Charter Arms .45acp Revolver

[jimmyj]

Anyone have one ?
Opinions ?

 

[Dave Baird]

Buddy had one several years ago. I thought for the price it was just fine. But he didn't like the way Charter made the tiny clasps that hold each round in place as opposed to using a moonclip. Granted, there was a "way to do it", but when I loaded the gun, I had little problem. He sold it within months.

As far as me using a revolver that fires semi-auto rounds, I had the dreaded bullets coming out of the casings while still in the chambers and spilling powder all through the gun. So, I won't buy another, but that's me.

 

[VictorLouis]

Same type of extractor system as that K- frame that chambered the 9mm, the 547. You must push each round into place until that spring tooth clicks into the extractor groove. There is no conventional speed-loading with mere gravity.

That said, I felt the recoil to be darn near epic, so my time with it was short-lived. I also had both the old version 9mm, 6rd...and the 'improved' version at only 5rds. Neither would print anywhere near POA=POI.

I do enjoy their .32 and .38 models, however.

 

[Model 15-4ever]

I had one when they first came out. Worked great. The extractor is the same idea as the S&W 547, but the system is not identical. S&W used spring-loaded retractable individual extractor teeth; Charter Arms uses spring-loaded detents within the extractor itself.

Loading this revolver is quite simple and easy. However, you must seat each round over the spring-loaded detent: light finger pressure is sufficient. Extraction is positive.

I hate moonclips of any variety. They are relics of history that should have been left on the battlefields of WWI.

The Charter system allows you to use speedstrips or even a 1911 magazine as a speedloader. Recoil is more than a .38 Special obviously but it's a .45.

I no longer have the gun because the XL frame size is physically bigger than Charter other two frames, and is close to the S&W L-frame in size (but not weight, it's much lighter). A bit larger than I wanted to carry for EDC.

Here's my old review from 2015: Charter Arms Pitbull .45 ACP Review – rifleshooter.com

 

[STORMINORMAN]

The Charter Arms 44 Special Model 74410 in SS (sometime referred to as the OFF DUTY?) has a Model 49-style shrouded hammer with a spur that allows single action firing.

It is just about K-frame in size with 5 shots of 44 Special and is very reasonable to shoot (just reload responsibly and keep away from the Buffalo Bore HEAVY ammo: their new ANTI-PERSONAL stuff is specifically O.K. in Charter Arms. But, at $54.69 for 20 I'll pass!).

Think of a Model 49, but on steroids...?

Cheers!

P.S. No need for moon clips, either!

 

[hyena]

I have a Pitbull .45 ACP. I like it. Pulling this from memory....too lazy to dig out the paperwork. When new it shot left (might have been right) a couple inches at 7 yards. Sent it back to CA on their dime. They replaced the barrel and had it back to me within 2 or 3 weeks. Cartridges have to be pushed into the cylinder....they don't drop in. But it's very easy to do. Extraction is normal. Recoil is brisk.

It's a good honest gun for the money. Hits to point of aim, and always goes bang. I use it for a truck gun when I feel the need.

I don't like moonclips either. My 640 Pro came with three and they've never been out of the box.

 

[Shrek Of The Arctic]

I picked up it's slightly larger brother a couple months ago in .45 Colt. Timing and lock up were good. The single point of cylinder lock up doesn't give me the warm and fuzzies, but I've gotten used to it.

Action was okay. I've felt newer Smiths that weren't much better. Sights were right on horizontally, but shot all bullet weights low. That was actually perfect. Low was fixable with the file I keep in my range bag. It now shoots spot on with my 255 grain SWC handloads.

It was not reliable. A couple 2-3 rounds out of each cylinder failed to fire. They were CCI primers, which many regard as the hardest primers out there. But still...I don't carry a revolver to deal with ammo pickiness.

I installed an extra strength spring, which made it completely reliable. Unfortunately, it also made accuracy a challenge due to a heckuva heavy trigger. I'm no trigger snob, but dang... With some trial and error, I hope to find a happy medium.

As I work these bugs out, it has developed a new trick. Now when cycling the action, the trigger will spin through a couple of rounds.

CA doesn't sell a DAO hammer, so I made due with the one it came with.

I think it's cool that Charter Arms is making the only compact .45 that's not primarily designed to fire .410 shells. That having been said, at the end of the day I'm currently much more comfortable with my Smiths, Rugers, Kimbers, etc. Even though the EDCs tend to launch a bit less of a potent round.

I'm a bit underwhelmed with mine. Not enough to send it away, but I'm not inclined to buy another one right away.

 

[JFthunder]

Well, I’ve commented here before. I have the 45 Colt version marked as a “Bulldog”. It had an intermittent light primer strike… not consistent to any one chamber, nor every trip around the cylinder. Also not consistent with any one brand of Ammo. When I sent it back for warranty service I asked about the 45ACP Pitbull. For $150 they provided a crane and cylinder assembly that is a one screw out and back in swap. Gun has been flawless with both set ups. I don’t currently reload so all factory rounds. Very happy with this one. It frequently rides with me when I want more than my Mdl38 or P32. They are not perfect in all respects, but they are bet-your-life reliable while still being affordable.