picker77
US Veteran
At 83, I can say AMEN to that, Pilgrim. My 14 oz 442 isn't much fun lately. I can still shoot it, but I'm leaning more these days toward "only if I have to" instead of "because I want to".
Charter Arms Bulldog/44 Special...Thoughts?
- Thread starter Shrek Of The Arctic
- Start date
BillinAlamo
Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2022
- Messages
- 59
- Reaction score
- 90
Pilgrim, that Smith of yours is simply a masterpiece.
Exchipy
Member
The Charter Arms folks were thoughtful enough to have sandblasted the interior of the original barrel on this one. And, the rifling was cut deeper on one side than the other. So, I cut down and fitted a discarded S&W 696 barrel to this .44 Bull Dog, resulting in what was likely the best barrel ever on a Charter Arms revolver:
Trouble was, the quality of its action was not up to the accuracy potential of its new barrel. So, this re-barreled .44 Bull Dog was given to a friend who insists on riding his super deluxe grass mower where the Copperheaded Rattle Moccasins roam.
When I feel like carrying a lightweight .44SPL, this S&W 296 is the one:
(Must have sneezed, or something. So, please just ignore that wide flyer 5. That's what I do.)
Trouble was, the quality of its action was not up to the accuracy potential of its new barrel. So, this re-barreled .44 Bull Dog was given to a friend who insists on riding his super deluxe grass mower where the Copperheaded Rattle Moccasins roam.
When I feel like carrying a lightweight .44SPL, this S&W 296 is the one:
(Must have sneezed, or something. So, please just ignore that wide flyer 5. That's what I do.)
Last edited:
I agree on the recoil. My CA 44 SP spends most time in the safe. My factory 44 Specials are shot through my Ruger 5 1/2 " Blackhawk, which is easier on my smaller hands, and very accurate.
I have a stainless steel.44 Bulldog Stratford address. The bulldog grips are perfect for that gun In my opinion. I do have a pair of the old Herretts shooting ace but prefer the factory wood grips. I've been to the factory twice for walk in service on Undercover .38s and they cleaned and checked the bulldog no charge. As noted by others the fit and finish is a little rough compared to S&W but they are perfectly functional revolvers.
Attachments
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2023
- Messages
- 114
- Reaction score
- 281
I dearly loved the 44 special, but got rid of the dedicated guns and kept the mags. Along the way I warmed up to two 45acp revolvers and kept them, the 625-10, and the 22 Thunder Ranch. Both good thumpers.
I knew a LEO that carried a CA Bulldog .44 Special back in the mid-'70's and I wanted one ever since. I bought one of the new Bulldog Classics, but I haven't taken it to the range yet. The only thing that bothers me is the blued finish has turned plum. While that doesn't affect function, I buy blued steel firearms for aesthetics.
Cartwright Jones
Member
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2023
- Messages
- 53
- Reaction score
- 106
Spoken like a person who has never shot a Bulldog.
The Bulldog weighs just 19 ounces empty, WAY less than a M69! With handloads, the Bulldog can deliver 350fpe which is right in the wheelhouse of the 9mm, .45ACP. The Bulldog can be dropped into a hoodie pocket. A 200 grain slug is no joke - maybe to some.
My S&W J-frame weighs 14.5 ounces. My Bulldog weighs 19 ounces. One will deliver around 180fpe, the Bulldog will slap with 350fpe.
The Bulldog is NOT a pansy gun. If you find the kick of a .38 spl excessive, do NOT buy a Bulldog! Any way you slice it, a 200-250 grain slug ramming home at 775fps beats a .38 special of ANY VERSION YOU CHOOSE!
Nicksterdemus
Member
Congrats, through constant emails I have been awoken from me slumber. Three inch tapered pencil barrel, w/Bridgeport stamped on as I recall close kin to SoS run, und bite as big as bark leaves no desire or need for any 'Spl' ammo. Save Buffalo Bore for the 32 and stoke Blazer Brass in the 44 or any cowboy load for more delicate wrists. Besides, should you feel the need to drop the hammer recoil will be the last thing on your mind. Perhaps that & dbl tappin' ...
