Posted: 3/6/2013 4:29:51 AM EDT
|
I have always wanted a Bulldog in (obviously) .44Special. Which years or generations are better than the others? How do I tell which is which? Is there a good FAQ on the Bulldog available somewhere that I may peruse? Thank you in advance, Eric |
|
I have owned 2 (1st was blue w/ alum frame, highly unusual, the 2nd stainless w/ bobbed hammer, still have) both 1st gen I think, because they say 'STRATFORD, CONN.' on the barrel. I have no personal knowledge of later models because I prefer the styling of the old ones, but all my internet reading says to avoid the ones marked 'CHARCO' (maybe it was 'CHARCO ARMS'?) like the plague. Wikipedia has a pretty good entry about their history here.
Here's my "newest" old Charter Bulldog; 
|
|
The older ones from the 80's which are marked "Charter Arms" are good to go. Obviously with anything 30 years old some will be abused and some in great shape.
The next generation of guns were stamped CharCo. Those generally had a pretty bad reputation. After that came Charter 2000, and quality went up a lot, but there were still reports of badly fitted parts. The Charter 2000 guns changed from the 3" barrel to the 2.5" underlug barrel. The latest iteration is once again marked Charter Arms, and retains the 2.5" full underlug barrel. These appear to be well made, though the finnish is a matte bead blast instead of a polished finish of earlier guns. The matte finish helps keep them affordable. My preference would be for one of the pre CharCo guns or one of the newer ones. Obligatory Bulldog pic (with 200 grain Gold Dots) This one was built in 1986 
|
|
I have one bought in 2003 that is marked CHARTER 2000. It has worked okay for the most part. I do have two observations. One, it will not shoot to the sights with any commercially available load. Mine shoots to the sights with 260 grain Keiths on 8.0 grains of Power Pistol at 850 fps. Any lighter bullets shoot way low. It does shoot well with this load. Two, don't dry fire these revolvers, the firing pins appear to be made of brass. They will break if dryfired extensively. Charter Arms will replace them for free, but it doesn't do much for you piece of mind. I no longer trust mine do to broken firing pins, so I no longer carry it, but it does still do car gun duty.
ETA: I did replace my spurred hammer with a spurless model that cost about 35 bucks from Charter. This made my trigger pull worse.....I may switch back as I no longer carry it. |
|
Quoted:
The older ones from the 80's which are marked "Charter Arms" are good to go. Obviously with anything 30 years old some will be abused and some in great shape. The next generation of guns were stamped CharCo. Those generally had a pretty bad reputation. After that came Charter 2000, and quality went up a lot, but there were still reports of badly fitted parts. The Charter 2000 guns changed from the 3" barrel to the 2.5" underlug barrel. The latest iteration is once again marked Charter Arms, and retains the 2.5" full underlug barrel. These appear to be well made, though the finnish is a matte bead blast instead of a polished finish of earlier guns. The matte finish helps keep them affordable. My preference would be for one of the pre CharCo guns or one of the newer ones. Obligatory Bulldog pic (with 200 grain Gold Dots) This one was built in 1986 http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m192/NVGdude/Taylor003.jpg Man, that's a good looking revolver in stainless. I had my Stratford, Conn "re-blued" by Charter years ago, but it came back with more of a parkerized finish. But, I'm not complaining...still a great hiking/camping gun. 
|
|
I have a new (recent manufactured) Charter Arms stainless Bulldog snub .44. It has a surprisingly good trigger on it in both double and single action.
The gun is made to a price (clearly) but it has really surprised me. The fixed sights are not regulated to my preferred load but I have yet to try "the" carry load most people prefer- the 200gr Gold Dot. I have considered buying another Bulldog with a 4" barrel and adjustable sights. I wish the front sight was black, however. The stainless front sight is pretty indistinct to my eyes. Charter should consider a "fancy" version with a dovetailed in front sight so the guns could easily be regulated to the shooters preferred load. |