.44 Special Rant

B

Boge

Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2009
Messages
426
Reaction score
266
City & State/Province
Border
I am angry as I just had to send my Charter Arms Bulldog back to the factory again for the 2nd time!! After a few cylinders of factory defensive ammo the endshake was off the map!! However, I love this gun for two reasons:

1. it is the perfect "belly gun" size

2. mine happens to shoot dead nuts on with 200 gr. HP's.


Why can't all those big brains at S&W merely copy the frame size & "Smith & Wessonize" the internals? Before anyone mentions it, yes I have a Model 696 and it is just too damn big for pocket carry or really comfortable urban CCW for that matter IMO. Personally, I think that is why the 696 & 396 flopped: they are too big for what people want them for. Charter Arms manages to sell a helluva lot of Bulldogs even with spotty QC as there are many people who want a .44 Spcl. BUT in a portable package!!

Rant off. Maybe Ruger will make an LCR in .44 Spcl.
 
I had a Rossi/Taurus snubnose 44 mag. that I only shot heavy loaded 44 spl's. A bit bigger than a bulldog but very concealable!
 
Nframecollector said:
I had a Rossi/Taurus snubnose 44 mag. that I only shot heavy loaded 44 spl's. A bit bigger than a bulldog but very concealable!
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with the 3" Rossi 720 or the Taurus 431. Those were guns they should have kept making.
 
S&W45Colt said:
Nothing wrong with the 3" Rossi 720 or the Taurus 431. Those were guns they should have kept making.
Click to expand...

I had a 720 and it was a total ***. Bolt notches were cut totally off the mark. I have shot a 431 and while a great gun it is still larger than a Bulldog, as is the 720.
 
Boge said:
I had a 720 and it was a total ***. Bolt notches were cut totally off the mark. I have shot a 431 and while a great gun it is still larger than a Bulldog, as is the 720.
Click to expand...

Boge,
Quite a large .44 Spl following here on the Forum. Also I'm sure there are many, myself included, who will join you in a desire for a Bulldog size gun from S&W. My LGS had a new Bulldog a couple of months back. I inspected and noticed the timing and lockup were off. Brand spanking new, straight from the factory. I passed.

I have a 696 and a 3" 624. I had a 3" Taurus 431. The Taurus was not a "bad" gun. Chamber throats in it were large enough for a Hornady 200 gr XTP to drop right through without much interference. Remarkably the gun was still very accurate, but the large throats resulted in extreme leading when firing cast SWC. The leading problem and the large SB grip were enough of an issue for it to go down the road.

I don't carry the 696. If it were fixed sight I might. K frame carry is usually a 2" M64 or M10. Heck, I'd settle for a fixed sight 696. Maybe someday but not holding my breath.
 
Last edited:
Cal44 said:
"I don't carry the 696. If it were fixed sight I might."

There is a super sized centennial, the M296, in 44 special.

Not sure you could ever find one.
Click to expand...

Cal44, I would be all over a 296 if ever one could be found. We here in MA have similar import laws to CA. Unfortunately the 296 is not import approved. 696 is. Go figure.
 
I agree with the OP. A number of years ago I called S&W and asked why they couldn't build a smaller 5-shot 44 Special, since Charter Arms seems to manage and has done so for years. The customer service guy on the phone hung up on me.

And, I agree with a couple others that a fixed sighted 696 would have probably kept the gun in production longer.

YMMV,
Dave
 
Last edited:
My Charter Bulldog D.O.B. is 1970. Flawless and reliable function after 43 years and many rounds. I think Charter Arms has come back a long way since the bad times,but an original from Bridgeport or Stafford is hard to beat.
 
setxn said:
My Charter Bulldog D.O.B. is 1970. Flawless and reliable function after 43 years and many rounds. I think Charter Arms has come back a long way since the bad times,but an original from Bridgeport or Stafford is hard to beat.
Click to expand...


I'm in TX as well so give me your address & I'll send you a certified check for 100 sawmill dollars for that gun!! Lucky rat!! Hahaha!!
 
I read that S&W didn't do it because the round is just too large for a K frame. Forcing cone would have to be too thin.
 
