Posted: 4/2/2015 3:48:48 PM EDT
|
I have been wanting a .357 for a while and have been looking at the Charter Arms. I know they have had quality issues in the past however they look pretty solid. Anyone have any opinions on them?? Are they a good option for a nightstand/car gun?
Thanks! |
|
From the research I have done that seems to be the case, the older ones were good but there was a period of time the quality went down hill... The newer revolvers look good for the price but im concerned about how they will hold up over time.
Thanks for your input! |
|
Can't say about the new ones but the by all reports the older ones with the exposed ejector rod seem GTG. The Stratford, Conn. marked ones being the best of the lot.
I just bought a older CA 3" Bulldog in .44 special and it is a lot more accurate than I would have expected and only 3.5oz heavier (loaded) than my loaded .38 special S&W Airweight. In fact after I gave it a good wringing out I've made it my EDC weapon. If I'm going to limit myself to five rounds it my as well be five rounds of 240 gr .44. 
All that said they are not a S&W, Colt, or Ruger and are one of those revolvers that fall into the "shoot a little and carry a lot" category. 
|
|
The early guns were built by a family owned business . Family got bought out and quality went south . Son of original owner bought company back and improved most everything .
This all being said Charter Arms are a bit on the rough side . To me the whole deal on a revolver is the quality of the trigger as that is the single most important key to me being able to hit anything I am shooting at. Years ago I bought one of the first stainless 44 sp bulldogs . Loved the whole design , shape and size with that caliber . Fun gun to play with but it came up short due to its poor trigger. Mine went back several times but it would hang up and I never had decent confidence in it. I know the low price is attractive and it is easy to think the trigger will wear in or you will get used to it but in most cases it will end up being a gun you will never shoot well. Save for a better gun , buy a used gun or search out a beat up used gun at the same used price but don't waste your money on a CA |
|
Buddy has an older undercover that he got cheap (free). It is a good CT made gun and light and handy. His daily CCW is a 642-1 or a Shield 9mm but he keeps the CA for a reason. It works well and is a good backup. I suggest looking for a good condition early production gun with the exposed ejector rod. They aren't pricey since hey aren't really a collector piece. |
| I'll be the guy that disagrees; I feel that they are a nicely made snubbie. They're not S&W Performance Center, but for the cash, its a good serviceable revolver. Mine are Bulldogs in .44 special; kinda of hard to argue with a lightweight .44 special. A great backup, or EDC. |
|
Quoted: I'll be the guy that disagrees; I feel that they are a nicely made snubbie. They're not S&W Performance Center, but for the cash, its a good serviceable revolver. Mine are Bulldogs in .44 special; kinda of hard to argue with a lightweight .44 special. A great backup, or EDC. I find the Bulldog .44 Special to be an interesting option. I have considered trying one myself. |
|
Quoted:
Rather have a reliable if someone rough finished Charter than a lawyer-locked Smith any day. That's going a bit far. A Charter Arms is a decent gun for the money, but a S&W 442/642 can be had for about the same WITHOUT THE LOCK and is a better gun in all respects. In some varieties they offer some interesting features, like the 9mm, 40S&W, 44 Special, and the six shot Police Undercover .38. They will shoot loose if fired often, especially if used with stronger loads. There's a lot of small screws and pins holding them together that have a habit of moving around. They have a great warranty and C/S but I'd personally rather have a gun that won't ever need it. The original all steel five shot Undercover is not a bad gun, either, but there's just better options. At one point I was seriously contemplating purchasing one of these: 
...but happened upon this at the same price: 
Can't say I regret that for a second, "Hillary hole" and all. |
|
Quoted:
I find the Bulldog .44 Special to be an interesting option. I have considered trying one myself. Quoted:
Quoted:
I'll be the guy that disagrees; I feel that they are a nicely made snubbie. They're not S&W Performance Center, but for the cash, its a good serviceable revolver. Mine are Bulldogs in .44 special; kinda of hard to argue with a lightweight .44 special. A great backup, or EDC. I find the Bulldog .44 Special to be an interesting option. I have considered trying one myself. Until S&W or most likely Ruger, builds an "affordable" 44 special, the Charter Bulldog will remain my bedside weapon. By "affordable" I mean no titanium framed, special custom shop run, gold inlay pussy willow grips, etc. at over $1,000. |
|
Quoted:
Until S&W or most likely Ruger, builds an "affordable" 44 special, the Charter Bulldog will remain my bedside weapon. By "affordable" I mean no titanium framed, special custom shop run, gold inlay pussy willow grips, etc. at over $1,000. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'll be the guy that disagrees; I feel that they are a nicely made snubbie. They're not S&W Performance Center, but for the cash, its a good serviceable revolver. Mine are Bulldogs in .44 special; kinda of hard to argue with a lightweight .44 special. A great backup, or EDC. I find the Bulldog .44 Special to be an interesting option. I have considered trying one myself. Until S&W or most likely Ruger, builds an "affordable" 44 special, the Charter Bulldog will remain my bedside weapon. By "affordable" I mean no titanium framed, special custom shop run, gold inlay pussy willow grips, etc. at over $1,000. I had a 396 Nightguard that was purchased for around $750. I sold it after a while because I didn't trust the super thin forcing cone's long term durability. ETA: I had to send my Pathfinder 22LR back for timing and gap issues. They replaced it promptly with a new gun. The second gun has been perfect. |