My father gave me a Charter Arms .38.  It's a blued "Undercover" model with wood grips and a 2" barrel.  I *think* my grandfather purchased it sometime in the early to mid 80's, not 100% sure though.  

What I do know is that it was made in Stratford, CT.  

Is this a decent quality firearm?

I never really knew of Charter Arms as a high quality gun maker, but honestly as I examine this thing on my bench, it doesn't look all that bad.  Pretty sure it's never been fired.

Just wondering if anybody as experience and opinions on them, thanks.

Back in the 80's I had two of the Undercover models at different times. I was a LEO and used them as a backup and off duty piece. I eventually sold them off and replaced them with a S&W Model 60. I think they are pretty decent for a budget pistol.

Back in the early 80's, I owned three Charter Arms. A Bulldog 44spl, a Pathfinder 22, and an Undercover 38. All three worked flawlessly with no problems whatsoever.  

I found out today that the one I have was made in 1980.

Quality wise, I would rate it somewhere between a Ruger and a S&W, S&W obviously being the top.

The Charter is probably closer to a Ruger.

Ruger being the strongest, tanks of a revolver made, there's no way I'd rate them even close to Ruger.  Charter makes decent "affordable" revolvers but not near the class of Ruger's or S&W.  Charter's claim to fame is cheap (as in inexpensive) revolvers that are made just well enough to be reliable.  They have had a lot of quality issues over the last several but I think they are a good choice for a backup gun or other similar uses.  From everything I've read when I was researching whether to buy one, the .357 magnum models are a better choice than the .38 only guns due to the increased strength.  After reading about a thousand reviews and such online, I decided they weren't worth buying in my case but your situation may be different.  The models from several years ago seem to be considered much better guns than the newer models.  I've read the "Bulldog" seems to be considered a decent gun.  One of the reviews I read described Charter Arms revolvers best when he said "the best thing I can say about the gun is that it fires every time the trigger is pulled".  That was after disparaging the overall quality, the accuracy and the trigger.

Would I buy one? No.   Would I keep one if it were given to me? Absolutely.

I'm quite happy with my .44 Bulldog. As someone else said" it goes bang each time I pull the trigger". I own a few S&W revolvers & 2 Colt 1911's, The Bulldog ain't a Colt or a Smith but it is a fine little revolver for the money. I bought mine on purpose, and am happy to carry it....a lot.

Charter has run hot and cold quality wise.

Original owner/family sold off the company and then some time later the son of the original owner bought it back (and I believe still runs things today)

Not sure where the OPs 1980 gun falls in with all this but I have seen some older Charters that seemed pretty decent and others that were rough as all get out .

Shoot it some and see how the trigger is

OP, from all I have heard and seen, Charter makes guns designed to be carried a lot and shot a little.  FWIW, I read a recent article by John Taffin and he listed a Charter Arms .44 spcl as one of the firearms he keeps available in his house as a "just in case" defensive pistol.

Charter makes the best of the 'Budget' revolvers.
Not as good as Smith and Ruger (and Colt and Korth and such...)
Better than Taurus and Rossi and RG and such.