Charter Arms BullDog

Blaine · Post by **Blaine** » Mon Jan 11, 2010 2:03 pm

I saw a Charter Arms Bulldog, .44 Special, Saturday. Right size and flavor, but my gosh, the fit and finish were bad....crane looked narrow and weak, as well........How have these been holding up?

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » Mon Jan 11, 2010 3:16 pm

They've been holding up just fine for years. I had one for a few years never had any problems with it. It's not a magnum so don't try to make it one.

Doc Hudson · Post by **Doc Hudson** » Mon Jan 11, 2010 6:12 pm

I've had a 3" Charter Arms .44 Bulldog for over 30 years, and it was used when I bought it. in fact it was the first centerfire handgun I ever bought.

I've put several thousand rounds through it over the years and carried it constantly for nearly 10 years.

it has never failed to fire and while not a target pistol you would not want me shooting at you withing 50 yards.

With a weight of only 19 ounces, recoil is pretty brisk, even with the old standard 246 gr. LRN bullets. I can't speak for the newer revolvers, but my old five-shooter has an indentation on the left grip panel. If a shooter fails to place his thumb in that indentation he will get bitten by the cylinder release button.

IMO, the Charter Bulldog is a fine carry gun. Mine has been very reliable and the trigger is much lighter and smoother than the average run of Charter triggers. i don't carry it a lot and i don't shoot it a lot any more, but it is still loaded and within easy reach if it is ever needed to repel boarders.

If you want a .44 S&W Special to feed a large and steady diet of Elmer Keith Memorial Heavy Loads, pass it by. A pistol as light as the Bulldog won't stand up to a heavy diet of heavy .44 Spl. loads, even if your wrists will stand up to the recoil.

Bullard4075 · Post by **Bullard4075** » Mon Jan 11, 2010 6:22 pm

I've had one for years.
What Doc said ++++++

salvo · Post by **salvo** » Mon Jan 11, 2010 6:40 pm

I think the older ones must be better than the new ones.
I bought a new one a few months back and figured for the price it was not going to be up to Ruger or S&W standards and that was fine. The rifling had chatter marks, the trigger was heavy and gritty and fit and finish was on the rough side. What made me return it the next day was the cylinder did not lock up in line with the barrel! If you looked down the barrel you could see a crescent moon portion of the cylinder face.
I really wanted a nice small .44 Special but will need to keep looking.

Nixterdemus · Post by **Nixterdemus** » Mon Jan 11, 2010 6:56 pm

Some of the older ones were used and abused. Howevah, I have the old made in Bridgeport tapered brl and it's tight. Has a hair trigger in SA & I figure that explains the smooth DA. Easy to tote.

Rossi made a 720 in sa/da & DAO w/3" full lug brl in SS. Five shot was about the size of a K frame. A lot heavier, yet could stand a heartier diet. I like the DAO coz it would fit in ya pocket. You knew it was there, but it wouldn't snag coming out.

Po' boy 696...

O.S.O.K. · Post by **O.S.O.K.** » Mon Jan 11, 2010 7:10 pm

I do not own one but I can say this. Brian Pearce included the Charter Arms revolvers in his 44 Special article in a Handloader article last year. He indicated that they were good for "level 2" loads - which are essentially +P loads. He did not include the Taurus revolvers because they "were not consistent" in construction, the steels were not consistent in hardness and the cylinder walls were not of a consistent thickness. Apparently, the Charter Arms revolvers are everything that the Taurus revolvers are not.

They are not as strong as the Smith 696 or Ruger New Blackhawk but they are stronger than older revolvers w/o heat-treated cylinders.

I would be happy to own one. Based on what I've read and seen, they focus on the fit where it's important and make a quality, affordable revolver IMHO.

Post by **Hobie** » Mon Jan 11, 2010 7:18 pm

John Taffin has several and often mentions depending on them for personal security. I think that says a lot for them. I do understand the, ummm, reluctance to take on such a thing as they appear to be. However, based on my reading on the "original" Bulldog revolvers, these aren't far from those and those did great service.

