Question on Charter Arms snubbies - quality, reliability, etc.

[bedbugbilly]

I'm still doing research and hunting for a 38 spl. snubbie for CC. I've seen a little, but not a lot, on Charter Arms. My understanding is that these are American made.

Can some of you that either have or have had Charter Arms pistols give your thoughts on them? i.e. - quality, accuracy, durability, etc.

How would you compare them to Ruger's LCR, S & W Bodyguard 38, etc. in regards to shooting, recoil and size?

They appear from photos to look good but I've never had the opportunity to handle one. The SA/DA appeals to me and they appear to be reasonably priced. I probably would put 300 - 500 rounds / year through whatever I end up with for range practice. For me, I'm satisfied with the standard 38 spl. I'm looking for something to easily carry concealed and the 5 round capacity with a couple of loading strips also meets my requirements.

Any input would be greatly appreciated as well as your recommendations on which CA model - I understand that some models have alloy frames versus SS, etc. Thanks.

 

[aarondhgraham]

My lady friend owns two CA revolvers,,,

She has a 4" Pathfinder in .22 LR,,,
And a 2" Undercover chambered in .38 Special.

Both are less than 3 years old so they are from the newest CA incarnation.,,,
Both started out with gritty triggers that got much better with use,,,
The fit and finish could be better but is perfectly adequate.

All in all and based on the performance of her revolvers,,,
I have no problem recommending a new Charter Arms handgun.

Aarond

 

[Joe the Redneck]

I have an old 44 BD from the 80s. No problems. Generally, with a cheap gun, the corners get cut on smoothing the action and on the finish work.

 

[Tom-Fairfax]

Personally, I believe that S&W perfected the snubnose with the Model 36. Since then, everything has largely been directed a making minor improvements that typically don't matter and sometimes adversely affect the operation of these revolvers. I do, however, own and have fired quite a number of Charter Arms revolvers. That's because some of the early ones were marvels of light weight construction. Historically, Charter Arms was actually three companies:

1st Generation - Company founded in 1964,
Bridgeport , Connecticut - First production Undercover model produced in 1966
Stratford, Connecticut 1970 - 1991
All revolvers marked as Charter Arms Corporation

I own a number of Undercover and Off Duty revolvers from this era. They were popular with police as back guns because of their small size and reliability. If you can find one on Gunbroker or elsewhere at a good price, buy it.

2nd Generation -
CHARCO, Ansonia, Connecticut 1991 - 1999
Avoid anything manufactured during this era.

3rd Generation -
CHARTER 2000 - Shelton Connecticut
Although the firm briefly went bankrupt in 2005 to avoid politically motivated nuisance lawsuits, the quality of firearms increased considerably. However, unless you're receiving a substantial cost benefit, I cannot recommend the short barrel models over those produced by S&W or Ruger. The difference lies mainly in the ability of the latter to provide slightly better build quality and, hence, reliability. In short, I don't see any particular reason to pick Charter over its competitors. On the other hand, if you're fixated on buying one, try to find a used Charter with proven reliability.

 

[Shadi Khalil]

I've played with a newer model charter along side a S&W 642 and in terms of fit and finish there was no comparison

 

[bedbugbilly]

Thanks fellas - I greatly appreciate the info and input. Having not handled a Charter Arms, I wanted to keep my options open when looking for a snubbie for CCW. I'm not knocking Charter Arms in any way as I'm sure some of you have one that is fine and a good shooter. I kind of had a feeling when comparing it with the Ruger LCP and S & W, it would be like comparing a "Saturday Night Special" with a Colt . . maybe a little extreme in that comparison but you get what I mean. Thanks again - much appreciated.

 

[coop2564]

They are fine guns, not made for thousands upon thousand shots...but for the avg shooter they work just fine.

 

[MrDontPlay]

I've also been looking at charter arms. I want a blued 38 snubnose to put di some fake "pantina" work on and rap some grip tape around the grip. I don't wanna pay colt or s&w prices to do what I'm thinking.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Just recently a friend of mine bought a 2 1/2 DAO .44 Bulldog. The newest type made by the current company.

We shot it with my reloads, .44 'cowboy' factory 240gr loads, and 200 gr CCI JHP 'blazer' loads.

Shot them all fine and with decent accuracy.

I examined the weapon well and while it is no S&W, it is quite serviceable and for those not wanting to shoot 10k rounds, yes it is adequate.

Oh, and I have an old stainless Undercover, made in Stratford, I got for $100 many years ago. Works perfect and shoots fine.

Deaf

 

[DFrame]

I've owned a couple. They are what they are. Inexpensive but reliable guns for people who either can't afford to, or don't want to, spend a lot more money for a nicer gun. I wouldn't have any qualms about carrying one (after a suitable amount of range time). They have more crude finishes than fancier guns and they tend to have gritty actions, but the action smooths considerably with use.
My only disagreement with tom-fairfax would be I believe the snub was perfected by Colt with their Detective Special and the lightweight Cobra.

 

[CWKahrFan]

I have a Bulldog .44 Special. There are a couple of small surface imperfections on it but I like it a lot for the price I paid... It's a sometimes-carry gun for me. I don't shoot it at the range a lot and never intended to. If I was going to average 400 rds. or so per year I'd get a Ruger or S&W. That's not slamming Charter Arms at all. They are what they are... Adequate inexpensive guns for people that don't intend to do a lot of range shooting IMHO.

 

[CajunBass]

I've got one of the older (1977) Charter Undercovers. Works just fine. It's my everyday carry gun. I did replace the original grips with a set of current production Charter grips. The originals would batter my knuckles bloody. No such problems with the neoprene ones.

My Smith & Wesson's and Colts stay in the safe.

 

[shootniron]

I've got one of the older (1977) Charter Undercovers.

Same here, had it for years and it has been perfect so far. Even though it is not my primary, I still trust it.