Charter Arms?

[Lj1941]

I am looking for a compact CCW. I really would like something with a little more power than a 38+P or a 9. The CA Pitbull in 40 looks like it would work for me.Does anyone have any experience with Charter Arms wheel guns? Cost is a huge factor. I know that there are some very good S & Ws available but they are out of my price range.COMMENTS?

 

[md2lgyk]

I've owned just one Charter Arms revolver, an Undercover .38 I bought in 1977. I had no issues with it, and wish now I'd never sold it. I think Charter is one of those companies that went out of business and then returned, so I don't know how the quality of their current guns compares with the old ones, or who actually owns them now.

I've always been interested in a Pit Bull; just never had the cash at the right time.

 

[Elm Creek Smith]

My brother has a Charter Arms Undercover .38 that he bought back in the late 1960's and carried as aircrew in the USAF. Since the finish was toast, I had it cleaned up and Parkerized for him. I had a Bulldog .44 for a few years back in the mid '70's that I shouldn't have let go.

You don't get the fit and finish of a S&W, and some of the guns under Charco or Charter 2000 are abysmal. But, if you get a good one, it will do the job.

ECS

 

[Overkilll0084]

I have a late 80's Undercover. Aesthetically it's nothing to write home about. Functionally it's been 100%. The action is reasonably smooth and the trigger is decent. I prefer it to a newer Taurus that I picked up a approx 3 years ago. I wouldn't mind a Bulldog at some point. I will admit that I'm not entirely sold on the .40 S&W revolver concept. YMMV.

 

[rule303]

The new Charters are good to go. They had some issues with quality control when they were Charco and Charter 2000 as mentioned above. I have an Undercover Lite .38 which has been a nice little gun. I have not fired any of the rimless versions, but I have had several come through the shop, and people seem to be happy with them.

 

[MedWheeler]

I have two Undercover 38 models. The first was acquired in 1987 (new) the day I was sworn in as a LEO. It rode back-up and off-duty detail for the first few years, and is still kept loaded in the safe. Great gun, and tightly-fitted. Has the then-rare anodized aluminum full barrel/ejector shroud, which makes it pretty handsome.

The second is an older gun, made in 1966, and acquired by me in 2010, inherited when my dad died. He bought it in the late seventies, and used it for pretty much the same purposes in the early eighties. It also points, shoots, and fits together quite well, but the smaller grips are too thin for me.

As was mentioned, Charter Arms changed hands a few times, and has now come back into its original ownership. The products it puts out now, and those it did before it went under the "Charco" and "Charter 2000" names, are the ones to look for.

Personally, I don't know anyone who owns any of their rimless-ammunition models, so I have no firsthand (or even secondhand) knowledge of how well they're put together or work.

 

[Blue Brick]

Over the years, Charter Arms has had a bit of an up and down history and is best known for their big bore .44 Spl. Bulldog revolvers. The company was originally founded in 1964 by Douglas McClenahan.

He, like many Americans, had the dream of owning his own company. After working as a designer for such notable firearm companies as Colt, High Standard and Ruger, he decided to form his own company. He developed a revolver design utilizing a one-piece frame without the weakness of a sideplate, plus a unique hammer block safety system.

His first model was a five-shot .38 Spl. he dubbed the Undercover. At just 16 ounces, it was the lightest steel-framed revolver in the world at the time. It also featured the fewest moving parts. McClenahan’s goal was to produce a reliable piece for personal protection that was also affordable to the average blue-collar worker.

In 1967 McClenahan took on his close friend David Ecker as a 50-50 partner. In the years that followed, the company had its ups and downs. In 1984 David Ecker’s son, Nick, joined the firm, running the manufacturing side of the company. Ultimately though, Charter Arms went bankrupt in the 1990s and was resurrected by the Ecker family. Production was moved from Stratford to Shelton, Conn., and work continued.

Some refinements were made to the original designs and new calibers were introduced. Today Charter Arms is owned and run by Nick Ecker.

http://www.shotgunnews.com/2013/07/09/charter-arms-pitbull-review/

 

[AABEN]

I have had 2 of them and both was a good carry guns. Sold them and made good money off of them. That is why I sold.