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Mon Jan 11, 2010 8:10 pm

Bullard4075 wrote:I've had one for years.
What Doc said ++++++

Same here. Had one in the 1970's, sold it way back when. Got another recently, and it is stainless, which I like better, and otherwise a decent gun. I shoot only factory Winchester Slivertips in it, and with Crimson Trace grips it is not 'fun' to shoot but is very controllable and accurate for a snubbie.

I like the fact that it doesn't have that supersonic 'ring' that the .357 Speed Six I used to carry has, in case you don't have time to put on your hearing protectors before the bad guy is at your throat.

I don't care much about rough rifling on a 3" 'belly-gun', I guess...

Leverluver · Post by **Leverluver** » Mon Jan 11, 2010 8:15 pm

Seems they make a serviceable revolver for it's intended purposes. Unless they have some sort of epiphany, they should stay out of the rifle business. IMO, they don't have the skill set (or maybe desire) to pull off a quality product on a consistent basis.

Tommy Reb · Post by **Tommy Reb** » Mon Jan 11, 2010 8:28 pm

My wife and daughter each have one as their carry guns. Both guns are about 4 years old and have been shot approximately 1k rounds each. They are holding up very well. Also, both are quite accurate. The ladies (and I) are very pleased with their Bull Dogs.

Pete44ru · Post by **Pete44ru** » Mon Jan 11, 2010 9:04 pm

The 1970's-era .44 Bulldogs are best.

FWIW, I would be the owner of one now, from a Ruger Forum member (wayno) in Oregon, if there was an economical way to get it to my FFL.

My free-fee FFL won't accept shipment from a non-FFL, and the other FFL's here charge fees ranging from $50 to 15% of the purchase price.
He told me that all his FFL's would charge him $50 or more to ship.
All those, added to the $250 price tag, added up to no deal for me.

The $250, though, is IMO an excellent price for a primo .44 Bulldog.

.

JerryB · Post by **JerryB** » Tue Jan 12, 2010 12:15 am

I have one from the late '70's or early 80's. It is a 4 inch Target Bulldog, I can still hit good with it out to 100 yards. I have not had any problems with it at all. Not long after I bought it I put a set of Grippers on it so it would take a speed loader. The piece carries good and shoots good.

Doc Hudson · Post by **Doc Hudson** » Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:09 am

Pete44ru wrote: The $250, though, is iMO an excellent price for a primo .44 Bulldog.

.

I don't know about that Pete.

I only paid $100.00 for mine.

Then again $100.00 was a lot more money in 1977 than it is now.

rock-steady · Post by **rock-steady** » Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:20 am

The 44 Bulldog I had was a newer model. The finish was not as slick as a S&W, but that thing would shoot! At 15 yards, I could put all five 240gr SWCs into one ragged hole.

86er · Post by **86er** » Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:38 am

I got one just over a year ago. I traded it for a used PPK/S that I had no love for. The one I got is an older gun, I think early 80's. I sent it back to Charter for no reason in particular and included a note: Please check, upgrade and/or repair as necessary for perfect reliability. Will be carried daily". In one week, Charter called me for $49 payment. They "replaced the pawl, cylinder release latch and screw, hammer and mainspring and reamed and cleaned chambers, test fire". There was also a new Lifetime Warranty Registration Card included in the box it was returned in. The gun has digested heavy Grizzly Cartridge ammo, standard pressure Grizzly Extremes, and a hundred assorted handloads both lead and jacketed with no problems, good accuracy and perfect reliability. It was accurate enough to shoot an 80 pound goat at 25 yards and hit it where I wanted to 5 times. A person would be closer and quite a bit bigger. I like it and trust it.

