Don't know if I'd say I'm a fan, but I do have a stainless. 44 SPCL. I do like it and it's been a while since I shot it.

One thing that bothers me is the very thin appearing cylinder walls. Otherwise, it's a decent revolver. Carries nicely in a leather jacket on the motorcycle.

I need to get it out and do a little shooting with it soon.

 

Not so much a fan of CA as I am of the caliber - .44 Spl - when I bought these there were not a lot of revolvers offered in that caliber.

These are both from the original Charter Arms - I believe that the company has passed through many hands since then - some good, some not so much. I bought the Pug first and only bought the Target because the LGS was practically giving it away. Since these were purchased I have amassed quite a few .44 Spl S&W's so these pretty much just languish in the safe.

Adios,

Pizza Bob

 

I have a Bulldog and Magpug. Both have been solid guns. The barrel on the Magpug is canted a little like at least one of my S&W's. I talked to them about it and they said I could file the front sight to compensate, but I could also send it in if desired. I filed it but not happy with the result. Just haven't gotten around to sending it in. Brian Pierce did a article on 44 Special, maybe in Handloader, using various loads. Sounded like the Bulldog could take a pretty stiff load compared to most revolvers chambered in that caliber. I never tried to push that myself. The recoil is snappy enough with standard pressure loads.

 

My first CA was this Undercover .38, bought 40+ years ago. It's still going strong, and is still my go-to snake gun, having taken over 100 copperheads and a few cottonmouths & rattlers. It has never missed a lick. Eats +P ammo just fine, though I've mostly used snake shot in it.

My second was an Off-Duty, that was originally bought for my elderly mother in the 90's. It hasn't had a huge round count so far, but it's never given any trouble. It's been vetted well enough that it's now my sister's EDC when she's jogging, hiking, or otherwise out by herself.

[Stock photo - I don't have a pic of the Off-Duty]

My third CA is a .44 Bulldog, 2014-Vintage. The overwhelming feedback from Bulldog owners is positive. It's no Colt or Ruger, but it's a solid, reliable revolver. It's served as an occasional woods gun, and I've used it on a few snakes.

Somewhere along the way, I picked up this 70's-vintage Pathfinder .22 WMR:

Haven't really shot it all that much, but it's a well-made revolver, and a fun little plinker!

...Brian Pierce did a article on 44 Special, maybe in Handloader, using various loads. Sounded like the Bulldog could take a pretty stiff load compared to most revolvers chambered in that caliber. I never tried to push that myself. The recoil is snappy enough with standard pressure loads.

That is the exact opposite of what I've heard (and believe). I've seen many writeups recommending against hot loads in the Bulldog, and I believe that some of the hotter boutique .44 Special ammo comes with a caveat not to use it in a Bulldog. Not sure what Pierce was referring to by, "most revolvers", but I would trust either my S&W M24-6 or my Ruger GP100 with magnum-pressure loads. The Bulldog? No way! Even if the gun could handle them, I'm not sure I could!

Charter Arms has been through a lot of financial ups & downs, and has been sold several times since their founding. I believe that most of the bad press they've received is due to quality lapses in the late 90's through 2005; the "Charter 2000" and "CHARCO" years. I would probably avoid one from those years, but wouldn't hesitate to rely on a well-vetted CA revolver from before or after that period. YMMV

 

The internals are based on the old H&R design and to be frank, it's shi$$y. Made to be carried a lot and shot little. I had a Bulldog I loved, but it had two major breakdowns requiring major repairs. Hard pass on the design.

 

I have the Charter Arms Boomer in .44 spcl. It is really a belly gun. Up close and personal. I think if you stuck it into someone’s gut and fired it, the flame blast would do as much damage if not more than the bullet.

 

^^^^^.

Yep.......Undercover was also my first CA, also 40 years ago. Never a problem.

40 years ago??? man----that's a long time ago!!!!!! :>))

 

My Bulldog bought in 2007 broke a bolt spring which is a SOB to repair as you need 3 hands to take one apart. Then it sprung the crane/yoke shooting less than five Buffalo Bore rds. that were rated for the Bulldog. To their credit, CA repaired it, but I lost all faith.

As Jeff Cooper said, the Bulldog is a Class A idea in a Class B design.

 

 

One of the guys at the range has/had a CA .44 and he ended up getting rid of it because it kept breaking. He ended up getting a S&W Mod. 29 but he is the exception because he is always there shooting his revolvers. I would think the CA would be okay under normal use but have no experience with the product other than the above observation. I know back in the day of .40 cal the shop sold the CA in .40 cal as BUG to the LEO community that carried that round. Seemed they sold quite a few of them too.

 

I don't know that I'd say the lock work mimics H&R. H&R uses a DA lifter and the sear is separate from the trigger. Charter is more conventional DA type revolver. It does share the same ejection rod setup as High Standard. I forget the name but IIRC the HS guy went on to work for Charter.

