I really like some of their designs, like their .22LR/.22MAG "Pathfinder" and target .357MAG revolvers. They seem to have the lightest weight for a given barrel length that I've ever seen by far, not to mention inexpensive; just what I look for in a both a "survival" handgun as well as a defensive weapon.
Are they crap?
My impression, not as an owner but as someone who has kicked around the gun scene for some decades and shot or examined most things commonly seen:
--The design is okay. In fact, it has some rather good points, light weight being one of them.
--Sometimes the people building them have, over the years, stumbled in execution of the good design. The guns are offered to the low priced end of the market and parts quality, fitting and inspection have sometimes wavered. I read one
gun magazine review in which Charter had footled the forcing cone of the sample gun. This suggests a communication breakdown somewhere between production and QA, or QA and distribution, or distribution and promotion, or something disconnected somewhere. I mean, you don't want to send an example that spits lead out the side to a magazine reviewer, if you send it to anyone at all.
That sums up my impression of the company: Good concept marred at times by silly mistakes.
--Durability has never been the brand's claim to fame. Common wisdom is that so long as you get a good example it will shoot well enough, but not for as long as a Smith or a Ruger.
That said, a cop of my acquaintance carries one and lots of other people find these little guns quite adequate. I think the auto pistol is probably a better type for a budget conscious manufacturer to tackle, due to simpler fitting and alignment, but I like revolvers and think it's kind of neat that an American company is going head to head against imported bargain brands.