JB · Post by JB » Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:44 am

I believe Charter Arms has changed ownership several times over the years. I had a couple of the original 1970's guns and they were o.k. guns for the price. I owned a later stainless Bulldog that was pure junk. After buying my junk I found an article in Guntest where they also found the then current Bulldog to be junk. I haven't examined the one lately, but I'd most likely avoid them in favor of something else.

86er · Post by **86er** » Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am

Doug McClenehan was a gun designer with several prominent American gun companies. Using his strong engineering and inventive background he decided to go out on his own and in 1964 founded Charter Arms. McClenehan and David Ecker were lifelong friends and in 1967 Ecker became a 50/50 partner in Charter Arms.
•1972: David Ecker made a buy out offer to Doug and Ecker became the sole owner of Charter Arms.
•1984: Nick Ecker, David Ecker's son and the present owner of Charter Arms, joined the company and ultimately ran the manufacturing/production arm of the company.
•1988: Through a complicated set of circumstances dealing with a somewhat related real estate deal, Jeff Williams, VP of finance for Charter Arms came into ownership of 100% of the stock of the firearm manufacturing and sales operation and renamed the company Charco. This stock transfer allowed David Ecker to work on the real estate deal. In order to ensure that the firearm portion of the company continued, Jeff Williams offered 20% of company stock to Nick Ecker to continue running production and Nick accepted
•1996: There was a dispute between Nick and Jeff and Nick left the company. Ultimately the production failed due to this loss of expertise and the company closed its doors for a short period in 1998.
•1998: Learning of the closing Nick Ecker brought on two partners and bought the company from Jeff Williams.
•2000: Nick Ecker's two new partners had the name changed to Charter 2000 to coincide with the change of the millennium. Charter 2000 marked firearms were produced between 1999 and mid-2007.
•2002: Due to excellent sales, Nick Ecker was able to buy out his two partners and changed the name back to Charter Arms. In mid-2007 Charter Arms was again stamped on the firearms and this mark continues to be stamped on Charter Arms revolvers to this day. Nick Ecker is now the sole proprietor of Charter Arms.
•October 2004 Founder, Doug McClenehan passed away and in March of 2005 David Ecker passed away.
•2005 MKS Supply became exclusive marketer of Charter Firearms expanding distribution and giving Nick Ecker more time to design innovative new products.

The new company is in the hands of the original owners family and the original quality and guarantee is being upheld.

Sarge · Post by **Sarge** » Tue Jan 12, 2010 10:19 am

That last line is good to hear, 86'er. Like Doc Hudson I started using them when Carter was pretending to president; mine were fully as good as he reported his to be. FWIW I shot shot perfect scores with one in the 80's, on a course that required fast DA shooting up close and deliberate DA shooting at 25 yards. Wouldn't have had any trouble at all ventilating a man with mine at 50.

I've wondered how the new ones compared to the old; and of course I'd like one in .45 Colt.

Post by **Hobie** » Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:29 pm

Joe,

I've snagged your info so that I'll remember.

Which model did you use on the goat?

JB · Post by JB » Tue Jan 12, 2010 3:43 pm

I love the idea of a quality short easy to carry 44 special, but evidently the market just isn't there. I wish I'd kept my old Bulldog, but I'm still scared to try the newest versions. There's just so many mixed reviews out there.

There's some interesting comments here, including the one by George Hill.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=330733

Modoc ED · Post by **Modoc ED** » Tue Jan 12, 2010 8:41 pm

O.S.O.K. wrote:I do not own one but I can say this. Brian Pearce included the Charter Arms revolvers in his 44 Special article in a Handloader article last year. He indicated that they were good for "level 2" loads - which are essentially +P loads. He did not include the Taurus revolvers because they "were not consistent" in construction, the steels were not consistent in hardness and the cylinder walls were not of a consistent thickness. Apparently, the Charter Arms revolvers are everything that the Taurus revolvers are not.

They are not as strong as the Smith 696 or Ruger New Blackhawk but they are stronger than older revolvers w/o heat-treated cylinders.