My Bulldog. In 35 years in CA it's the only one I've ever seen.

 

The Bulldog was favored by David "Son of Sam" Berkowitz. I owned a Bulldog in the early eighties that gave light primer strikes. Sent it back to the mothership and got it back with the same problem. Traded it off. The recoil sure was snappy.

 

Mark David Chapman (John Lennon’s murderer) and Ted Bundy also carried Charters. Most serial killers and nut jobs didn’t want to spare a few more dollars for a Colt or S&W back in the day, I suppose. I don’t condemn guns based on their users though, I do own an AK, an SKS, and a Mosin afterall. Too many people miss out on good or decent guns over the “weapon of the enemy/thugs” nonsense.

 

I like the design of the short barreled, 5 round, 44Spl for carry -I wish S&W would take the M69 ( I have the 4.25 in 44M ) and build it lightweight, shorter & chambered in 44Spl. That would be a quality CCW!

 

Like these?

Only the 696 is kind of heavy being all stainless steel. The others are all lightweight versions with the two on the bottom using titanium cylinders with Scandium frames.

Adios,

Pizza Bob

 

I had a 696 and it is far bigger than a Bulldog. Too big for CCW. The same for the Ruger GP100 .44.

 

We love the Charter Arms revolvers. We find that their triggers are far superior to S&W. S&W is nice after one places a spring kit in it but the CA's feel about the same or even better than the S&W after the spring kit is placed.

 

We love the Charter Arms revolvers. We find that their triggers are far superior to S&W. S&W is nice after one places a spring kit in it but the CA's feel about the same or even better than the S&W after the spring kit is placed...

Who is 'we'? No spring kit is going to replace a shoddy design.

 

 

I'll betcha that .41 Mag Pug does wonders for "Arthur-itis" hands.

 

I kind of like them.

 

I had one of these for a while and liked it well enough but traded it off for something else I don’t even remember. Should have kept it because it was a good price at the time and it really was a good shooter with its weight and size.

 

Any other Charter Arms fans out there?

No, just being honest.

 

Not sure I am a Charter Arms fan (just call me James Bond) but I have this which I purchased circa 1977 (LOL)

 

How did you get a scope on that? I have the same and wouldn't mind having an optic on it.

 

I bought a Charter Arms Bulldog in .44 spl a few years ago in my quest for the perfect carry gun. It’s ok. Seems big for my purposes. I stick to a J frame when it is not a 1911.

Fun boomer to shoot cans in the backyard though.

 

I have experience with a new Undercover stainless (circa 2015 production). The finish is a crude bead blast, and double action is leaves a lot to be desired, especially when compared to a Colt, S&W, or even a Ruger. The lockup is pretty tight though, much tighter than a similarly priced Taurus 85, in fact.

The only problem I’ve ever had with this gun was self-inflicted. I was shooting some old ammo that was oxidized on the case, and was bad about sticking in the chambers. One fired case got so stuck, that when I smacked the case out, the ejector came out with it. I put the gun back together and it’s worked fine ever since. All in all, I’d say Charter makes a gun that is much better than the cheap pot metal revolvers of the ‘60s and early ‘70s but also not quite equal the “Big three” offerings (Colt, S&W, Ruger). Granted, their price tag reflects that.

 

I'm a fan of their latest design... the Pitbull series which will load and extract rimless cartridges (no moon clips) like 9mm, .40 S&W, and the venerable .45 ACP. Liked them so much I bought three Pitbulls, chambered in all three calibers. They never gave me any trouble and in fact, the 9mm shoots better than many of my .38 spl snubnose from Ruger, S&W, and Taurus. It leads me to believe that the 9mm in a 2 inch snuby is a better configuration because it has less recoil and I found it to be much more accurate.

 

Honestly I’m not impressed with the design or build quality of Charter Arms . However I think it you want an inexpensive revolver then buy a Taurus. Neither are top shelf but that would be my preference

 

The quality, fit and finish has improved significantly in the past 5 or 6 years, my opinion. I have an older Charter Arms about 15 years old, it has a gritty trigger, and the finish is very course with milling marks in several places. The recent ones, the Pitbull series are rather nice and trigger is very good. No spongy grittyness on the trigger pull. Grant you the finish is nowhere as nice as a S&W, Ruger, Colt with a polished stainless steel finish etc. But they do come with what looks like a stainless-steel mild glass-bead finish.

 

I have four of the first generation bulldogs that have never failed me. I don’t shoot them a lot, but I do shoot a cylinder full on each range trip. There’s something about a 20 ounce 44 special that excites me.😁

 

I still have a Police Undercover that I bought in the early 1990s. It's a gun hidden "somewhere" in the house if needed. I never run into this model much. It's a 6-shot about the same size as an S&W K-frame. It's easy to shoot with +P ammo, although you can short-stroke the trigger if you try to fire too fast without fully resetting the trigger.