32 Magnum
Member
NICE GRIPS!
p.s. My first name is Jim, not mister, dammit!
Here's a nice snubby .357 BULLDOG TRACKER.
p.s. My first name is Jim, not mister, dammit!
Here's a nice snubby .357 BULLDOG TRACKER.
Is Charter Arms any good?
- Thread starter A strange person
- Start date
- Status
Kendal Black
Member
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2011
- Messages
- 1,647
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.
Last edited:
rdrancher
Member
Well, Jim it is then!
I have a thing for faux stags. I find 'em and then look for a gun to fit 'em!
32 Magnum
Member
rdrancher,
Arizonagunrunner
member
Older Charter is ok. (before 1983) New Charter is GARBAGE!
Walk or run away from them.
Walk or run away from them.
Leathermarshmallow
Member.
and you know that the new Charter arms are garbage because???
rdrancher
Member
Drive-by comments without backup are generally viewed by us mere mortals as trolling. Just sayin. It seems that every thread involving Taurus, Rossi or Charter Arms brings out a few.
I can't wait to pick up Charter's Bulldog Classic. I need me some "GARBAGE"...
Last edited:
32 Magnum
Member
rd,
Don't forget to post your observations WHEN (not if) you get that GARBAGE Bulldog Classic.
Throw away comments like those noted are a dime a dozen - literally worth absolutely nothing.
Don't forget to post your observations WHEN (not if) you get that GARBAGE Bulldog Classic.
Throw away comments like those noted are a dime a dozen - literally worth absolutely nothing.
Last edited:
Cocked & Locked
Member
ditto
I bought a Charter Arms "Undercover" with Stratford barrel. Serial number 889xxx. It is the only one I have seen with a case hardened bobbed "pocket hammer". Can you tell me anything about my gun at all? It is like new and cost me $50 from a garage sale last weekend..
Was the "pocket hammer" something special?
Was the "pocket hammer" something special?
Last edited:
MMCSRET
Member
Arizonagunrunner: please respond with a description, model, age, caliber of the CA that made you decide the new ones were junk. Please don't ignore this request for authentication of your statement, I want to benefit from your knowledge.
Thanks in advance.
Eagerly awaiting your information.
Thanks in advance.
Eagerly awaiting your information.
32 Magnum
Member
gun papa,
The POCKET HAMMER was something special. It was introduced into the 1st Gen. CA product lines sometime in late 1979. It was specially designed to have the same "mass" (for reliable primer ignition) as the spurred hammer, it was NOT a matter of simply lopping off the spur.
I have two examples in my collection that have the Pocket Hammer, but both are Stainless, so the hammers are also stainless. I've only seen a very other examples of a blued piece having the PH; most have been stainless. Since all the blued pieces I've seen have case color hardened triggers and hammers - it is not unreasonable to expect one equipped with the Pocket Hammer to have the same.
Your gun with a s/n in the 889K range was probably made in 1985 - '86. $50 is an excellent price paid, your gun looks to be in very good condition and would sell on one of the on-line auctions for around $250 +. Nice catch.
The POCKET HAMMER was something special. It was introduced into the 1st Gen. CA product lines sometime in late 1979. It was specially designed to have the same "mass" (for reliable primer ignition) as the spurred hammer, it was NOT a matter of simply lopping off the spur.
I have two examples in my collection that have the Pocket Hammer, but both are Stainless, so the hammers are also stainless. I've only seen a very other examples of a blued piece having the PH; most have been stainless. Since all the blued pieces I've seen have case color hardened triggers and hammers - it is not unreasonable to expect one equipped with the Pocket Hammer to have the same.
Your gun with a s/n in the 889K range was probably made in 1985 - '86. $50 is an excellent price paid, your gun looks to be in very good condition and would sell on one of the on-line auctions for around $250 +. Nice catch.
Harley Quinn
Member
Garage sale for $50
Regards
Regards
doc.lonestar
Member
I shopped around a lot before getting into a Ruger LCR
I needed a revolver for the CHL Instructor Qualifications but wanted something that I could pocket carry
I looked at Charter Arms, Taurus, Smith, and Ruger
The Charter Arms that I had access to locally all looked very nice, everything locked up tight and seemed to be well made. IF I had not been able to get the LCR at the price I did I would have bought the Charter Arms because that also had a nice price tag and features I was looking for.
Only concerns I had was because the company was sold and bought a couple different times over the past few years and for warranty work this was an issue.
Gunblast author spoke very highly of them
I needed a revolver for the CHL Instructor Qualifications but wanted something that I could pocket carry
I looked at Charter Arms, Taurus, Smith, and Ruger
The Charter Arms that I had access to locally all looked very nice, everything locked up tight and seemed to be well made. IF I had not been able to get the LCR at the price I did I would have bought the Charter Arms because that also had a nice price tag and features I was looking for.