I would be happy to own one. Based on what I've read and seen, they focus on the fit where it's important and make a quality, affordable revolver IMHO.

Have you got a Month, Issue #, and year or that Handloader article?

EDIT" Nevermind -- found it today.

86er · Post by **86er** » Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:11 pm

My revolver, and the one used on the goat is the old 2" shiny finish model.

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Tue Jan 12, 2010 11:33 pm

BlaineG wrote:....crane looked narrow and weak, as well........How have these been holding up?

If you think about it, the crane shouldn't bear any stress when the gun is fired, as its function is 'merely' to hold the cylinder when you swing it out of battery. Especially with the type of front and rear lockup on the Charter's, the cylinder is held nicely. I'll bet you could fire one without the crane screwed into the frame (except the base of that screw I think holds something else in place...).

Nixterdemus · Post by **Nixterdemus** » Wed Jan 13, 2010 6:42 am

I e-mailed Charter Arms a while back about their 9mm "rimless revolver" in a five shot. They claim they're too busy making the rest of the line, but I'm not so sure. I'd like to have one. We'll see.

Kinda goin' the other way, howevah the 9mm is cheap, more potent than the 38 spl & if ya don't like breakin' the sound barrier there's always 147 grain slow rollers. I noticed on their website they now claim they're coming out in 2010. Sure you are CA.

I'm not trading in the bulldog though if they make the rimless...

Availability: First quarter of 2009. -Ha, ha, ha...

MSRP Prices: 9mm $399.00, .40 $449.00, .45ACP $449.00

Charter Arms Rimless Revolver (CARR) will be available late Fall 2009! Ha, ha, ha...

Charter Arms announces...

Charter Arms’ New Revolutionary Rimless Revolver
Thursday, November 20th, 2008 at 1:00 am

http://www.gunpundit.com/1487.php

Post by **Hobie** » Wed Jan 13, 2010 7:30 am

Lots of us have been waiting on the .45 ACP....

Nixterdemus · Post by **Nixterdemus** » Wed Jan 13, 2010 7:48 am

I'd like to have a 45 w/3" brl. as opposed to a 2.2". Anywho, I figured they'd change gears and come out first w/9mm and then maybe the 40 & 45.

Their claim that they're just too busy to open up a seperate line for production is hogwash as far as I'm concerned.

I'm more apt to believe that they're experiencing problems in their rimless system.

Here's the deal in a nutshell: Moon clips work, the end...

Pete44ru · Post by **Pete44ru** » Wed Jan 13, 2010 10:20 am

[Nick Ecker is now the sole proprietor of Charter Arms.]

FWIW, Nick Ecker was the person who actually answered my phone call to Charter in June 2008, when I called about a botched warranty repair on my then-new .22 Mag 4" Pathfinder.

Nick told me to ask for him, in further contacts regarding the revolver, and resolved my problem by not only replacing my revolver, but making it a prototype by adding an extra/convertible LR cylinder, gratis, for "my patience" !

Nick told me that his goal, not withstanding the human foibles of employees, was to make the best revolvers he possibly could, with the very best service as exemplified by the example of a 20 day warranty repair turnaround.

.

Blaine · Post by **Blaine** » Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:38 am

Pete44ru wrote:[Nick Ecker is now the sole proprietor of Charter Arms.]

FWIW, Nick Ecker was the person who actually answered my phone call to Charter in June 2008, when I called about a botched warranty repair on my then-new .22 Mag 4" Pathfinder.

Nick told me to ask for him, in further contacts regarding the revolver, and resolved my problem by not only replacing my revolver, but making it a prototype by adding an extra/convertible LR cylinder, gratis, for "my patience" !

Nick told me that his goal, not withstanding the human foibles of employees, was to make the best revolvers he possibly could, with the very best service as exemplified by the example of a 20 day warranty repair turnaround.

.

Impressive!

Nixterdemus · Post by **Nixterdemus** » Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:52 am

I've heard nothing except good things about Nick and his customer service.

