Charter Arms Bulldog 44 Spl

[gr7070]

What's the typical view on Charter Arms and specifically this model?

It looks like about a 2.5" bbl.

Any idea how to determine age? 700,000 serial number.

The cylinder release and extractor rod are a bit clunky but the trigger is actually quite smooth and reasonably light. No idea how it shots, yet.

Any idea on value?

 

[Brian in Oregon]

The Charter Arms Bulldog fit a niche that S&W refuses to fill, which is a K-frame size 5-shot .44 Special pocket handgun.

A friend had a Bulldog many years ago. Recoil was pretty brisk. The one I shot had wood grips, and it needed rubber. The gun functioned fine and the trigger, though heavy, was smooth. Round for round it's not going to have the longevity of a S&W, but for its intended purpose few will ever wear one out. Accuracy was decent and more than good enough for its intended purpose. As for value, I don't know. Back in the day they were about 2/3 the price of a Model 36.

If S&W was smart, they would make a 3" version of their new Model 69, like this:

 

[chief38]

Not a big Charter fan. Always thought they were sub quality guns as compared to S&W and Colt. I'd even opt for a Ruger over a CA revolver. The CA guns I've shot and examined (3 of them) were pretty poor and did not function properly.

 

[Biggfoot44]

I really love the 44 Bulldog concept. While their MSRP was modest in the day , they can have aa niche supply/ demand. Every one I came across was either beat to death , overpriced , or both.

My one CA in .38 was disapointing , and I quickly let it go . However several knowledegable people I know swear by their CA's , so I guess it can vary gun to gun.

Before there was a Taraause , CA filled their niche , aalbeit made in USA .

 

[CajunBass]

I've had a couple of Charter Arms 38's and thought they were pretty good for the money. I didn't shoot them a lot, but then I didn't buy them to shoot a lot.

The 44's I've seen all seemed to have been battered pretty bad. I've always wondered if they got that way by people who tried to hot-rod them into 44 Magnums.

I do like the idea of five shot, 44 Special in a K-frame sized gun though. I found a Taurus 431, in very good shape, for a very reasonable price. I've only put a couple hundred rounds of factory "cowboy" ammo, and 50 or so reloads through it, but man is this a fun gun. There is just something about those big holes in the paper, and those trash can sized empties. It shoots straight, and recoil at least with the ammo I've fired is a *****cat. My wife loves shooting it.



I know a lot of people don't care for Taurus, but you gotta admit they do seem to make/have made several guns S&W "shuddahave" made. This one is a 3", fixed sight gun, but they made it (with a different number) in a 4", adjustable sight model as well. My LGS had one in stock last week and I almost put it on layaway, but I already had a 13-3 in the bin, and I hate having two guns on layaway at the same time. Someone else snatched it up.

Rossi makes/made the same gun as a Model 720 I believe.

 

[Duster340]

OP - What's on the Bulldog, i.e. name Charter Arms, Charco, Charter 2000, where it was manufactured etc. Common concesses is 1st gen and current production models tend to be solid shooters. Though some folks have had good success with the other years. I have a newer 2014 model stainless pug. Put over 2000 rounds (mostly teloads) down range and it has impressed meet. Accurate, reliable and a joy to carrier. While it's not as pretty as my 4" 629, but then again it was less than 1/2 the price. It does what it's supposed to do. I wouldn't hesitate to buy another.

Be well

 

[nipperdog]

My normal carry piece is a Colt Defender 3" 1911, but when I choose to carry a Revolver it's a Charter Bulldog .44. I bought mine in 2007, and it has functioned flawlessly since. I trust mine 100%.

 

[bananaman]

I bought a C.A. last November ish. Only purchased because S&W does not make what I wanted. Bought a new 40 S&W Pitbull. 2.3" barrel. The fit & finish are not the same as a Smith. My 1st 1 had issues with firing all rounds of a cylinder. (often) Sent it back. I received a call from tech that worked on it. They replaced the cylinder & crane. Sent it back. All was free. Repaired gun slightly better. Sent it back again. Nothing said, but they sent me a NEW replacement. Functions well, and accurate for what it is. The people I talked to there were quite nice! IF I needed another gun Smith did not make and Charter did, would do it again. Pitbull 9mm? Bob

 

[JohnK]

I had a short barreled Charter .44.

When I bought it, I was aware that the factory 246 gr. round nose factory was lightly loaded, in the 700's, or less.

To my surprise, that blasted thing kicked like the proverbial mule. I developed a terrible flinch, and shortly became less than fond of it.

