Glock Talk banner
  • Notice image

    Glocktalk is a forum community dedicated to Glock enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about Glock pistols and rifles, optics, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, and more!

1 - 20 of 86 Posts

shoot4recreation

· Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
Discussion starter · #1 ·
I started a thread asking about a new Taurus revolver. It got me thinking: Where does Charter Arms fit in regarding quality compared to today's Taurus, S&W, and Ruger? I'm guessing Charter Arms aren't as well made as Ruger and S&W but I have no idea how they compare to Taurus. Assume recent production samples.
 
They’re different. Taurus may be a step above CA in finish. I only own S&W revolvers but I had a Taurus Judge I used for snake protection. When the CCI Heavy shot shells came out I sold it. CA are good for what they are if you’re looking for a small-medium big bore revolver. I would look elsewhere for 38/357. I owned a CA 44 special and am sorry I sold it.
 
Charter is okay, Taurus is sometimes ok, a S&W Centennial is pretty much guaranteed to be good. Same goes with Ruger. Caveat, every gun company has the rare lemon out there. Why not spend the extra $50 and get something you know is good? I like S&W revolvers, and would feel fine about a Ruger. Anything below that gets to be a compromise that I’m not really interested in making.
 
Charter Arms claim to fame is the bulldog line of 44special revolvers that are sized somewhere between a S&W J frame and a K frame. I've never owned one, but I would like to.

S&W is pretty much the gold standard for 38 special snubs (5 or 6 shot). But their guns are getting costly. I own a decent amount of smiths.

Ruger is nice, but heavy. The kind of heavy that is nice at the range but maybe not so nice in your pocket or on your hip all day. I would like to own a SP101 in 327 Fed someday.

Taurus is hit and mice, I had a nice 41magnum tracker, but it rusted a lot faster than a s&w does. Shockingly fast.
 
Like Taurus, I've owned a few Charters. They're functional. Finish isn't great, but you should pay less for one than say a Smith and Wesson. The triggers aren't the best, but they're not target guns. I've come to the conclusion that I don't care for revolvers this size, I don't care who makes them, but if I was going to carry one, a Charter would do just as well as anybody elses for my use.

Charters 44 Bulldog is a unique offering. I really like that little gun, but it kicks like the proverbial mule with the standard wood grips. Switching them out to the neoprene ones Charter sells is a BIG improvement.

Of course maybe I'm just a wimp. :)
 
I have toyed with the idea of their .45 Colt snubbie but have never seen one in the wild and I have a suspicion it wouldn’t hold up to a lot of shooting.
 
If the quality is "just as good", I wonder what secret manufacturing processes allow Taurus and Charter Arms to produce substantially lower priced guns? Or do they cut some corners on quality to save costs?
 
Bought a used CA bulldog 44 from a private seller at the San Antonio gun show back in 1995. Made it my truck gun, shot it a lot and it has never failed. A few years ago I bought a new Charter Arms Bull Dog 44 and it shoots well, my wife saw it and now its has become her handgun. You do have to be careful with those handguns as they cannot tolerate heavy loads of .44 special.
Just use the big 240 gr 44 special standard loads and it will stop any criminal.
 
I handled a few new ones some years back and couldn’t find one that worked smoothly. They all tended to get stuck. I already had a Taurus 94 which works smoothly and has a great blue finish. I ended up with a Smith because I had a lot of them to choose from at the time and they were easily the best of what I was handling.
If you buy a CA make sure you can handle it first..
I should add, I only looked at 38’s…
 
If you want a 5 or 6 shot revolver in .38 or .357 in 2“ or 4” barrels, the classic 30+ year old revolvers are still available at what I consider reasonable prices. If you want a 7 shot, 3” barrel, or a 9mm (or the option with an interchangeable cylinder), the lesser brands are worth a look. I haven’t bought a Taurus 692, or an RIA 9231B, but they’re out there.
 
I started a thread asking about a new Taurus revolver. It got me thinking: Where does Charter Arms fit in regarding quality compared to today's Taurus, S&W, and Ruger? I'm guessing Charter Arms aren't as well made as Ruger and S&W but I have no idea how they compare to Taurus. Assume recent production samples.
Taurus is the bottom of the barrel in Saturday Night Specials that are currently produced. I'd rate Charter Arms a step above them and they have put out some popular guns, like the bulldog revolvers. Neither is remotely in the same league with S&W, Ruger or Colt.
 
Bang, click, click, bang, click

Apparently, that was about the level of reliability of the CA .44 Special used by Berkowitz.

I stuck with S&W and Ruger, personally.
Could I get your source for this info, everything I read about the Son of Sam killings had no information about the gun misfiring.
 
Taurus and Charter have had their ups and downs with regards to consistency. I have never owned either, but have been tempted by several Charters.

While theTaurus and Rossi have always been basically S&W clones, the Charter is a different design that has no side plate and a different type of crane, both of which are somewhat less refined but with a potential to be rugged enough if consistent QC is implemented.

Rugers, at least from the 70’s on, have always seemed more rugged than Smiths, if slightly less refined- not in finish but action smoothness. I have owned several Rugers including an SP101 which I foolishly sold. It felt gritty compared to a Smith, but that thing was a tank.

Today, I think Smith, Colt, and Ruger are equal in overall quality. I think Taurus and Charter are a step below, and more or less equal depending on when they were made. I think the Taurus is by design more refined, but ruggedness and reliability could be equal depending on QC. A lot of users swear by them though.
 
I've a Pitbull in .45 acp. It is a beast! It's more accurate than I am, has a decent DA trigger and is a hoot to shoot!
I've had one Taurus revolver in my lifetime. It was a small .357. It was a handful to shoot but seemed to be of good quality. I traded it to a guy I worked with and a few months later, the firing pin broke off.
 
I have toyed with the idea of their .45 Colt snubbie but have never seen one in the wild and I have a suspicion it wouldn’t hold up to a lot of shooting.
I love sixguns chambered in .45 Colt so that Charter Bulldog XL appealed to me but I thought it might be pretty uncomfortable to shoot... so I checked Youtube videos on it and some people were bleeding after shooting one. I'll pass on it!
 
@tacticaljoey : FWIW, I just got the latest Gun Tests magazine. The S&W Pro Series 686 Plus had misfires and was rated a "D". The lowest of the four tested.
No offense, but what one gun rag states is of little value to me. Over the years I have learned that quite often the gun that has great reviews also has a lot of advertising space. Maybe they got a lemon like I referenced can happen with any firearm manufacturer, who knows.
 
1 - 20 of 86 Posts