how is the charter arms .32 H&R Mag?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks XD. I hadn't ran across that forum yet. With what rcmodel and a couple others have stated about the QC issues, I am looking at the tarus as strongly as the charter arms is now. I am also waiting on a range report from the gentleman who just bought one. I appreciate the heads up.
 
I have a Smith and Wesson 432 in .32H&R magnum and it is all around wonderful in every way. I also have the Ruger SP-101 in .327 Federal which will also shoot the .32 Short, long and H&R magnum. The Ruger is a heavy little gun for the .32's and recoil is very light, for home defense for a person who is recoil shy then it would be a great platform.

I can't comment on the Taurus or the Charter Arms current offerings but have had both brands in the past. From what I've seen, the quality control can be spotty but the designs are sound so if you get a good one it's a good one and if it's a bad one you'll find out quickly. Any gun you want to use for defense should be thoroughly tested so by the time you depend on it you'll know whether you got a good example.
 
From what I've seen, the quality control can be spotty but the designs are sound so if you get a good one it's a good one and if it's a bad one you'll find out quickly.
Click to expand...

I've heard that Jeff Cooper described Charter as "a great design executed poorly."
The new guns use the same old Charter design, so if the QC has improved with the new company it might be a decent option these days. FWIW, Charter falls under MKS now (same folks that manage Hi-Point). Say what you will about Hi-Point being a chintzy blowback design, the company has a great rep for warranty and service, so maybe coming under MKS will give Charter the kick it needs to live up to the promise of their designs?

I don't see anyone else making sub-J size .32 revos, or K-frame .44Spl revolvers, so Charter has their niche.
 
Forgot to mention, S&W is also making a J frame in the new .327 Federal magnum and it's ported so if you put .32 H&R's through it then it will be a real pussycat.
 
I don't have any experience with the Charter .32H&R. I picked up a Bulldog .44 Special (new production) on Thursday and I put about 50 rounds through it, PMC 180 grain JHP, Georgia Arms 200 grain Gold Dot, and my handloads, 240 grain LSWC over 6.5 grains of HS-6. It went bang every time and shot point of aim with all three bullet weights at 7-10 yards.

Obviously it needs more shooting before I pronounce it good for carry, but so far, so good. I am hoping to make it to an IDPA BUG match tomorrow, and if I do, I'm going to shoot the Bulldog.

So far there are only two things I don't like about it, the cylinder turns the "wrong" way and the cylinder latch is sharp and I cut my thumb on it due to the somewhat stout recoil in such a small, light gun. I got the stainless DAO version FWIW.

The finish leaves something to be desired, but the lockup is tight and the trigger is decent. I carried it around the house and yard today while doing chores in a DeSantis Nemesis pocket holster for a SP101 and found it to be an excellent pocket gun do to its light weight. It needs a smaller grip to really shine (which Charter offers), so I ordered a set from them. If it continues to perform as it has, I can see it becoming a regular pocket companion for me. Should my experience say positive over the longer haul I expect another Charter revolver or two in my future.

I would love to be able to comment about the Taurus 327 Fed Mag. I ordered one through a local dealer, but the gun arrived out of time and very rough, so I had him return it to the distributor and get me another. It should be here next week, hopefully in shootable condition. I was not at all impressed that it made it through Taurus' QC, assuming they have any. It didn't include a fired case (the Charter did), so I suspect they never fired it at the factory.
 
harmon,
She fired a my friends baretta which kicks just like mine. His is actually a little heavier than mine, and mine is too wide for her hands (double stack vs. his single stack). She has fired a 9mm, and did not feel that she could control it. She has also fired a 32 auto and didn't like it either (she could handle that, but didn't like it just the same). She seems to like the revolvers more.
 
i've seen 120lb women shooting .44 magnums out at the range. your wife is just a scardey cat ;)
 
To me it sounds like your wife may not be very confident in any caliber yet(please don't take this the wrong way I don't mean it to be rude, poke fun or any of that) I'd start her out with a .22 to build some confidence. Just my opinion.
 
harmon raab,
You are probably right. I think some of it is fear, and I am hoping to work her up to a .38 in the years to come. She has very weak wrists, so it's going to have to be a very gradual increase.