Only concerns I had was because the company was sold and bought a couple different times over the past few years and for warranty work this was an issue.
Gunblast author spoke very highly of them
32 Magnum
Member
The NEWest incarnation of Charter Arms - the MKS Marketing association - will repair ALL models from the very first pieces made in Bridgeport in the mid 1960's thru today's production.
scottishclaymore
Member
Hmm. See, I really, really want to like Charter arms. They are the only company of which I am aware that is doing anything noteworthy (and affordable) with the bulldog concept. It's not that I'm a snob either - I have a Rossi 461 that still does some very serviceable work, even if the trigger is a bit lacking. I'm just a little put-off by all of the stories of poor quality circulating around about Charter. I'm going to be looking at purchasing another snub in December, so I guess I'll have to keep an eye out and see if Charter has anything that interests me. On the other hand, used 642's and 442's are going for $350 in my area easily, and that's hard to beat.
scottishclaymore
Member
Okay. That being said, I just looked up some of the publicity on the new Classic Bulldog. I gotta say, if I can find one of those in the right time frame and it passes the sniff test, I might just have to buy it.
Of course then I'll have to start stocking up on 44 spcl components...
Of course then I'll have to start stocking up on 44 spcl components...
32 Magnum
Member
huduguru,
CA 1st Gen reached serial number 500K around July/Aug '79. They were making around 40K pieces per year (an educated guess on my part) so your Undercover was probably made in the spring/summer of 1980.
CA 1st Gen reached serial number 500K around July/Aug '79. They were making around 40K pieces per year (an educated guess on my part) so your Undercover was probably made in the spring/summer of 1980.
Harley Quinn
Member
Seems pretty cheap in this day and age, one of um for $150 is doing very good
[email protected]
Member
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2008
- Messages
- 2,153
Mine is a 3 inch 44 spl and the serial no. starts with 515, so I guess it was
made somewhere around 1977. This is the second one I've had. The first got
stolen by ex-wife. I had put about a thousnad round thru it that probably
blow up other guns. I won't say the load, but I was pushing a 200 grs. JHP
at 1200 fps. I even called the prisident of the company Doug McCllen I think
that was his name around the early 70's and told him my load. He said don't
worry that I was in no danger of blowing up the little Bulldog. So on my second one, I have only shot it about 500 times with that same load. Getting
too old, I'm almost 70 now to be shooting such hot stuff. Anyway the point
is that the both of mine did not shoot loose, or is the cyclinder loose or anything. The older 1st gen. of them handle the hot loads just fine. I use 2400 powder and will just say, there isn't much room in the case for the bullet. Please anyone don't try hot loads in your Bulldog. This was just in my
two guns and my lot of "2400" powder that I bought back in 1964. Everything
is different now. I hear that "2400" is hotter now than it was in 1964. Anyway
it was safe in my gun, and still is. I think they are just a GREAT little pistol.
Perfect for my CCW. When you are as old as I am, you need something light.
And that's my story and I'm sticking to it.
made somewhere around 1977. This is the second one I've had. The first got
stolen by ex-wife. I had put about a thousnad round thru it that probably
blow up other guns. I won't say the load, but I was pushing a 200 grs. JHP
at 1200 fps. I even called the prisident of the company Doug McCllen I think
that was his name around the early 70's and told him my load. He said don't
worry that I was in no danger of blowing up the little Bulldog. So on my second one, I have only shot it about 500 times with that same load. Getting
too old, I'm almost 70 now to be shooting such hot stuff. Anyway the point
is that the both of mine did not shoot loose, or is the cyclinder loose or anything. The older 1st gen. of them handle the hot loads just fine. I use 2400 powder and will just say, there isn't much room in the case for the bullet. Please anyone don't try hot loads in your Bulldog. This was just in my
two guns and my lot of "2400" powder that I bought back in 1964. Everything
is different now. I hear that "2400" is hotter now than it was in 1964. Anyway
it was safe in my gun, and still is. I think they are just a GREAT little pistol.
Perfect for my CCW. When you are as old as I am, you need something light.
And that's my story and I'm sticking to it.
Swiftyjuan
Member
I have toyed with the idea of buying a .44 Bulldog for a few years. At our last Friends of the NRA dinner, and I won one!
It is not as nice as my 586, 686, 625, Bill Davis Model 19, or Python. It is slightly loose, but it shoots. It is tactically accurate (can't beat the Python, but I get groups, not patterns), and for some reason I feel comfortable with the gun, and trust it. I won't carry it often probably, but would have no problem doing so. Oh, and the price was right!
It is not as nice as my 586, 686, 625, Bill Davis Model 19, or Python. It is slightly loose, but it shoots. It is tactically accurate (can't beat the Python, but I get groups, not patterns), and for some reason I feel comfortable with the gun, and trust it. I won't carry it often probably, but would have no problem doing so. Oh, and the price was right!
- Status