However, to announce a new pistol, that's going to start out in one caliber, in fall of 2008 that is coming out in the spring of 09, then fall 09 and now there's a little banner on their site proclaiming early 2010. Which technically could be right up to six months.

On their website they have news releases for 2006 and 2007. I could find nothing on the rimless save what other sites have saved from CA's news release in November 2008.

I e-mailed Nick advocating the virtues of the 45 acp in a five rnd wheelgun, fwiw. At that time he told me they couldn't fit it on the existing frame. I'm sure many contacted him w/same wants.

So, when I heard about rimless I was excited. Now I'm thinking that maybe they had a few problems w/their spring-loaded catch and release system.

Yes, I'm saying that I think they could have already been brought to market if they had used moon clips.
I appreciate that they think they could sell more w/their design. I'd buy a proven moon clip over new and improved rimless.

They will need to have that design in use for five years before I'll consider it reliable and it still will be slower to load and more expensive to make.

Then again I've been wrong many times before and am nowhere near depleting my quota...
-----------------------
I'm going on record that no one will ever produce a speed loader for the rimless series.

Blaine · Post by **Blaine** » Wed Jan 13, 2010 1:27 pm

The Ruger 45/45acp convertable does not have a problem without 'clips.....
If Charter Arms are coming out with the .45acp revolver, I shall certainly wait for it. I find the 230gr hardball nearly perfect in every respect.

Nixterdemus · Post by **Nixterdemus** » Wed Jan 13, 2010 1:44 pm

I'll go on record that there will never be a speed loader made for the Ruger 45/45acp either.

I'm waiting on Charter. I just purchased two 3" brl Rossi 5 rnd 38 spl for $229 + tax apiece.

I guess I could've purchased their new 38 spl Goldfinger model, 32 Lavender Lady or the ever popular Undercoverette & Dixie Derringer combo....
---------------------------
I count 65 models to choose from although the Rimshot isn't listed.
-------------
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008 ... lver-carr/
New Charter Arms Rimless Revolver (CARR)
Charter Arms have issued a press release heralding their “revolutionary new rimless revolver” the Charter Arms Rimless Revolver (CARR), that will go on sale Q1 2009.

Problem: The major drawback to rimless semi-auto cartridges in revolvers is they require specially made revolvers. These low-production, somewhat scarce and, highly-specialized revolvers are limited to sometimes fragile and expensive moon/half moon ammunition clips. Generally, only revolver aficionados and collectors bother with (.45ACP and 9mm Parabellum) rimless revolvers. While they may sometimes be fired without the specialized moon clips, generally the ejector rod will not eject the free-floating fired cases (got a pencil?).

Solution: Charter Arms has come up with an affordable revolver that chambers rimless semi-auto rounds in the same manner as a standard rimmed-cartridge revolver.

The first caliber on offer will be .40 S&W which will be followed by .45 ACP 3-4 months later and 9mm Parabellum (that will also be able to chamber .380 ACP) 3-4 months after that. All will be able to handle +P ammunition.

Initially only snubnosed models will be produced (2″ barrel for 9mm and 2.2″ barrel for .40 and .45ACP).

Catshooter · Post by **Catshooter** » Wed Jan 13, 2010 1:59 pm

Excellent info 86er, thanks.

So we should stay away from the ones stamped "Charco" and "Charter2000"?

I am really looking forward to their new .45 ACP revolver, that sounds enticing.

Cat

Lefty Dude · Post by **Lefty Dude** » Wed Jan 13, 2010 3:54 pm

I have had my Pug/44 now close to two years. It is my personal protection handgun.
Where ever I might be, it's close by. The usual carry rounds are Winchester 200 gr. Silvertips, factorys. My hand load is a close duplicate, 200 gr. Nosler JHP over 7 grains of Unique. For practice I use my Lead CAS/SASS 200 gr. loads.

My theory is : "If I use it , you loose it". This piece did not cost alot of money. And if I must, God forbid use it. Then it will not be one of my high dollar Colts or Brownings.