Almond27,
She seems fine with the .32 longs that she has shot, so I am going to keep working on it with her. That was out of a 2+lb ruger. The .32 auto she shot was out of a phoenix arms and the recoil is different. One is more straight back, vs the rolling back of barrel lift in a wheel.
 
Without bringing up the thread on the ,327, if you go the Charter route and you want a .32 vs a .38spl-- get the .327 Federal one (Patriot?). That way you can still shoot your .32SW Long, .32 HR Mags, and .327--

CHarters are fine, but don't seem to be meant for heavy shooters (Just to me)-- I have looked at the Taurus and RUger versions and they SEEM better made, but then again CHarter does have a good warranty...

YMMV...
 
Hello.

The original question was:
How is the charter arms .32 H&R Mag? More specifically, how is it's size and shape compared to the charter arms undercover .38 sp?
Click to expand...

This is not a question that should get any member so wrapped up in anger and teeth gnashing that they post irrational personal insults and get themselves banned.

Guys, it's just a damned gun.

There is more to this self defense thing than buying the latest pocket popper and stuffing it in your pocket. If the gun will reliably shoot a decent bullet accurately enough to stop a threat when required, it has done it's job.

Some of you will notice some posts deleted. I have left some up that should not have been posted, or perhaps should have been worded differently, simply because the thread would be reduced to nonsense by their deletion. In addition, nobody here should need a moderator cleaning up their posts. We are adults. Clean them up yourself before you hit the submit button.

Do not think that just because I left your post standing that I agree with it or that it is acceptable. This is your chance to chose to abide by the forum rules and attack the argument, not the man, or not. If any of you feel you need to edit your posts, do so.

Any ad hominem attacks past this point will result in moderator action.

Keep in mind that I never should have had to make this post. It's just a damned gun. Answer the man's question without getting crazy and irrational. Save the insults and personal slams for another forum. They are contrary to our rules here.

That is all.
 
So, the .327 will shoot .32 longs, .32 H&R magnums and .327?

Sounds like something I need to look into.
 
SP101 in .357 Mag or .327 Mag.

Heavier = less recoil. Solid dependable, reliable, built to last two lifetimes

Load the .357 with .38 SPL or the .327 with .32 H&R mag, then she can work up if she wants to with either one.

The .327 can even be loaded with .32 S&W Long for plinking, and even .32 S&W for very low recoil plinking, though I can't recomment either for self defense.
 
Just to be fair, my previously mentioned 4.6" BHG SSM in .32 H&RM was eventually a fair revolver, but it was delivered new with a host of QC problems. The later acquired 4" SP101 was worse, by far, although judicious following of the 'tune-up' instructions for SP101s found on the Ruger forum remedied most of them. One glaringly obvious fault they shared was their maximum SAAMI spec chamber ID (.337+"), which worked the commercially and homebrew ammo (.334") brass, making extraction in both the SA & DA revolvers difficult.

I enjoyed both revolvers, once they were 'completed', for a while. Then, the combination of lower power, hard to find reloading components, short brass life, etc, when compared to .38 Specials, convinced me. I am happier with .38 Specials. I feel safer with .38 Specials. If I am away from my basement ammo factory, I can find .38 Specials at Wally World... and I can better afford them.

I think if I felt the need for a .32 revolver for a CCW, I'd be tempted to try the CA 'Undercoverette', especially if I couldn't find a S&W 432PD and I'd stay with .32 S&WL and H&RM, not looking for the .327 Magnum. Just my opinion.

Stainz
 
John Taffin owns more handguns than most and has shot about everything. He still has and carries a Charter snubbie, and mentions that in a number of articles.
 
My wife has no problem shooting a 38S&W Airlight. I personaly like the Airlight because it is hammerless and will not snag on your clothes. The trigger pull is a little heavy which I like because it will not go bang unlees you want it to. I would add the Crimson Trace Grips. This will help with fast target accusition and no need to line up the sights.
It is light and fits in you pocket well.
 
