rugerman07
Member
How good are Charter Arms revolvers? Are they well made, a good value for your money? I'm considering a 357 pug revolver.
Charter Arms Revolvers. Good Quality?
- Thread starter rugerman07
- Start date
- Status
MedWheeler
Member
S&Ws they ain't, but I've had my Undercover .38 for more than 20 years now, with no complaints. Not as refined as a S&W or Colt, but they'll fill the bill, especially for the price. My Undercover was my on-duty BUG when I was in LE, and I also carried it off-duty. I still carry it sometimes, but usually reach for one of my .380s instead. Still, a neat little wheelgun.
chrisf8657
Member
Stay far away from them.
I had a Mag Pug (Charter 2000, current incarnation of the company), had lockwork failure with it, it shaved rounds and went out of time, and the crane screw constantly backed out. This wasn't with heavy loads either, just regular 38 special.
Plus, I just saw a Pink Lady 38 from Charter in the local gun shop - the frame has RUST from the FACTORY!
I STRONGLY suggest you consider a Taurus instead if your on a budget, or if you can save up a little, a S&W. You will NOT be sorry, but will with a Charter.
The older guns (1970's) are decent, but the current stuff is pure crap.
I had a Mag Pug (Charter 2000, current incarnation of the company), had lockwork failure with it, it shaved rounds and went out of time, and the crane screw constantly backed out. This wasn't with heavy loads either, just regular 38 special.
Plus, I just saw a Pink Lady 38 from Charter in the local gun shop - the frame has RUST from the FACTORY!
I STRONGLY suggest you consider a Taurus instead if your on a budget, or if you can save up a little, a S&W. You will NOT be sorry, but will with a Charter.
The older guns (1970's) are decent, but the current stuff is pure crap.
twoclones
Member
I had a Charter Bulldog which was made in 1985. It seemed to be a pretty good revolver for the money.
Neckshot5seven
member
- Joined
- May 26, 2008
- Messages
- 128
I have a .38 spcecial undercover model that was my mothers. It is at least 20 years old. I put a different grip on it and it fits the bill when Im in beachwear that wont hide my 1911. It it pretty darn accurate even at 25 yards. Has held up well to be passed on down the line. Good pistol for SD and women, but my wife does not like it.
MCgunner
Member
I had one, once. For similar price range, I prefer Rossi.
jwr747
Member
I have an early model 44 Bulldog (Son of Sam timeframe) that has lots of rounds,lots of carry time,looks ragged,but still goes bang, don't know what else you could ask for. jwr
+1
They were decent guns for what they were..... no hot loads..... not a target gun.... I wouldn't plan on putting 5000 rounds through it....
I had one that was cut to 2", when all they made was the 3". Made a neat pocket howitzer.... A friend of mine traded me out of it 25 years ago, and he still has it and still shoots it and carries it.....
Southern Shooter
Member
Mine is fine...
I found a Charter Arms Under Cover this spring at a pawn shop...think it is a 1980-ish production...mint condition...no cylinder ring at all...lock-up is very tight. May have paid too much but I had been wanting a "tiny" .38 special in addition to my other .38s. And for $180 + tax it seemed like a good deal.
True, it may not be as finely tuned and well constructed as a S&W...but, it is a solid piece. The cylinder bluing is more purple than black. But, to me that is cosmetic. I keep it clean and oiled so it is not going to rust anytime soon.
Anyway, I have had no problems with it. I don't shoot it a bunch...a cylinder or three every month or so. Keep it loaded with a mild ammo...Federal 110 grain hydra-shock, standard load. Yes, I am aware that is not much of a round. But, I can hit where I aim and reacquire my target much quicker for the follow-up shot with the lighter load. Can't be any worse than a .380 pushing an 88 grain bullet...IMO.
I found a Charter Arms Under Cover this spring at a pawn shop...think it is a 1980-ish production...mint condition...no cylinder ring at all...lock-up is very tight. May have paid too much but I had been wanting a "tiny" .38 special in addition to my other .38s. And for $180 + tax it seemed like a good deal.
