's to folks on a tight budget who are looking for a big bore snubby. In fact, I'm kicking around the purchase of the new 40 S&W Pitbull as a companion to my M&P 40.

Be well all.

URL=http://s46.photobucket.com/user/emandm/media/Hunting/IMG_0398_zpsc1gwfebr.jpg.html][/URL]

I've owned and carried everyday the Bulldog .44 spl
(Son of Sam) gun with 3" bbl. and Love carrying it.
Shoots well for a 3" and was very concealable with
not too much recoil. I've owned two at different times
and never had an issue but these were earlier guns.

No comparison to a S&W or Colt in regards to fit and
finish but they were not meant to be purty just effective.

I'll own another one some day.
I keep letting buddies talk me out of my favorite carry
guns...

Chuck

__________________
They hold no Quarter

I share the opinion of many that the early Stratford Charters were better made. For a number of years, I had one of the earlier Undercover snubbies in .38 Special, and would compare it favorably to a Chiefs Special, but maybe a little cruder in execution. I have no experience with newer ones.

My wife carries a CA Undercoverette in .32H&R Magnum. She loves it. It goes bang every time we pull the trigger. I have tried to get her to go to another revolver but she keeps going back to it. It is not as pretty as a Smith would be, but costs half the price and works every time. I said would be, because S&W no longer makes a J frame in this caliber. A shame really.

Years ago I owned two Charter Arms .44spls and I loved them both. Never a problem, firing many thousands of rounds between them. Eventually, I sold them off, becoming more of a .45acp guy.

I just ordered my first Charter Arms in years, a few days ago. It's a 5 Shot Pittbull .45acp 2 1/2", no moon clips of any kind, A friend has a .40 Charter Arms, in the same configuration, which he bought about a year ago and loves it. He claims that their unique extract system, works like a dream.

I should get mine next week. I try to follow up, after I get it!

I bought a 2.5" backpacker 44spl Charter Arms a few months ago. I love the size & weight for a carry gun and shoot 7.0gr unique with 240 SWC. Mine has combat type grips and is a lew horton spl gun. I wish the trigger had a little less curve to it and there is a part of the frame inside the trigger guard that I can feel as a sharp edge, but I can fix that. If this one got gone for whatever reason, I would buy another.

Charlie

I have an original 3" and a newt stainless 2.5".
They've both been fine except I sent the newer one back because the barrel was over torqued and it made the front sight a little cockeyed.
They covered shipping and corrected and had it back in a week.
They're not comparable to a Smith with fit&finish.
I've read to avoid hot loads with them and keep them to standard loads.
That works for me for a close range .44 weapon.
Mine have been good guns for the price and very easy to carry.

I had the .40 pit bull. I liked the idea..... but mine was a dud. One chamber wasn't machined right and the round wouldn't fire 1/2 the time from that chamber. I also had to manually push out the rounds from 3 of the chambers. Overall a headache.

I have an older .44 special that aside from one of the cylinder latching screws needing constant tightening, works fine. Locktight doesn't hold it.

Not overly impressed with the quality from my two experiences, but I'd give it a 3rd try if the price was right.

__________________
- The Federalist #46 -

I've had three, still have two of them. One is an early Pathfinder .22 and the other is a .38 special Undercover that I did a CA factory hammer swap on and made it a DAO. Both are great and no problems with them.

The one I no longer have was an older one that was chambered for the 9mm Federal rimmed cartridge. Traded it off years ago.

If I run across a .44 or .45 I may get it.

__________________
C & L

"The one I no longer have was an older one that was chambered for the 9mm Federal rimmed cartridge. Traded it off years ago."

Have you seen any recent prices on those? Pretty amazing. I believe Charter was the only maker who chambered that round. Last ammo (Federal) I saw was $100/box if you bought 4 boxes. Otherwise $125/box. Problem was some used 9mm Federal in old .38 S&W breaktop revolvers which blew up.

Yes I've seen the prices on those...up, up, and away! Last time I looked ammo was still available on Gun Broker but wasn't cheap. I had the box and papers on the 9mm Federal CA one I had. Sold it probably 20 years ago.

As with some other guns, wouldn't mind having it back now.

__________________
C & L

When you talk about Charter Arms, it's important to know which iteration of "Charter Arms" you are talking about. The guns built during the first incarnation of the company, distinguishable by the Bridgeport and later Stratford, CT, addresses, were uniformly of good quality. With the later "CHARCO" and today's Charter Arms, quality has been more hit or miss, but examples I have looked at lately seem well built.

