[Niekamp]

Does anyone have any experience with the charter arms bulldog in .44 special. Looked at one today and it seemed like a decent piece. What kind of quality are these guns? Any input is appreciated.

[4thHorseman]

I never had one. I seen them at the gun show last month and they looked pretty nice. As a matter of fact, I had to pick it up and look at it after it caught my eye. It had a trigger lock on it so I couldn't dry fire it, so I'm not sure how the trigger feels.

[EJ]

The eearly ones are pretty solid-- They went Chap7 in late 80's and were bought by someone else-- It's explained in the Blue-Book, I'm not home now--

I've had several old model --Prior to 1980 and still have a stainless--
They are relatively smooth -- solid -- strong guns--

They will pull bullets if shot with a loose wrist or very heavy loads--

The department I was with in the 70's thru early 90's allowed Charters and we didn't have any trouble with them--

[D.W. Drang]

Charter Arms has gone through several incarnations--it's sorta the Ford Motor Compnay of the gun industry. (Henry Ford tried severa times to get his car company going...) The Charter Arms Bulldog is a "not bad" seld-defense gun, read the "revolver check" thread at the head of this forum and use it--QC seems to have "gone south" just before the two or three failures, I've heard horror stories of unrifled barrels, etc.
We have two, LSW's is in excellant shape and mine is better used, and slightly less accurate. (I.e. more barrel wear--but they're both rifled! :p )

[Preacherman]

I've owned two, one a 4" Target model from the 1970's and one a new-manufacture 2½" stainless Bulldog Pug. Both were reasonably accurate, but they both exhibited cylinder binding when hot loads were used. Also, the recoil was NOT enjoyable, due to their light weight... I'd say fully the equal of a 125gr. .357 Magnum out of a lightweight snubby. For these reasons, I decided to move to heavier guns in this caliber, and now own a S&W 696 and a Taurus M431. I carry the Taurus now and again, and find the S&W very heavy, so don't carry it as much: but it's very accurate and enjoyable, and I use it a lot in teaching newbies that a "major caliber" doesn't have to be uncontrollable or painful to shoot.

Tamara has a S&W 296, which is the lightweight L-frame snubby in this caliber. Ask her how it recoils.

I would NOT recommend the Charter revolvers for serious (i.e. frequent, high-round-count) use. For carry and occasional practice, they'll do fine. Just don't use high-pressure loads in them!

[JMLV]

and have sold them both. never plan to buy another. the reason is simple: OUCH!!
they are a real pain to shoot. I mean they just plain hurt! I would rather fire 125 grain factory 357's out of an sp101 than factory 44's out of a bulldog. (actually I would prefer my Officers acp 45 over both - and I shoot it better too!)

[D.W. Drang]

LSW'sBulldog had Barami Hip Grips on it when purchased, and that Bulldog bit at both ends! :what: :fire: Replaced with Pachmeyer Compact grips, now shoots fairly comfortably and conceals fairly well.
Peter Kokalis, in a Soldier of Fiction review, speaks highly of the Secret Service (boot-style) grips for this pistol by the Eagle Grip Company: http://www.eaglegrips.com/index.htm

[Jim March]

The 2nd reincarnation of the critter was the "Charco" series...avoid like the plague.

I had a nightmare once that S&W bought the design out and started making 'em out of Riboflavin :eek:.

[Nick96]

I've used two variants of the "Bull Dog" frame - a .44 Spl and .357 Mag. Both were good for their intended purpose - light weight revolvers that launched major calibers. My impression is these are good "carry a lot - shoot a little" type guns.