 

[silicosys4]

They are certainly no Colt. Or S&W. Or Dan Wesson. Or Ruger.
Even Taurus is a better revolver in my book, than the older Bulldog Pug I had.
Maybe the newer ones are of higher quality, but I had my Bulldog Pug apart a few times, and there were some aspects of the design that, when you look at it, you truly get the impression the gun was designed as a disposable gun, with a life expectancy in mind, and not a long one at that.
If the design hasn't changed, and I don't see that it has by their parts diagram, better fit and finish won't do much for longevity. I carried mine for a while and it made a great carry gun, but stopped after I had it apart and saw what it was all about inside. Lets just say loctite is the name of the game with this gun, and I wouldn't carry a new one or an old one without seriously loctiting some of the screws.

My main gripe is the relationship between the cylinder latch release screw, the cylinder release latch, and the ejector rod. The ejector rod rests against the head of the cylinder release screw, and over time the ejector rod peens the flathead screw slot shut on the cylinder release screw, and you can't take apart the gun. When reassembling the gun, if you screw the cylinder release screw too far into the cylinder release latch and close the cylinder, the cylinder release latch no longer releases the cylinder....then it becomes a NIGHTMARE to take back apart when you can't get the cylinder to release. Then you also have the possibility of problems with the screw backing out, and the gun failing to lock up when the cylinder is closed.
IMO, it is a cheap, shoddy shortcut of a design that gave up quality and longevity for ease of manufacture and less parts, that WILL fail eventually if the gun is shot regularly.

http://www.charterfirearms.com/pdfs/Bulldog_MagPug.pdf

Rant about my Bulldog aside,
If the newer .40 model has changed that, I have heard the quality of CA revolvers has gone up, so I would not refuse to own it if it were a good buy.

 

[Blue Brick]

Keep in mind that frames, cylinders, and barrels are all manufactured offsite and outsourced from other companies.

 

[40-82]

I had a Charter bulldog 44 special back in the early 70's. When I tried to shoot it on paper at twenty feet, half the slugs landed sideways. Took it back to the dealer.

 

[phildenton]

ive had good experiences with charter arms revolvers. ruger and s&w are certainly better, but charter will do the job. the one i bought seems accurate, a bit snappy due to its light weight.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

The original Charter Arms was a very good company. Over the past few decades they went through a few incarnations and owners, the worst being Charter Arms 2000. I'm not sure what year but Charter Arms is back in the hands of the original owners and the Ecker family and IMO on the top of their game.

If I were looking for a J frame size 44 Special I would buy the Charter Arms Bulldog without reservation.

 

[fredg]

I had a new .38 snub two years ago. A total mess! Ejector star was all chewed up and cylinder was very loose. Returned it and got another, within a week the transfer bar broke in half. That was enough for me, returned it and got a Ruger SP101.

Now if I could find one from the 60's or 70's I would be all over it.

 

[35 Whelen]

My Dad has an old Charter Bulldog .44 that has had no problems. About 3 1/2 years ago I bought my wife a Charter Arms Pink Lady .38 Spec. That little sucker only weighs 12 oz. and is a joy to carry. I've wrung it out with quite a few hand loads up to and including +P loads and have had ZERO problems.

35W

 

[Lj1941]

Thank you for all of the comments.Now if I can just find that piggy bank~~~~

 

[MICHAEL T]

Like my old 44 spl Just don't try to hand load to 44 mag and it will last long time
I use blazer 200ge hp for carry.

 

[smalls]

I wanted a Pitbull really bad in 9mm. I thought the moon clip-less design was cool.

But then I went on the interwebz searching for good reviews, and couldn't find any. Apparently the moon clip-less design looked better on paper.

 

[beag_nut]

I have a CA .357 Mag Pug. Got it new about three years ago. I consider it to be a little better than a "Saturday Night Special". For one thing, the screws in the frame continually loosen, and I am not about to use any grade of Loctite on them. For another, the non-adjustable sights are worthless as manufactured. I had to machine down the front sight just to get it to hit paper at 25 feet. (I am a NRA-certified Distinguished Expert at 50 feet, so I know about sights) And, the trigger pull is horrible, being unpredictable and very rough. Other than that, I consider it to be a somewhat "disposable" gun, considering the price. But I would NEVER get another CA product.

