Are Charter Arms Revolvers Worth It?

[Cosmodragoon]

Some of you may have seen my post about searching for a lighter .327 Federal Magnum in a 4" Barrel. I was down to hunting for a 4" Sp101 in .32 H&R Magnum to rechamber. That's when I discovered the apparently much more common Charter Arms 4" Patriot in .327 Federal Magnum.

I've never handled anything from Charter Arms. They seem to have a reputation as a cheaper gun and the price reflects it. I've seen a few horror stories on the web about these things being pure garbage but they also have their defenders. A lot of web discussions are old. There also seems to be confusion as to which models during which years were either good, bad, or somewhere in between.

So what's the deal? Who has real experience with Charter Arms? Who has recent experience? Does anyone have experience with this firearm in particular? How do the Charter revolvers stack up between range and carry? How big of a gap do they have with other manufacturers? How do they hold up over time and what is their expected life span?

 

[lowercase]

I have some experience with Charter Arms revolvers.

I have 6 of them, with 4 vintage, and 2 new models.

Charters are just really their own thing. Comparing them to Ruger or S&W is a classic apples to oranges type of comparison.

They are light revolvers, and some people think they feel "flimsy". They also have screws that may need locktite if they start loosening up after shooting. On the newer models, the screw on the side of the frame that holds the hammer is the most likely to loosen up. As far as screws loosening, I just think of them as similar to an old Harley that needs to be checked periodically for things loosening up.

On the plus side, I find Charters to be light and easy to carry. They also (for me) feel great in the hand, especially with some Pachmayr Compac™ grips to replace the stock rubber ones they come with these days.

You are looking at a newer generation Charter, so I will speak to those. The quality is way up these days, but they can still have quirks. For example, I have a .357 Mag Pug that I had to file down the front sight to get it to shoot to point of aim. Also, it doesn't shoot the world's best groups, either. These both seem to be known issues with this (the Mag Pug .357) revolver. However, it is light, ergonomic, and reliable. By contrast, my .44 Bulldog, built on the same frame, has zero problems and is just a fantastic little revolver.

Once again, Charters are really their own thing and the company's guns have a definite "personality", for lack of a better word. I really enjoy mine, and am not planning on selling them.

Unfortunately, I don't have any experience with the .327 Patriot 4" barrel revolver. I think it has been dropped from the product lineup (due to the declining enthusiasm for the .327 cartridge). I've seen positive feedback on the gun with a couple people wishing that Charter would continue to produce it.

Here's some pics from my little collection of Charters:

Current-production Mag Pug .357 2.2" barrel with Pachmayr Compac grips.

Current production Bulldog .44sp with 2.5" barrel and NOS vintage bulldog stocks

 

[Crazy88Fingers]

They aren't the smoothest or prettiest guns out there, that's for sure. But they're a bit cheaper than the smoothest and prettiest guns too.

I have a Bulldog and a Pathfinder from them. Both guns do just about everything I could ever ask. The Bulldog I acquired used, and it required a trip back to Connecticut to have the cylinder gap opened up a bit. They fixed it, no questions asked, and had it back to me in two weeks flat.

I've read the guns marked Charco and Charter 2000 should be avoided. But the company changed hands a few years ago (I think the original owners reacquired it) and they've got it together.

In short: decent guns built by a company that stands behind them.

 

[Newton24b]

yes they are. they are decent. better then what youll get from the phillipines in the same price range. may not be designed for 1,000s of full power, "lift a horse off the ground" type of load, but they work.

and if the company made bad products, they would be instock..

 

[Dan-O]

I'm a big fan of em. Especially the .44 Pugs. The new production ones are good to go.

 

[CajunBass]

I used to have a couple of the old Charter 38's. I thought they were good guns. The only thing wrong with them was those tiny grips. They beat my knuckles bloody even with wadcutters. A set of the current production neoprene grips fixed that. I think those grips are among the most comfortable grips I've even used. I really like them. For anyone who has an older Charter and is interested, the current production grips fit perfectly.

But you're interested in their current production guns I suppose. Back about Easter, my wife and I were in the LGS and she spotted a "Lavender Lady" 38 in the case and wanted it. "It matches my dress." I've heard worse reasons for wanting a gun, so we got it. Now we haven't had a chance to shoot it yet, but I don't see a thing wrong with this gun. It's not something I'd go out and shoot thousands and thousands of rounds through, but then I wouldn't do that with an aluminum "J" frame Smith & Wesson either.





If I run into one in a more normal color, I might pick it up for myself.

 

[rclark]

I have a .44Spec Bulldog that I've now had a couple of years. Other than shooting to the right, I have nothing to complain about (well I wish it came with wood grips instead of rubber baby bumpers ) . Light and easy to carry, and I can hit with it out to 77 yards (back of our range). Try to get out once a month for 'familiarization' practice. Usually run around 20 rounds through it and say 'yep, still shoots where I point with some Kentucky windage that is' . Works good for me as a CC revolver. I've got other .44 Special revolvers for general shooting. The caveat is of course to shoot standard .44 Special loads in it.... Don't heat them up as the cylinder walls are quit thin.