Forcing cone is too thin on most snub .44 Spl. revos. That's a BIG bore dia. for a frame that was designed for .357/38 cal. I believe the real reason for the reluctance of the manufacturers to build a Charter type gun is simply because too many people insist on handloading +++P ammo or using Corbon/Buffalo Bore type loads in one. They feel they would just be swamped with beat to death guns damaged by dumb owners (and they're right). A 200 gr. bullet @ 850-900 fps. is really more than enough for social use. But so many people think that they "need" more. They're wrong. I have been carrying an old Charter from the 80s for many years and I will never sell it. It is still as tight as it was when new. I also have and carry a 696 and I don't have any complaints carrying it with a good rig. I don't believe in "pocket pistols". A "pocket pistol" is a Beretta .25 or .380 auto. Not for me. I think the .44 Spl. cartridge is the best caliber for SD along with the .45 ACP. I still remember the first time I saw a Charter Bulldog Pug - I bought it immediately. They did make an awful lot of truly awful guns in the later years but if you can find an old one that hasn't been beat to death with heavy loads it makes a very fine carry piece. I have also heard from quite a few people who have bought the new current Charters and had problems with them and they all told me the factory made them right. Don't give up.
 
Last edited:
I had a Charter Bulldog, it was a ok gun, but not what I wanted. Sold it and got a Taurus 445 Ultra lite. While not in the same category as a the S&W, I have put almost 500 rounds thru it with no problems. The more I shoot it , the better it gets. Can't find a S&W 44 special anyway to replace it.:(
 
I got a Charter .44 Bulldog after they got "Son of Sam". Before that if you had one, they called anyone with in 500 miles in to see if it was "the one".

Never liked it that much, violent even with factory loads with that light weight shroud.
Long gone & someone wanted it so I lost no money.

Only have S&W .44 SPL's now.
M24-3 target

M696

M21-4


1935 M&P


1921 HE target
 
Last edited:
You tell em brother! A for instance here, for many years Ruger just would not make a .44 Special, Lipsey's was convinced to make an order of two thousand, sold out in record time and now is a Ruger cataloged item. S&W was convinced to make a N frame fixed sight .44 Special, they sold a boatload of em. Come on S&W make a real carry .44 Special!
 
Boge said:
I am angry as I just had to send my Charter Arms Bulldog back to the factory again for the 2nd time!! After a few cylinders of factory defensive ammo the endshake was off the map!! However, I love this gun for two reasons:

1. it is the perfect "belly gun" size

2. mine happens to shoot dead nuts on with 200 gr. HP's.


Why can't all those big brains at S&W merely copy the frame size & "Smith & Wessonize" the internals? Before anyone mentions it, yes I have a Model 696 and it is just too damn big for pocket carry or really comfortable urban CCW for that matter IMO. Personally, I think that is why the 696 & 396 flopped: they are too big for what people want them for. Charter Arms manages to sell a helluva lot of Bulldogs even with spotty QC as there are many people who want a .44 Spcl. BUT in a portable package!!

Rant off. Maybe Ruger will make an LCR in .44 Spcl.
Click to expand...

How many times have you needed to send your 696 back to be fixed?
 
I'd buy a snubbie if ruger or s&w offered it in 44 special. Nothing but these two manufacturers.
 
mc5aw said:
How many times have you needed to send your 696 back to be fixed?
Click to expand...


To be frank, I have not shot it very much as IMO it is neither fish nor fowl in that for a field gun I have a Ruger 4.75" .44 Spcl. that can shoot the Skeeter Skelton load all day long and that's a little too much for the 696 as well as the latter being too large IMO for everday CCW. That is the crux of my post: despite the Bulldog being spotty in its quality it is absolutely ideal for a CCW. I have no problem slipping it into a front pocket holster as it's just a frog hair larger than a J Frame. Too top it off my Bulldog shoots Corbon 200 gr. DPX, 200 gr. Gold Dots & 200 gr. Win. Silvertips dead nuts on out to 15 yds. When one factors in size, portability, accuracy & the caliber it is absolutely ideal. That is why I treasure this gun.
 