__________________
Pisgah

Hickok45 on YouTube demonstrated a recent vintage .44 Bulldog. I recall 2 misfires (of whatever type). An early .38 Charter snub might be a good very light duty gun if available at a low price. What I see in every Charter is a narrow crane (yoke?) held in place by a screw that works loose constantly. The extractor rod assembly, which also serves as the frontal lockup, is a "Rube Goldberg" mishmash of several parts and springs that is too easily unscrewed. Extraction is uneven due to it's construction. The hand is extremely narrow, less than the width of a J-frame hand. The cylinder latch also loosens and has small parts easily lost. It's action is rough as it has to work against the Rube Goldberg extractor set-up.

To be fair, the fixed sights afforded a good sight picture at a time when the sights on a J-frame were hard to pick up.

Kaaskop49
Shield #5103

I bought one of the 44 Bulldogs new in 2010 and since then have had roughly 200 rounds thru it, mostly Winchester Super-X and Hornady stuff. For the $350ish that I paid for it I've been very happy. Fit and finish is fine and it shoots well. When a dedicated 44 Spl alternative is a $700+ S&W, I'm fine with the Charter Arms although if I started handloading or shooting high volume 44 Spl I'd likely go another route.

I have a .44 special I keep out in the garage just in case someone with bad intent shows up when I am out there. If someone breaks in and steals it, it wouldn't hurt my feelings as bad as if it were a S&W or Dan Wesson.

I've wanted a .44 special for awhile, but just can't afford the prices a nice model 24 or 696 command. I had the chance to buy a 1972 vintage Charter Arms .44 for $300 a couple months+ ago and jumped on it. The previous owner took very good care of it. The only change I made to mine was I bought a set of Pachmyers for it. I think it's a fun gun to shoot.

Attached Images

	CharterArms44Bulldog (2).jpg (115.0 KB, 115 views)
	CharterArms44Bulldog.jpg (111.3 KB, 103 views)

I own an early Charter Arms Bulldog .44 Special manufactured in Bridgeport, CT. I purchased the revolver new decades ago. The workmanship is very good and it’s been a reliable and accurate shooter. I don’t own a new Charter Arms model so I can’t make a comparison.

__________________
A gun has no brain.. use yours

I shot a friend's .44 Bulldog in the 1980s and was impressed with the accuracy and the increased power of the cartridge over a comparable .38 Special revolver. Recoil was brisk but manageable. Never got one because I was spoiled on S&W quality.

If only S&W would make a 2" or 3" 44 Special revolver they'd eat the Bulldog for lunch.

Maybe if we get lucky we'll see a 3" Model 69.

I always wanted a Bulldog .44, just like Son of Sam's. I haven't yet found one at a price I'm willing to pay.

Have a police bulldog, .38 special, +P rated 🙌, 2" barrel, 6 shot, Stratford Ct., bought in 1979. Wanted a 4" barrel, but the 2" was available and has worked better for my need. All steel, nice CCH on hammer. Only change from factory was Pachmeyer grippers, which really improved things. About K frame size, and trigger compares to a nice K frame trigger.
Does everything I require, including shot loads, easy carry, and all of that +P power makes it invincible 😝. Never failed to shoot, sites work for my eyes, so can't complain!
Have box, paperwork, original grips, but never thought of it as a safe queen 😝 , just a nice using gun!

__________________
Wherever my mind isn't
Jim

Same here. Some nice looking ones on Gun Broker at times. I want one in my hands before I decide to buy it however. Never see any for sale around here.

__________________
C & L

I would like to like one, but sorry I just cant. A family member just bought a new 44 stainless snub, The comment I will make on it is.... for the same money a basic Rock Island 1911
in 45acp would be MUCH better, regards Ernie

__________________
Rimfires Makes me "Insane"

Not sure but son of Sam had a good quality 44 bulldog?

just got one of these last week , havent shot it yet, supposed to be beefier and twist rate change for better accuracy....havent shot it yet..im sure at 15 feet it will do what its intended to do

i watched a hickok45 video and the older bulldog is very accurate in his hands..also found a 50 gr bullet pushing close to 2000 FPS

lifetime warranty like most

Charter Arms and Lew Horton Team Up for the Backpacker Revolver | Gun Digest

I had a Charter .44 bulldog back in the 70s. I had some nice wadcutter loads from a company in Austin, TX. When those ran out I traded the gun.
Geoff
Who is a little recoil sensitive, my only 44 is a Ruger Superblackhawk 7 1/2.