If they bring one out in 45ACP, my Pug/44 will have a mate.

BTW; I bought the piece with the Bush stimilus Money. If the Gov't sends me another check, I'll buy another Gun.

tman · Post by **tman** » Wed Jan 13, 2010 5:38 pm

O.S.O.K. wrote:I do not own one but I can say this. Brian Pearce included the Charter Arms revolvers in his 44 Special article in a Handloader article last year. He indicated that they were good for "level 2" loads - which are essentially +P loads. He did not include the Taurus revolvers because they "were not consistent" in construction, the steels were not consistent in hardness and the cylinder walls were not of a consistent thickness. Apparently, the Charter Arms revolvers are everything that the Taurus revolvers are not.

They are not as strong as the Smith 696 or Ruger New Blackhawk but they are stronger than older revolvers w/o heat-treated cylinders.

I would be happy to own one. Based on what I've read and seen, they focus on the fit where it's important and make a quality, affordable revolver IMHO.

always thought taurus was first rate. equal to the s&W, while charter arms was the weak cousin

JNG · Post by **JNG** » Fri Jan 15, 2010 7:40 pm

Sorry for late post on this subject. I've gone through many,many handguns for CCW. I have stopped at the Bulldog.
Light weight, powerful, cheap and easy to handload. With some work, hits where I want it to hit. (I am not the greatest handgun shooter, not the guns fault) Best trigger, No. Best finish, No. Goes bang when it should go bang, you bet.

I like 200 grain Gold Dot for carry ammo. 200 grain lead over 6 grains of Unique for training and fun. (works for me, your gun my be different) I did have to file down the front sight a bit, again works for me though my one son liked it better as new. Cost had no consideration in my pick. I sure wish I had tried it 5 years sooner. Hope this helps.

Joe

Doc Hudson · Post by **Doc Hudson** » Fri Jan 15, 2010 9:37 pm

Nixterdemus wrote:I'll go on record that there will never be a speed loader made for the Ruger 45/45acp either.

WRONG!!!!!

You clealy have never had the opportunity to watch Jim Taylor at his speed shooting. With his .45 ACP Blackhawk, Jim uses a Colt M-1911 magazine as his speed-loader shucking the cartridges into the chambers with amazing speed.

With a .45 LC revolver, Jim uses a tube of a sized for the cartridges to fit into it and cut to hold the proper number of cartridges. Just as fast as his magazine loading and maybe even faster.

jeepnik · Post by **jeepnik** » Fri Jan 15, 2010 11:30 pm

Well now. I've never even considered using a 1911 mag as a loader for a .45 acp Blackhawk. So, I just tried it. You know, with a bit of practice, I figure I could reload alot faster. Shucking the empties won't get any faster, but you're right about just slipping them out of the mag and into the cylinder. So how come I've never seen or heard of this before. Must be living under a rock. Thanks for the education.

revolvergeek · Post by **revolvergeek** » Mon Jan 18, 2010 12:48 pm

I had a couple .44 spl Bulldogs back 10-15 years ago and they were pretty nice guns. That said, I have been completely unimpressed by the quality control that I have seen on the few newly manufactured Charter revolvers that I have looked at lately. I am sending a Southpaw (left hand model) back for a friend tomorrow that is unusable from the factory.

At least two of the chambers of the cylinder are machined incorrectly and have over-diameter rings in them about halfway of their total depth. These rings cause fired cases to bulge and then the cases must be hammered out with a punch. This case bulging occurred with both Winchester USA 130 FMJ and Remington UMC 130 FMJ factory ammunition. I don't remember the dimensions off the top of my head, but the bugles were several thousandths bigger than the necks and bases of the cases. We were not able to successfully fire a single complete cylinder full out of it. I can only assume that this gun was not test fired fully at the factory. They were very apologetic when I called them about it and assured me that it would be replaced or repaired ASAP.

