Charter?

[GF.]

Anybody familiar with these? At first when I saw them around, I kinda figured they were an 'off' brand sorta like Taurus - made out of cheaper materials somewhere outside the US to take advantage of cheaper labor & what not.

But having looked them up a little, it seems that they're a US company (right in CT, where so many other & more famous arms makers used to be); they've been around quite a while. too.

So I wondered what their reputation might be, if any...

And while I'm at it it... Whaddya think.... .357 or .44 Spcl for an all-rounder?

[Twanger]

You could hunt deer with a .357 :biggrin:

[Sidekick]

I shot a friends Charter Arms Bulldog .38 Special about twenty years ago. It was nothing special.

[Just a Hunter]

For a all arounder I would go with a .357
For homesecurity where I would wish to limit the chance of a bullet finding its way into my neighbors house I would likly go with a 44special.

The 44 special is big, heavy and slow but more than enough to protect my skin

[Altjaeger]

I bought a nifty little .22 trail gun back in 1977 by Charter Arms that unfortunately was stolen later. They have been around for close to 40 years and are decent guns at medium price, but not finely finished.

[GF.]

You could hunt deer with a .357 :biggrin:


Not in CT, though.....

I've been following up a touch on this... Sidekick and Alt seem to be right on top of what these are all about, though... They have a couple of pages - more like five, I think - where they discuss the reasons to choose a revolver like theirs for CCW/Home/backup, and among those reasons are that theirs are very solid little guns that are reasonably priced, dark-alley accurate, and otherwise nothin' special. By design. Their rationale is that you don't want a $1500 Smith to throw in your tackle box or under the seat of a pick-up where a fine, costly finish is going to get uglied up, so a gun that's too nice to carry is no better than one that's too heavy, too bulky, kicks too hard, or whatever other reason that it might get left home tat one time you really need it.

And there's a certain amount of sense to that.

I kinda wish they made a .357 with a 3", un-ported pipe on it... Cost no object, I think I'd grab a bulldog in .44 with the 2.5" on it as a poor-man's Alaskan, and a 'target' Patriot in .327 with a 4" and adjustable sights for practice sessions.

I wonder if they sell interchangeable barrels???? :hmmmm:

[bill m]

Hey GF,
About 10 years ago, I was split between a Bulldog and a Taurus 445. The Taurus was local and priced at $307. That's what I bought.
A friend has a Bulldog and the only thing I like better on my Taurus is the grip. But that wouldn't be a deal breaker for me.
Mine is a 44 Special and I absolutely love it. It's an accurate and manageable snubnose. Mine is ported. I think that I made a mistake with the porting. It throws quite a scorching flame; not good if you ever had to use it close to your body or close to other people.
I think the Charter Arms are good choices for utility and dependability. And they look OK. 44 Special is good for the reasons stated by Just a Hunter. It's also cheap to reload.
Are you getting one?

[kjjm4]

For an 'all arounder' I'd go with a .357. My general-purpose handgun is a 4" S&W 681 that I bought used for $199. I load a 158 grain cast SWC to around 800 fps for my small game/target load, a 125 grain JHP to 1350 for my defense load, and a 158 grain XTP to 1200 fps for my deer load.

I'm inclined to agree with the idea that it's not worth spending a lot of money for fit and finish on a gun you're going to beat up and carry a lot and shoot a little. As long as it functions reliably you're good to go. I don't know anything about Charter Arms beyond what I've read in gun magazines (none of it was bad).

[GF.]

$199??? How long ago was that?

Bill - this is something I've been toying with for quite a while... Just took another hit in the disposable income column, so it'll be a while yet, anyway.

I hear you on the .44, though. And besides, I've always liked that round for some reason. Coyotes, bears, or 2-legged vermin, it seems there's not a lot that that round won't do, especially with a hotter load...

511


Of course, I'm kinda little and scrawny, so a smaller round would make for an easier-to-hide bulge under my jacket or waistband... Either way, it would make a lot of sense to pick up a Marlin in the same chambering, but of course the .44 has it hands down there, especially since I have good access to Elk hunting - at least provided I can scrape up the airfare and non-res tag fees....

I don't even like to think about how expensive it has gotten, compared to when I could roll out of bed and head up the hill with a $20 tag in my pocket :barf:

[bill m]

There's something about "GF" that I never thought of little and scrawny. I think you're not measuring from the right place.
I so love the 44 Special. I have a 44 Marlin and when I'm done with the big ones, I shoot Specials. My son has been shooting the specials since he was 7; even the snubby. He says it's HIS gun. I say when my fingers and the rest of me is cold. I hope it's a long time before I have to give it to him.
It's such a universal round. As light as you want; as heavy as you need.

[Bushman]

Well, the .44 Special worked pretty well for Dirty Harry! I think that the .44 Special out of that Charter Arms snub nose got some bad press early on with the Son of Sam shootings out east. I like the cartridge a lot out of my S&W M629 for big bore plinking. One whale of a difference shooting a gallon milk jug filled with water with that load and a hot .44 Magnum round, but I like the versatility of being able to use both cartridges in the same revolver. If the lady that owned my S&W before I did had known that she could have shot Specials through that gun, I don't think that it would have been in the pawn shop in new condition.

One does sure wonder why they didn't more accurately name cartridges according to their bore diameter? Lots of people out there think that a .38 Special is a 38 caliber. Not so, it is a 35 caliber at .357" Okay, the same goes for the .44 Special or .44 Magnum. That one is actually .429 or .430" so why didn't they call it a .43 Special or .43 Magnum? The .357 Magnum, .40 S&W, .41 Magnum, .45 and the .500 Magnum are the only ones that match what they should be for the larger pistol cartridges. Same with the little ones. A .32 ACP is .311, not .320. A 380 ACP is .356" not .380". Go figure.

[Altjaeger]

:wink:uuuuuuhhhhh, and all these years I thought Dirty Harry used a Smith and Wesson .44 Remington magnum.

[Bushman]

He did, best marketing tool that ever happened for a S&W M29. My local gun store guy said that they couldn't keep them in stock. But in one of those movies he said that he used a .44 Special round through it. The gun itself was a .44 Magnum... "Do you feel lucky, punk...?" but looking up at it from where that kid was, it wouldn't have mattered.

[GF.]

I have to agree with you on that one, Bush - a guy staring down a bore that looks big enough to swallow him whole isn't gonna be worried much about case length!

[bill m]

Either way, it's a bad day for him, eh?
Whew! Thank God it's only a Special!