 

[ChasMack]

Charter

I have a 2 year old 44special Charter arms and I love the gun. I bought some 44spl that the LGS had and the thing shot cloverleafs @ 15 yds. Not all in one hole but close enough for me. I'd like to get the 40S&W version...have not heard much about the gun in that caliber.

 

[10mm Mike]

I happen to have a Pitbull in .40 S&W.

I got it for the novelty of it. Thought the ability to shoot rimless ammo without a moon clip was really cool - and indeed it is pretty neat. As far as extraction, etc I didn't have any trouble with it.

I did have a problem with the ejector rod loosening up, making it difficult to open the cylinder. I solved that problem with some blue loctite.

Another problem was that it has fixed sights and was shooting low. Quite abit low, infact. The 3 potential solutions to that were to try some different ammo, file on the front site, or change my sight picture... Never got around to that solving that because of problem #3

Recoil was rather unpleasant (and this is coming from someone the generally enjoys abit of recoil). I couldn't use the thumbs forward grip because the cylinder would smash into the tips of my thumbs during recoil, so I had to alter my grip. Even with the altered grip, the gun would slip down in my hand so far it would make follow up shots impossible without stopping to readjust my grip - meaning that using this gun in a defensive situation was absolutely not going to happen.

I never got around to taking it to the range again to try out some different ammo before I lost interest and shelved it. FYI, I was using 165gr UMC FMJ. It's possible that 18ogr. ammo would have solved issues #2 & #3... then again 180gr ammo might also make it worse. Who knows.

For the price, its alright as a novelty to take to the range every now and then if you like punishing your hands... In a defensive situation though? I would rely on a pocket knife or my fists before relying on that thing. Even at range. Against an armed aggressor. Or maybe throw it at them to cause a distraction and run away...

 

[JERRY]

I suggest you handle one to inspect it before you buy it. timing has been off on the last three bulldog .44spls ive examined at gander mnt and academy sports.

the guns no longer have a frame stud to prevent the cylinder from moving away and off the ejector rod/crane assy. there are a few youtube videos of this. why C.A. did away with this part is beyond me. if the side of the barrel has Bridgeport or Stratford on it its probably a real keeper. beware of astonia or Shelton.

 

[B!ngo]

I understand that funds are tight, but are you only looking at a new gun? I've rarely purchased 'new' in handguns as there are so many out there that are lightly used and can be purchased at significant saving or there are models that are just not made anymore. In long-guns, since I'm left-handed, finding a used LH model is pretty tough so I painfully resort to buying new for those.
My HKUSP's, P7M13 and M8, S&W .357 and .44 V Comps among others were all purchased 'pre-owned' and some saved me quite a bit, though to be fair some saved in money and time, others just saved time.
I'm sure this doesn't come as a revelation but thought I'd mention it. And though opinions may vary, buying over the internet from individuals or stores via one of the large used gun trading sites has been a friend of mine. It would seem that most in the gun industry care about their rep, take good care of their firearms, and are honest in their assessments.
You should be able to 'buy up' one brands-worth of quality if you pursue this route.
Best of luck,
B

 

[Kymasabe]

I have 3 Charter Arms right now. Two are snub .38's and the other is a 4" barrelled Bulldog Police .38. Recently dumped the beautiful S&W Model 36 Chiefs Special that I had because the trigger edge was sharp, the hammer spur was sharp and the trigger really wasnt much better than the Charters that I own. I really did NOT enjoy shooting the S&W and much prefer my Charters. I stake my life on one everyday as a carry gun.
By the way, all of mine are Stratford, Conn. guns from the 70's.
Stay away from Charco and Charter 2000. The new guns have been fine for me, I've had a few, all cycled fine and worked fine, but I prefer the older guns.
Oh, one last thing. If you're considering the .40cal version, why not consider the tried and true .44 special instead.

 

[Lj1941]

Nothing is engraved in stone.I may or may not buy one. I am just trying to test the water for various opinions. There are sure a lot of opinions.I would buy a pre-owned gun should I find one that I like. My last two handgun buys have been used.Thank you one & all.