Another friend of mine has two of the current .38 spl (Undercover?), he has shot them extensively and is happy with them. Apparently YMMV.

Nixterdemus · Post by **Nixterdemus** » Mon Jan 18, 2010 4:12 pm

Wouldn't be close to the first or last time that I was wrong.

Does the sum of the large, bold font coupled w/multiple exclamation points equate to something special, outside the world of a teenage girl's emotions and thirst for drama?

"...a Colt M-1911 magazine as his speed-loader..."

That's all good and fine, howevah it's not made and/or marketed for the Ruger 45/45acp.

"...a tube of a sized for the cartridges to fit into it and cut to hold the proper number of cartridges..."

I'd love to see that, yet once again you're taking my statement out of context.

When either of your examples are slapped on cardboard w/vacuum wrapped plastic, bar code and sold as a Ruger 45/45acp convertible speed loader then I'll consent defeat.

You can nit-pick my statement at will, but perhaps I've allowed too much elbow room for interpretation.

I'll go on record again that there will never be a speed loader made and/or marketed on a commercial level for the Ruger 45/45acp convertible wheelgun.

Same thing goes for the CA Rimshot.

This doesn't imply that someone couldn't or wouldn't make a handmade/homemade version. Especially in a small niche such as speed shooting.

I'm simply stating that this product for the specific use will never be produced for resale to the masses.

I'm sure that you knew good and well my intent and thought you'd have a little fun w/me.

More power to ya brother.

jeepnik · Post by **jeepnik** » Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:50 pm

Well now, it just dawned on me that there are speed strips for the .45 Colt. Bianchi makes them. So, for the .45 Colt as used in any .45 Colt chambered handgun, there is a speed "loader". I could spend the time to look and see if anything like that would work for the .45 acp, but why, it's kind of a silly argument to begin with.

Nixterdemus · Post by **Nixterdemus** » Tue Jan 19, 2010 6:19 am

Here we go again. Will someone call up an oldie station and request Billy Preston's, "Will it go round in circles"?

My remark about a speed loader for the Ruger was tongue-in-cheek response to me taking a stab at Charter Arms in a previous post.

I dish up a little grief for them coz they still haven't offered their rimshot revolver.

Which is a dig as well, but I like the sound of rimshot.

Due to the construction of the rimshot ejector, I speculate that a traditional speed loader will never be produced.

Anywho, there's nuttin' to argue.

Just a little BS banter, nuttin' more & nuttin' less.
---------------
Kinda silly & quite the reach to infer such qualities in a speed strip, in the first place, even w/your cute quote/unquote marks...

Post by **Hobie** » Tue Jan 19, 2010 7:55 am

jeepnik wrote:Well now, it just dawned on me that there are speed strips for the .45 Colt. Bianchi makes them. So, for the .45 Colt as used in any .45 Colt chambered handgun, there is a speed "loader". I could spend the time to look and see if anything like that would work for the .45 acp, but why, it's kind of a silly argument to begin with.

Bianchi only recently began to "make" speed strips for other than .38/.357. Those other speed strips for many different cartridges are produced by Tuff Products. It was only because this company was doing so well with other than .38/.357 Quick Strips (their brand) that Bianchi finally produced something other than the .38/357 Speed Strips. From my experience the Tuff Products Quick Strips are just as good as the Bianchi product.

Catshooter · Post by **Catshooter** » Wed Feb 02, 2011 12:07 pm

I found a three inch stainless Bulldog at a show a couple of weeks ago. Sad shape, shows that you can rust "stainless" steel.

Needed a couple small parts so I called Charter and a human being answered the phone! Very nice. She was very helpful and got my parts off to me quickly and cheaply.

Very positive customer service experience. Nice little revolter too.