True, it may not be as finely tuned and well constructed as a S&W...but, it is a solid piece. The cylinder bluing is more purple than black. But, to me that is cosmetic. I keep it clean and oiled so it is not going to rust anytime soon.
Anyway, I have had no problems with it. I don't shoot it a bunch...a cylinder or three every month or so. Keep it loaded with a mild ammo...Federal 110 grain hydra-shock, standard load. Yes, I am aware that is not much of a round. But, I can hit where I aim and reacquire my target much quicker for the follow-up shot with the lighter load. Can't be any worse than a .380 pushing an 88 grain bullet...IMO.
Last edited:
Southern Shooter
Member
Specific Problems?
Are there any specific problems people are having with these revolvers? Is there a difference say between the 1980ish guns and today's Charter Arms?
Are there any specific problems people are having with these revolvers? Is there a difference say between the 1980ish guns and today's Charter Arms?
Phil DeGraves
Member
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2006
- Messages
- 1,531
Had one. Didn't like it. The crane is too small and fragile for the cylinder. Save for a Smith.
(Of course, since I don't own one anymore, I'll probably be accused of being close minded).
(Of course, since I don't own one anymore, I'll probably be accused of being close minded).
Southern Shooter
Member
not close-minded
Phil,
I would not accuse you of being close-minded. That is your experience and opinion of the revolver you had. I just know that once my Under Cover is closed the cylinder shows to be held in place nicely. And, when in lock-up status there is NO budging the cylinder...side to side or front to back. And, shooting appropriate ammo in the gun I don't think that is going to change any time soon.
I have several S&W .38 revolvers. One, of which is a beautiful snub Model 10. It is a sweet gun. But, when it comes to putting the bullet on the target one cannot tell the difference of which gun was fired...both guns hit at point of aim with the ammo I have selected for each of them...and, to me that is the proof in the pudding.
Phil,
I would not accuse you of being close-minded. That is your experience and opinion of the revolver you had. I just know that once my Under Cover is closed the cylinder shows to be held in place nicely. And, when in lock-up status there is NO budging the cylinder...side to side or front to back. And, shooting appropriate ammo in the gun I don't think that is going to change any time soon.
I have several S&W .38 revolvers. One, of which is a beautiful snub Model 10. It is a sweet gun. But, when it comes to putting the bullet on the target one cannot tell the difference of which gun was fired...both guns hit at point of aim with the ammo I have selected for each of them...and, to me that is the proof in the pudding.
.380awsome
Member
ive never fired a charter arms revolver or gun but my uncle carries one and he doent seem to have had any problems
old ones are OK new ones are prue crap.I friend of mine a cop here in texas bought one in 44 special for back up.3 times back to the factory as it was out of time and a 20 lb trigger pull
.
you will be buying a very expensive paper weight.
friends don't let friends buy junk.
if you do buy one and it is crap you will never sell it as people know they are junkers.
.you will be buying a very expensive paper weight.
friends don't let friends buy junk.
if you do buy one and it is crap you will never sell it as people know they are junkers.
loneviking
Member
Do yourself a favor and look high and low for one of these guns to actually handle. I did and what I saw made me say 'No Thanks!'. Poor fit and finish, along with being fairly lightweight was something I didn't want to carry or fire.
theotherwaldo
Member
I've had two Charter Arms Undercover .38spls over the last twenty years. They worked. They were a step up from RGs, but not a big step. I pawned one and traded the other away for some fence repairs.
DonP
Member
Charter Arms can be a really mixed bag, (not unlike recent Colt, Post '64 Winchester or a number of other high profile manufacturers). Some of the guns are great and others, ... not so much.
I have an older (1st generation) CA Undercover in .38 spl. (exposed ejector rod etc.) I believe our own Jim March mentioned having one for a long time as well a ways back. It's pretty much a poor mans J-frame.