I have had four Charter Arms revolvers, three .44 Special Bulldogs and one .38 Special Undercover, all built (and bought new by me) by the original company back in the 1976-1980 era.

They were designed and built to a price point at least 33% below S&W's equivalent gun. You get what you pay for.

The Bulldogs are unique. My first one, bought Jan. 1976, was the gun I learned both how to handload .44 Special, and how to overload your handloads such that they stretched the topstrap and pounded a crater around the bolt face where the smacked firing pin came through to ignite the primer. A full pound of Unique, Speer swaged 240 grain SWCs and hardcast 250 grain SWCs beat the gun to death eventually, all preventable by me.

I was more circumspect with the second and third Bulldogs, limiting them to factory ammo and handloads that duplicated their pressure. Both of those guns held up fairly well, with some caveats.

All three Bulldogs key-holed SWC bullets at 25 yards, some leaving a perfect profile of the bullet punched through the target. I wrote a letter to charter and they cheerfully acknowledged that this often happened, and that because the bullets were handloads, my Charter Arms warranty was void! "But thank you for buying Charter Arms!"

Day-to-day shortcomings included the screw that formed the bolt, which was pushed back out of the cylinder window by the rear end of the ejector rod when the cylinder was closed, would unscrew and keep the ejector rod from locking the cylinder closed in the frame. You had to loc-tite this screw into the proper depth in the piece into which the thumb latch was screwed onto.

That thumb latch chewed the thumb up when shooting.

There was a small plastic washer that went on the screw that went through the bottom of the yoke or crane and then into the frame, which helped keep the face of the cylinder back away from the rear end of the barrel. This washer flattened out, allowing the cylinder to bang on the forcing cone. Watch that. In fact, you had to watch and tighten all of the screws in/on the gun.

I did like the relatively (compared to a Chief Special) big blocky fixed sights on the Charters.

My ex-wife took the .38 when she left. One of the other good Bulldogs I sold, the junked one I sold cheaply to a fellow who thought he could fix it, and I still have the third one. It fits any good holster made for a 3 inch Colt Detective Special.

Balancing out their quality shortcomings, they are inexpensive. If you don't expect much from them, they should be okay.

I'll take the RI 200 thank you. Took these three to the range the other day. You'd be surprised how the trigger ranked against the other two.... the RI has been flawless....

I mentioned last week, in this thread, that I had ordered a Charter Arms Pit Bull 5 shot in .45acp 2 1/2". I just picked it up today and I must say, I am impressed! It's a satin finished SS and weighs in at 23oz. Appears to be very well made and solid, locks up real tight. I don't have a trigger pull scale available right now, but the trigger pull SA seems to be very light, maybe 3 or 3.5lbs. On DA it's light as well, I am thinking about 7/8lbs. The sights work well, but I will place a yellow dot on the front site for faster acquisition. I used once fired, unloaded brass, to try the ejection system and it works. It's simple and it works flawlessly, at least for now. I do not know how well this system works on casings that have been fired in the gun. That info will come later. Anyway, it's a dam nice weapon and so far, I am extremely happy with this purchase.

Attached Images

	MVC-001S.JPG (18.1 KB, 109 views)
	MVC-002S.JPG (15.0 KB, 90 views)
	MVC-003S.JPG (20.3 KB, 86 views)
	MVC-004S.JPG (24.0 KB, 89 views)
	MVC-005S.JPG (26.7 KB, 104 views)

Final photo related to the above post.

Note: when loading you cannot simply drop the round into the chamber, you must push it in, so the small lip you see in each chamber, snaps into the grove in the casing.

Attached Images

MVC-006S.JPG (24.0 KB, 80 views)

I'm liking that .45 johnnyflake !

__________________
C & L

That's a sweet looking 45 Johnnyflake. I've been debating whether I should jump in and try a new Charter Arms. I've never owned or shot an older or newer model. But I have held and inspected a few new Undercover 38's and one Bulldog at a local gun store and they all seem well made. I couldn't put my finger on it. They sort of remind me of a Ruger and a RIA put together. From what I understand the man who started Charter Arms use to work for Ruger. That explains some of the similarities.

I guess the real question is why hasn't S&W ever put out a 44 Spl J frame??? I wouldn't be looking elsewhere if they offered it.

__________________
Ephesians 6 (Armor of God)

Actually the man who started up Charter Arms, worked for Ruger, Colt and Hi Standard. I previously owned two Charter Arms .44spls way back in the day. I really loved them back then and fired thousands of rounds between the. That's back when I first started reloading as well. When they first came out with the 9mm and then the .40cal only a short time later, I knew, in my mind, that they would come out with a .45acp, and they did!