Cat

SJPrice · Post by **SJPrice** » Wed Feb 02, 2011 1:20 pm

If anyone is serious about a great "combat" or CCW revolver, then I suggest you take a look at the S&W Night Guard series. The 396 Night Guard is "Bulldog" size, lighter, possibly stronger, and the trigger is better both DA and SA and it is a 5 shot 44 special with great combat night sights. I own both a 396 and it's big brother a 329 Night Guard in 44 Mag. They are great personal protection revolvers. I have added CT Laser grips and I can tell you even with Cor-Bon DPX defense loads in 44 special or 44 mag respectively they are very controllable. The Night Guard series also comes in a 45 ACP version.

86er · Post by **86er** » Wed Feb 02, 2011 1:47 pm

Mine is a 2 1/2" barrel gun from the late 70's. Recently, I sent it back to Charter Arms for updates under their 100% service warranty. They gave me a new trigger, hammer (bobbed), ejector rod and star, barrel (internal) screws, spring and polished and reamed the chambers. I had it back in 12 days. It cost $49 to get all the upgrades. Shoots extremely accurate and perfectly reliable.

Blaine · Post by **Blaine** » Wed Feb 02, 2011 2:08 pm

I'm still waiting for their double action 45acp (without need of moon clips) that they were supposed to bring out last year.

Hagler · Post by **Hagler** » Wed Feb 02, 2011 2:19 pm

Blaine,

I guess they will be out soon. Gunblast has this, from the recent S.H.O.T. Show, on the Charter Pit Bull .40 S&W, about halfway down the page:

http://www.gunblast.com/SHOT_2011_0.htm

Shawn

JohndeFresno · Post by **JohndeFresno** » Wed Feb 02, 2011 2:22 pm

86er wrote:Doug McClenehan was a gun designer with several prominent American gun companies. Using his strong engineering and inventive background he decided to go out on his own and in 1964 founded Charter Arms. McClenehan and David Ecker were lifelong friends and in 1967 Ecker became a 50/50 partner in Charter Arms.
•1972: David Ecker made a buy out offer to Doug and Ecker became the sole owner of Charter Arms...

Joe,

Thank you. Saved - excellent info. Like one or two others, I have tracked Charter Arms' Bulldog a bit through the years, coming close to buying one for backup or carry.

I recalled that, for a while, there was a model that more than one person complained about - lockups on double action firing was one reported problem, I think. And I vaguely recalled that Gun-Tests gave at least one model a bad score.

Your history is particularly useful in determining if a certain year model (from the serial number) would be a wise used gun purchase. And a validation that the new models are of similar quality of the early issues.

Pete44ru · Post by **Pete44ru** » Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:02 pm

UPDATE - After not even SEEING a .44 BullDog of ANY shape/form locally in the last 15 years - AND having to pass on getting one in from a private party in oregon due to FFL fees on the shipping end a few years ago -

I finally lucked into NOS/unfired Stainless .44 BullDog Pug a few weeks ago, complete with it's form-fitting clamshell-type plastic factory box for $275 - and have been wringing it out since.

(top, below, with a 1966 Colt DS)

I've found it to be accurate as far as I intend to shoot it (21'), with several different brands/etc of commercial ammo - both with slower/aimed SA fire, and rapid DA shooting.

Additionally, it's WAAAAAAY easier to handle the recoil/twisting/etc during firing, than the wood-gripped, blued .44 BD I had in the 70's ( and sold just because of that) - which I attributed both to the rubber bumbers and a slightly heavier barrel/frame on the SS gun.

BTW - ALL these Charter BullDog's are much stronger than a Colt, S&W or the various Tauri/Rossi clones - due to the design not having a removeable sideplate like the others, AND an unbreakable Beryllium firing pin. The trigger group is accessible via dropping it down/out of the cylinder frame.
The crane size is not an issue, since the cylinder locks up fore/aft - and IMO one shouldn't be flipping cylinders open/closed like some yahoo, anyway.

Now than it's proved itself, the Colt's gone on to a friend who's been lusting for it, these last 10 years or so. (I'm NOT Two-Gun Pistol Pete

)

.