older Charter Arms 44 vs. new Taurus 44

O

old_yout

New member
I've got two boxes of 44spl that I bought a long time ago when I thought I was going to buy a 629.
I bought several other guns instead and just sort of forgot about the 44 over the years. Now I'm thinking what a waste those rounds would be if I didn't buy a 44, so here I am
I don't want to buy a 629 anymore so I'm looking at some of the old Charter Arms bulldogs I see on the internet auctions from time to time. They're usually going for $300 or less and that seems about right what I'd like to spend.
Should I pick up one of these or should I spend a little more and get a new Taurus? I don't particularly want a shiny revolver, as I've seen some of the Taurus models turn out, and I'd like something around a 4" barrel, though that latter is negotiable.
Or is there another inexpensive option? Dan Wesson? I don't know.
I'd like the revolver mostly for range time but from time to time I might want to carry it around as a back-up.
Any thoughts?
 
The pre '91 Charter Arms Bulldogs are outstanding handguns. I would choose that over a new manufacture Taurus (provided it is in VG or better condition). I also wouldn't go too far above $200 for a Bulldog.
 
I've had a Bulldog for 17 or 18 years now and had to replace the firing pin once recently. If you're worried about that order a couple extra. they're about $6. each and take about 10 minutes to change. Pull one pin is all.

They say the shrouds shoot loose on the Pug models, might want to stay away from those ones. If you want to do a lot of shooting you might want to get something a little beefier than a Bulldog. If its going to be carried much and shot little, a Bulldog will be just fine.

Carries like a J-frame, hits like an O-frame. Probably better to stick with the lighter weight bullets for recoils sake, 200 gr or less and do check those screws at the range, they like to loosen up with recoil.

I like em'! For $200. bucks, its hard to go wrong. 300 is pushing it.
 
Some people about fill their pants at the thought of anyone buying a Charter Bulldog. (As we've seen in this thread.)
LSW and I each have one, hers has the "pocket" (spurless) hammer and is of later manufacture than mine. Neither is as muich fun to shoot as our other handguns, but they are easier to carry under some circumstances. (Lighter than a 1911, for instance so if we're dressed such that a fanny pack or purse--for her--work better than IWB.)
Do some research--there's plenty of material on the internet about these pistols. (Of course, some of it's utter crap...) Keep in mind that Charter Arms has gone under and resuyrfaced several times, and that quality control is known to have suffered during all the vicissitudes involved. I recommend that, if you buy via internet, make darned sure you have a long enough inspection period that you can have your FLG look it over--one story I heard--and it may BE only a story--is that for a while some were being made without rifling...:eek:

I have no experiance with Taurus .44s. Buy one of each, and a S&W x96, and do a comarison--maybe it'll be your road to a new career as a gun writer!:D
 
You're taking your chances with a Charter Arms ...

Knew a guy at the office that had one, and it functioned fine when he fired it twice in one year.

I bought one of the stainless 3" with the "bobbed" hammer, and couldn't get it to function for more than several rounds without the cylinder, trigger & hammer locking up tight. Took it to the head armorer, who's also a revolver armorer and has experience with Charter Arms .44's. He couldn't do anything with it to make it function. Frustrated him no end.

I returned the gun to Charter Arms. Got a nice letter back with the gun after it was repaired. Didn't make it through the first cylinder full of Silver Tips. Back it went.

Another nice letter and repaired gun ... this time I dry fired it right out of the box it was returned in ... and didn't make it twice around the cylinder before it locked up tight ...

Last time back to the factory was a repeat performance.

Notice a trend? I did ... Excuse me, but while I generally don't feel this strongly about a gun, this is the perfect opportunity to use this smilie .. :barf:

I wouldn't give $50 for one, unless it was deactivated (officially deactivated, not just the normal Charter Arms condition ...), brass plated and highly polished to use as an interesting paperweight or coffee table conversation piece ... but that's only because I thought they looked nice.

The older .38 Undercovers from the late 70's appeared to work well, but then, I only knew one guy that fired more than 1 box of ammunition through one ... Everyone else just carried them a lot and fired them a little.

Personally, if I felt the urge to get a nice little .44 snubnose, I'd spend the money to get one of the various S&W's.

Of course, you might just get lucky and get a functional Charter Arms ... but $300???? You could've bought 1 1/2 of them for that when they were new, and when everybody thought they were good guns.

:eek:
 
I have a Charter Arms Undercover which was purchased back around '75. Put a few thousand rounds through it with no problem.
 
Since we're all chipping in with our anecdotes, my experience w/ the Bulldog was negative. I had one of the blue 3" models, one of the few handguns I've bought new, and it shot loose as a goose with 2 boxes of very mild handloads. FWIW.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top