Boge said:
To be frank, I have not shot it very much as IMO it is neither fish nor fowl in that for a field gun I have a Ruger 4.75" .44 Spcl. that can shoot the Skeeter Skelton load all day long and that's a little too much for the 696 as well as the latter being too large IMO for everday CCW. That is the crux of my post: despite the Bulldog being spotty in its quality it is absolutely ideal for a CCW. I have no problem slipping it into a front pocket holster as it's just a frog hair larger than a J Frame. Too top it off my Bulldog shoots Corbon 200 gr. DPX, 200 gr. Gold Dots & 200 gr. Win. Silvertips dead nuts on out to 15 yds. When one factors in size, portability, accuracy & the caliber it is absolutely ideal. That is why I treasure this gun.
Click to expand...

If the CA has proven to be unreliable, as evidenced by two returns for repair, it is not ideal for anything beyond being a paperweight. Banking on a a CCW firearm that may or may not go boom when you most need it to falls somewhere between optimistic and foolhardy. 100% reliability is what breeds confidence; that why S&Ws and Rugers rate significantly higher as CCWs than all other makers.
 
I think it is a given that we will never see a Bulldog size revolver from S&W. I think the best we can hope for is a fixed sight short barrel (2-2.5"), all stainless L frame. That would fit the bill for me.
 
Last edited:
If you've ever overlaid a Colt DS on a j-frame Smith, you'll see that they're just about the same size. I know the DS came first, but the best comparison I can come up with is that it's as if Colt took a Chief Spl & heated it up until they could jam in a 6-shot cylinder. I don't know why S&W can't do the same thing and come up with a "fat j-frame", sort of halfway between a j & a k. Another new one could be a snubby k-frame but with a 5 shot 44 or 45 cylinder. Make them old-school-- no titanium scandium or unobtanium, no slab-sided barrels, no zombie sights.
 
Gemini Customs did up a pair of 296s about a year or so ago, and were featured in American Handgunner Magazine. They looked very hot-rodded, and certainly came with a hefty price tag, but seemed to be amazing carry guns. I think they were one-offs though, and not an available package.
 
mc5aw said:
If the CA has proven to be unreliable, as evidenced by two returns for repair, it is not ideal for anything beyond being a paperweight. Banking on a a CCW firearm that may or may not go boom when you most need it to falls somewhere between optimistic and foolhardy. 100% reliability is what breeds confidence...
Click to expand...


I should have added that I only used it as a backup CCW. My main carry is a semi-auto. I live on the Border and no one here carries a revolver as a primary CCW that I know of. The bad guys down here just have too much firepower. I sometimes visit a range that borders on the Rio Grande. Needless to say, most who frequent it are armed to the teeth.
 
A carry gun needs to be 100% reliable-period. I don't care how small it is, it needs to go bang every time. I'd rather have 38 that is rock solid than a 44 special that is spotty.
 
My 1970 Charter bulldog is a bit of an oddity because it
has a Bridgeport roll mark and 1970 serial # number but they didn't introduce the gun until 1971 after they moved to Stafford. The nice lady I spoke to that is the in house keeper of the records/historian said it should not exist. Sounds like S&W transitions gun syndrome.
 
oak1971 said:
A carry gun needs to be 100% reliable-period. I don't care how small it is, it needs to go bang every time. I'd rather have 38 that is rock solid than a 44 special that is spotty.
Click to expand...


You're right, which is why I carry a 442 now or a Det. Special as a backup.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Glenn R. McMannly
NEW Charter Arms Bulldog! 👍
Replies
17
Views
901
'79 Magnum GT
'79 Magnum GT
S
Reloading the .44 Special. Bought myself some pin gauges and need advice for bullets.
Replies
22
Views
959
rockquarry
R
BLUEDOT37
The New 44 Special Night Guard 396-2 Reviewed, Compared & Tested: By the Numbers
2 3
Replies
85
Views
5K
BLUEDOT37
BLUEDOT37
S
Charter Arms Bulldog/44 Special...Thoughts?
2 3 4
Replies
91
Views
11K
Eddie Southgate
Eddie Southgate
Miami_JBT
.44 Large Frame Revolvers for home defense.
2
Replies
37
Views
3K
A10
A10

Latest posts

Back
Top