I had a dear hunting buddy that was in love with it, and I gave it to him. Don't remember him griping about the recoil, maybe he never shot it.

 

[P33v3]

I actually really like mine. I routinely use it as a backup carries in the small of back position. Mines fairly new. As has been noted the trigger is pretty smooth and it is a nice size. Priceless I see them new from between 350-450 depending on where you find it. Mine has the rubber grips and they fill my hand fine. I use the Federal 200 gr LSWCHP. Recoil to me feels a little less than one of the current S&W Airweight 38 SPC's. Is it a tack driver? No. Can I keep it into 4 inch groupings out to about 15 feet? Yes. That's what it is meant for. It's a "belly gun", it doesn't purport to be anything else. It's pretty well put together and is reasonably lightweight. As has also been noted S&W doesn't have anything that fits this niche right now. It's a smallish (think Chief's Special 38 size), lightweight, 5 shot revolver that sends a big slow moving chunk of lead down range. Which may be comforting for some. Mine has never let me down.

 

[bigggbbruce]

Not a big Charter fan. Always thought they were sub quality guns as compared to S&W and Colt. I'd even opt for a Ruger over a CA revolver. The CA guns I've shot and examined (3 of them) were pretty poor and did not function properly.

I checked out a brand new one. Cylinder did not carry up on all charge holes.

Pass..

 

[Mike@NDS]

I recently got a smokin' deal on the 3" blued retro model.

At first I thought it was a mint condition 70's gun.

Recoil with the magtech 200gr cowboy loads is like a 38 to me.

The Blazer HP's were stout and not something I'll shoot on a regular basis.

I'm going to work up some 240 gr cowboy loads to get the right POI as the 200gr stuff was a bit low and I don't want to up the velocity.

I'll also use shot loads in it for snake duty on prairie dog trips.


All in all it fits the niche of a trail/belly gun perfectly.

 

[KSDeputy]

I am considering the purchase of a CA Pitbull in 45 acp. I do love a .45. I carry a CS 45.

 

[diyj98]

A new model Bulldog serves as my nightstand gun. I've only shot mine a couple boxes, but it's fairly accurate and only took a little front sight filing to bring to point of aim with my chosen ammo.

 

[bigggbbruce]

A new model Bulldog serves as my nightstand gun. I've only shot mine a couple boxes, but it's fairly accurate and only took a little front sight filing to bring to point of aim with my chosen ammo.

I just have to ask.

As a night stand short barreled gun, do you really think filing the front sight will make any difference when something goes bang in the night?

 

[flundertaker]

I will admit to having an old charter arms 38 detective that is rock solid. Its got to be from the 70's. The bad years to avoid are the charter 2000 and charco marked guns from what most say. I have finger banged a number of new bulldogs and just havent come off the cash, YET. I will eventually.

 

[CATI1835]

Not a big Charter fan. Always thought they were sub quality guns as compared to S&W and Colt.

The thing is, Charter is filling some niches Smith and Ruger are not. My wife carries a CA Undercoverette, .32H&R Mag. We chose that because the did not like the recoil on even a .38. I was skeptical at first, but we got the gun and after shooting it, I was surprised. Very nicely made and a great shooter. I believe the caliber is also under-rated, but that is another thread. I liked it so much, I spent months finding a SW 432 for my summer EDC. I have no problem with CA. Taurus, however, I will never buy another. Bought two, new, and both were borderline P0$. One spent more time at Taurus waiting on a backordered part than I actually had it in my possession.

 

[AveragEd]

I bought a 3" .44 Special Bulldog with wood stocks when they first came out in the mid-1970s. With any .430" bullet, factory loaded or handloaded, it keyholed badly at any range. I contacted Charter Arms after reading that the barrel bores were too large for that cartridge and failed to stabilize bullets. They acknowledged that problem and replaced the barrel on my gun. If you buy one, check the bore diameter.

Ed

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

I bought one when they first came out. Had to shim the wooden grips on the inside with a glued-in matchstick to make them fit perfectly, and the only factory ammo available (RNL) would back out of the case after four shots, so I had to reload for it, and use a very heavy crimp. I found the grips to be very effective, and I did not find the recoil excessive. Furthermore, the grips made kind of a ledge so that "Mexican carry" was actually pretty secure. I eventually sold or traded it, but I never had any trouble with it at all.

 

[steelslaver]

I have one and it has always functioned well and shoots decent. Had to file the front sight to get it centered as it shot low. I practice with my carry guns using paper plates at various distances and it does as well as my Taurus 431 and my S&W 696. It does have more recoil that I have to over come because it is so light. I made a set of "fat" grips for it to help out.