I agree that the Charter Arms handguns, tend to remind you on another handgun. For me, They have always reminded me of Ruger Handguns.

S&W is not a very innovative company. They use to make great handguns, but never took any risk in their designs. Now, after all their missed opportunities, at some form of innovation, they remain very basic and they now only make good handguns.

I have a Bulldog. I blew it up with some one elses handloads. Charter replaced it free of charge. See the thread "Bulldog Blowup" It IS accurate and fun to shoot. The factory grips had to go, then it stopped biting me. I think I got what I paid for and more.
Really wanting the 45 revolver.
David

Edit, here is the link to the thread. Its over a year ago. The Bulldog fits in most of my J frame holsters.

http://smith-wessonforum.com/firearm...g-blow-up.html

Bought wife a pathfinder in ss. She wanted a .22 about the same size as her Smith 637 airweight. Shoots great.

I just bought one of the classic 3" 44 special Bulldogs from the Bridgeport era the other day. Paid a whopping $185 OTD ($170.19 + tax).

Haven't shot it yet but it seems to lock up tight, timing seems good, no appreciable endshake and no pushoff, good bore, and a fairly light turn line. Seems like the quintessential (possibly) carried a lot shot a little revolver.. It is a bit finish challenged though. The bluing on the barrel is mottled looking with about half of it gone - almost like it got something spilled on it that stripped about half of it off. On the cylinder the bluing is pretty evenly faded all over.

Now for a question: does anyone know if the 2-1/2" barrel from the newer current version will swap with the 3" barrel on my older model? I like the idea of the 3" barrel, but I don't care for the looks of the "shark fin" front sight and the unshrouded ejector rod. I'd be OK with giving up 1/2" of barrel length to get a regular ramp-style front sight and an ejector rod shroud.

Tried a buddy's bulldog and was not impressed with the fit and finish, trigger pull or accuracy - I do like the concept. For the price, I'd look elsewhere. I'd gladly pay double for a 696. The bulldog is functional, but crude.

What version of the Bulldog does your buddy have?
As others have said there is a HUGE difference between the old ones produced in Bridgeport CT, that look like this


and the modern version produced in Shelton CT that looks like this.


I looked at a new stainless one like this the other day and there were actually pits and flaws in the barrel surface next to the roll marks!
And it was priced at $375 + tax! I wouldn't pay nearly $400 for one of those if I could use YOUR money to buy it - much less if I had to use mine!

On the other hand, the older one I bought for $185 the other day seems like a fairly decent gun.
Not a S&W for sure, but probably more comparable to a Taurus for fit and finish (not counting the damage to the finish of course).

I don't know why it's so hard for people to understand, but Charter Arms Handguns are more accurately described as tools, than aesthetically pleasing works of art. They are strong, well made weapons/handguns, and they serve the intended purpose extremely well!

I have owned several over the years and just a month or so ago, I purchased a new Pitbul 5 shot .45acp 2 1/2" in SS. It is the nicest one of all, so far. This is a unique handgun, as it does not require Moon Clips of any kind.

All that I have owned, including my new one, shoot, shoot and just keep shooting. They fire every time and they are as accurate as you will ever need! Remember, on average they cost about 50%/60% less that a S&W.

I've owned a newer production CA 44 Spl for several years. No problems and nice enough revolver for it's price point. In fact, it's what I normally carry in a Simply Rugged silver dollar pancake holster, loaded with hand loaded low velocity 200 gr Gold Dots. Also picked up the no spur hammer as an alternative for pocket carry.

Does it have the smooth pull of a vintage Smith?......No, and neither does it have the price. Maybe just me, but I prefer to not carry an expensive firearm on the minute chance I may have to use it and it winds up in an evidence locker.

Just FYI in case anyone else was interested in the question about swapping barrels, I emailed Charter Arms directly. I figured that even though they weren't in the same location and don't have the same ownership, they should know the specs for the old guns as well as the new ones. Here's the answer I got...
She was also able to tell me that my SN dates from 1973.

Well, since a barrel swap isn't an option, I did a little Birchwood Casey cold blue (paste) finish repair after I got home from work. It's no deep carbonia blue finish, but then it never was on this gun

Here are a couple of pictures, before & after. Maybe not beautiful, but not nearly as ugly as it was either....

Attached Images

	BDAfter1-2.jpg (143.5 KB, 92 views)
	BDBefore1-1.jpg (111.2 KB, 90 views)