 

[Seaman]

Have a 44spl Charter Arms Tiger. About 250 rounds thru it, mostly handloads as 44spl ammo is hard to find and expensive. I load with standard 240 gr sjfp with light powder loads for practice and medium loads for carry. (They were originally designed for 246gr) I shoot a couple of cylinders a month (10 rds). They are slightly larger than a J-frame, easy carry.

Had to gunsmith it because one chamber was sticking. Once I stopped limp wrisiting, the accuracy is as good as any S&W out there. However, the S&Ws are much smoother, more refined, and better finished, you can really tell the difference.

But thankfully the CA do not have the internal lock which is why my CA gets carried way more than the IL S&Ws.

Bottom line... it works.

 

[dahermit]

Where is the lock located?

 

[Seaman]

Hermit -

You misunderstand, I wrote:

"But thankfully the CA do not have the internal lock which is why my CA gets carried way more than the IL S&Ws.

Bottom line... it works. "

The 'it' being the Charter Arms 44spl Tiger (it works) ... it is the S&Ws that have the internal lock and which are now becoming range guns while the CA has replaced them as a CCW.

Apologies for my poor writing skills.

 

[LewSchiller]

Very happy with the new production Undercover .38 Special my wife has.

 

[tdrizzle]

I like my old Pathfinder .22 (from the original company) a lot. I haven't noticed very many of the original company's revolvers on the used market. One possible explanation for that is people keep them because they like them and they work.

 

[obiwan1]

You either want a first generation or the latest. Nothing in the middle. I have handled the newest Target Bulldog. It seems well made. I have a 3" original made in the '70s and a Target Bulldog also made in the '70s. The Target Bulldog was a TERRIBLE execution of a good idea. If I had to carry a revolver presently, it would be the 3".

 

[PetahW]

To answer the OP's question of: "Are CA revolvers worth it ? ", IMHO the answer is "Yes".

Just keep in mind that you get what you pay for, and it's an unfair comparison to match a new CA revolver with a new revolver costing upwards of 3x as much, like a S&W or a Colt - some of which dollar difference goes into fit/finish.

As compared to the remainder of it's direct competition, like a Rossi, a H&R, or a Taurus - IMO, the CA gives a buyer better value for the dollar, both in quality, reliability and in resale value (if it should ever arise).

FWIW, the Rossi/Taurus warranty process is akin to a 6-mos long Chinese water torture, should it be needed (and it most likely will). DT, DT - NTS.

I have three Charter's - a 1970's .22 Mag Pathfinder, a recently-made .44 BullDog Pug & a recently-made LR/Mag Pathfinder Dual Cylinder.

All three have yet to have issues, except for the two newer stainless steel models - their front sight blades are the same stainless color as the barrels, making them hard for me to discern, so I had to apply a blob of orange sight paint to their rear faces. (Problem solved)




.

 

[coop2564]

.327 is a bit much for the Charter frame pressure wise, I had one it only lasted about 400 rds. when I called the factory they said it was a problem if shot a lot and suggested I exchange to .357/38 model, which I did and Ive shot hundreds of 38's but only occasionally 357 and they do well shooting them few but carrying a lot. Now having said this I have also had a SW m60 357 that also started binding at around 400 rds...so these small frame revolvers IMO are shoot little carry a lot guns and work well in that role. Take a bigger gun to pound rds thru at range time.

 

[aarondhgraham]

I agree with PetahW,,,

I have experienced nothing but good quality,,,
With my new Target Pathfinder.

My lady friend has owned a Charter Undercover,,,
And a Target Pathfinder for three years,,,
All of them shoot as well as my S&W's.

Mainly the difference between them and my S&W J-frames is fit and finish,,,
And yes, a bit of orange sight paint really improved the shootabiliy.

Aarond

.

 

[bpear1600]

I have a 44 special Bulldog Pug which I purchased in the mid 80s. AFAIC it's an across the room gun and a good one at that.

It's easy to carry in a FOBUS Paddle and since most gun fights are from 3 feet or less I feel confident it will do the job if called upon.

 

[myusername]

I bought an undercover .38 in the mid 70's, I've still got it. They do need periodic checking of the screws. My cylinder release goes out of spec about every 500 rounds, just a matter of readjusting it. It always has gone bang.

I did move up to a real nice looking stainless Smith Performane Center .357 but it's a lot bigger gun. That little CA slips in a pocket.

 

[j3hill]

I have a ...well..had a Charter in .32 S&W long that I just gave to my 14 year old niece. She loves it. She has to buy her own damn ammo though.
And nobody can argue about the Charter .44 bull dog ( even the new ones) they rocked!!! But if you are looking just for affordability, what about a Rossi? I picked up a M971 back in the mid 90's when I got a flat tire right next to a gun store, The dude let me use his phone so I bought something. It's as smooth as a S&W and with a 2.75 in ported bbl the thing actually makes my ears sting when it goes bang. I think I paid 295 or something bran new. I find myself carrying it when nobody that I know is going to see me.
Let me dig it out an shoot a pic.

 

[Tucker 1371]

I'm gonna keep tabs on this thread, bought my girlfriend this one for Christmas

She fell in love with it the second she saw it and since she has trouble loading mags for semis I figured the Pink Lady would be a good choice. I'd hate to know I bought her something that might not go bang when needed. So far so good though, about 200 rounds through it and no surprise or pins working their way out just yet.