I carry an Undercover .38 quite frequently, and have had it for more than twenty years. It has always launched a projectile (or caused the powder charge to, to be more accurate) out the muzzle and to a reasonably-sized area everytime I've fired it. It's a two-inch snubby, so a "reasonably-sized" area might be a little bigger than a quarter-sized target at thirty paces.
When I'm not carrying it, I'm carrying my Bersa Thunder .380, also a piece for which I paid less than $500. A handgun does not need to set you back several hundred or even thousands of dollars to be effective as a defensive weapon. It only needs to be functionally reliable, chambered for an effective cartridge, and a good "fit" for its user (meaning manageable and accessible.)
 
Got my stainless Charter Undercoverette .32 Mag revolver today.

Fit is actually quite good, finish isn't bad (matte beadblasting), though the name/calibre engraving is awfully cheap looking. The stock rubber grips were horrible, but I'd anticipated this and spent $15 on wooden grips on eBay. My J-frame T-grip doesn't fit this frame, so I'll call Tyler and see what size does.

The design is quite interesting, seems to be a lot like what Ruger's new LCR has. The grip and triggerguard are completely separate from the frame, and apparently made of cast aluminum. So the gun has the lightness of a partial alloy frame, yet all the load-bearing components are steel.

Compared to my 1970s S&W 49, the SA isn't quite as good (hopefully will break in), but the DA is slightly lighter and smoother. The trigger currently has a bit of friction "schhhhhlick" to it, sounds almost like a plump person walking in corduroy trousers, so hoping that's just the fresh edges that'll break in with use.

My cylinder release isn't terribly sharp as some folks have complained, but if I feel it carefully all over I can find some sharpness I may dremel. Same for rear sight channel, which is very square. The rest of the gun, except maybe a little bit by the yoke swivel, is very smooth and rounded, including the front sight.

Overall, not to bad for a gun a few hundred less than an S&W (mine was $330, a little high I thought). I'd still recommend getting a used S&W snub if you're buying a .38, but since S&W .32s are expensive, and nobody currently makes a J-frame .44Spl, I'd say Charter's got the niche for those.

If anyone has advice on breaking this in (besides just dry-fire), I'm open to hear it.
 
How does the .32 compare size wise to a .38 Special J-frame? Same size, or is the .32 any smaller?
Click to expand...

I don't have a caliper on hand, but the .32 frame seems to be basically the same (but lighter because of the alloy grip assembly), and the cylinder is the same length. It seems to be slightly smaller in diameter, but I can't confirm that until I get a set of calipers.

Again, I mainly got this to round out the collection, to see how Charter designs work, and because I reload .32, so I'm mostly into this as a curiosity. I had hoped it'd be notably smaller than a J-frame, but it's really much of a muchness.
 
MatthewVanitas said:

Again, I mainly got this to round out the collection, to see how Charter designs work, and because I reload .32, so I'm mostly into this as a curiosity. I had hoped it'd be notably smaller than a J-frame, but it's really much of a muchness.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a perfectly good reason to get it to me. I recently got a Taurus in 327 Federal Magnum just because I wanted to try it out. The fact that I could shoot .32H&R and .32S&W Long (well, and .32S&W for that matter) was a selling point since brass and ammo is actually available for those cartridges.

I was torn between the Taurus and the Charter Arms Patriot. I ended up ordering the Taurus, but given my recent Bulldog experience, I kind of wish I had gone with the Charter. The first Taurus that arrived for my order was rough and out of time, so I had the dealer send it back and get me another one. He did, and it seems fine (I won't get to shoot it until next weekend). While both have lifetime warranties, I hear Charter actually has good service. Taurus, not so much, and one actually seems to hear more Taurus horror stories than Charter horror stories (though perhaps that is due to more Taurus guns being sold).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
Replacing Charter Arms Cylinder
Replies
1
Views
393
BusMaster007
BusMaster007
D
  • Locked
RE-CHAMBERING A CHARTER ARMS .32
Replies
6
Views
991
Herb Fredricksen
H
S
  • Locked
Charter Arms .32 Questions
Replies
2
Views
811
Tallball
Tallball
W
  • Locked
Holster for a Charter Arms undercover
Replies
1
Views
577
byf43
B
B
  • Locked
Charter Arms Undercover 38 Special Old
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
behoof
B
Back
Top