M E Morrison
Member
I had one back in the 70s. It wasn't fun to shoot, but in the days before arthritis set in it was barely ok.
I shoot/load 200 grain lead SWC bullets to about 700 to 750 fps in mine.
These guns, being very lightweight, can have some pretty stiff recoil. The load I use is just below painful recoil (for me) and still acts like it is a useful load.
I have not shot any live critters with it yet, but I think with halfway decent shot placement it would suffice for any flesh and blood situations I am likely to encounter.
Love the 44 spl, but, for me, the CA's fit and finish is crude compared to the Smith's 44 spl. .
'79 Magnum GT
Member
I agree 100%. But when I was looking for a smallish, inexpensive, self/defense gun in 44 Spl. back in 2017 I couldn't find one. I wanted something to carry in my pocket. I don't recall if there were any Smith's that fit the bill. I knew about the Bulldog but thought it had too many things to get caught on while trying to dig it out of my pocket. That night after getting home from the gun show I was looking on line and found the BOOMER. That was just what I needed! The perfect "get off me gun". Now it's nowhere as nice as a Smith but it doesn't have to be. Small, powerful and no sights to get in the way. Point, Pull, Done. Everybody goes home happy.
Ps. I have small hands that's why it looks a bit big.
Rick
Attachments
dvc45acp
Member
Through the years, I've had a 296, 720 a Boomer and a .45 acp Pitbull. The 720 was OK but heavy and rough. The 296 was smooth, light and a brick shape. The Boomer was OK but I couldn't not have sights so I had a front sight installed. It worked OK. The Pitbull was an experience. First the barrel started turning. They repaired it quickly. Then I got light primer hits. Bought a Wolff spring and achieved about a 50 lb DA trigger. Got a different spring from CA and it's OK now. With +P HST's it's barky but useable. I don't carry it however as I really don't trust it 100%. Some guy on youtube wrote CA and asked if he could shoot .45 Super in the Pitbull. They though he meant +P and said yes but blah blah. So, he loaned up some 255 gr. hardcast 45 Supers and fired I think 30 of them. Chron'd right at 1000. The gun still worked. I finally gave up on pocket big bores. For a pocket, a 342 seems the optimum and I load Buffalo Bore 150 wadcutters. Otherwise, I just carry a big gun on my waist and conceal it. FWIW, DVC
'79 Magnum GT
Member
You don't need a front site on a Boomer. It's not made for target practice over 20 ft if that much. It's when you have someone right in front of you intent on doing you harm. Just like I said before, "point, pull, done". That's it, that's all there is too it. When I carried while hiking I used the 165 gr. Hornady C.D. or the 200 gr. W-W Silver tip. I practiced with a 250 gr. cast KTSW over 5 gr. of W-W 231. Don't know what the fps was but it felt like the two factory rounds that I carried. Never had to use either of them in reality fortunately.
Rick
dvc45acp
Member
I fully understand I don't "need" a front sight on a Boomer. My ESP is not very good though so I really can't say what I might have to use a defensive gun for. So I "want" a front sight. I know the intent of the design, but that intent limited the gun a little too much for my taste, so I fixed it.
fatcat3
Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2016
- Messages
- 456
- Reaction score
- 969
I've owned three CA bulldogs; the only trouble was someone always wanted them more than I did. If finding 44spl wasn't like finding hens teeth around here I would have a Boomer. Then always wanted a Magnaport Backpacker back in the dark ages. Guess I'll just have to settle for my 638 that fits like a glove and naturally, for me, points were I'm looking. Oh well, Humpbacks are just way cooler than anything else. 
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2012
- Messages
- 11
- Reaction score
- 9
I had a CA Bulldog in the seventies and it was too much for me. got a couple of S&W Lew Hortons and thought they were too heavy for carry. Got a GP 100 Lipsey's 44special with a five inch barrel and it's 'just right' for woods carry.