Mine works great and shoots far better than it has any right to. I bought it used for $125 with the original Charter Arms belt holster that came with it. A quick clean up, a new compact Hogue grip and it was ready to go. My wife took official possession of it the first time I took it out shooting with her and now she and our youngest girl are squabbling over who's gun it is.
I'll never see that gun again.
The "Charco" and "Charter 2000" era of the company produced an inconsistent product with some real finish and quality control problems.
From what I hear the older and the newest versions are pretty good, reliable guns for the money that a lot of people that haven't owned or shot one have very strong opinions about. In other words pretty much like most other guns and things in life.
You don't neccessarily need to have any first hand experience to have a strong opinion.
FWIW, there must be enough of them out there to make it worth while since Crimson Trace is now offering a laser grip for the .38, .357 and 44.
I have an older (1st generation) CA Undercover in .38 spl. (exposed ejector rod etc.) I believe our own Jim March mentioned having one for a long time as well a ways back. It's pretty much a poor mans J-frame.
Mine works great and shoots far better than it has any right to. I bought it used for $125 with the original Charter Arms belt holster that came with it. A quick clean up, a new compact Hogue grip and it was ready to go. My wife took official possession of it the first time I took it out shooting with her and now she and our youngest girl are squabbling over who's gun it is.
I'll never see that gun again.
The "Charco" and "Charter 2000" era of the company produced an inconsistent product with some real finish and quality control problems.
From what I hear the older and the newest versions are pretty good, reliable guns for the money that a lot of people that haven't owned or shot one have very strong opinions about. In other words pretty much like most other guns and things in life.
You don't neccessarily need to have any first hand experience to have a strong opinion.
FWIW, there must be enough of them out there to make it worth while since Crimson Trace is now offering a laser grip for the .38, .357 and 44.
LeonCarr
Member
No, not good, stay away from Charter Arms.
I have had one for several years now.
It's an ok gun. By that I mean, it didn't cost a lot of money, and it shoots and works reliably. Is the finish as good as a Smith or a Ruger? No... but I didn't pay what Smith and Ruger are charging, either. I wanted a practical gun, not a showpiece... something that didn't come so dear I'd be afraid to scratch it, lose it or have to surrender it to the cops if it was ever used defensively. I don't shoot it a lot. I'm inclined to think that if I did, it maybe wouldn't weather as well as it has. So I do go kinda easy on it. Some of these guys on here shoot 200 rounds of heavy loads or more a week. The little bulldog, IMHO, wasn't made for such rigorous demands. She was made to ride much, and work little.
It has never failed at the range. It suits my grip. It leaves a lot to be desired if you're looking for a quality pistol, but if you are looking for an inexpesive handgun to serve a multitude of needs, it has a place.
Incidentally I find it to be the gun I most frequently reach for when trouble comes calling. That says something about my faith in this little dog.
It's an ok gun. By that I mean, it didn't cost a lot of money, and it shoots and works reliably. Is the finish as good as a Smith or a Ruger? No... but I didn't pay what Smith and Ruger are charging, either. I wanted a practical gun, not a showpiece... something that didn't come so dear I'd be afraid to scratch it, lose it or have to surrender it to the cops if it was ever used defensively. I don't shoot it a lot. I'm inclined to think that if I did, it maybe wouldn't weather as well as it has. So I do go kinda easy on it. Some of these guys on here shoot 200 rounds of heavy loads or more a week. The little bulldog, IMHO, wasn't made for such rigorous demands. She was made to ride much, and work little.
It has never failed at the range. It suits my grip. It leaves a lot to be desired if you're looking for a quality pistol, but if you are looking for an inexpesive handgun to serve a multitude of needs, it has a place.
Incidentally I find it to be the gun I most frequently reach for when trouble comes calling. That says something about my faith in this little dog.
XR400R
Member
I purchased an Undercover .38 a year ago & have carried it in a front pocket ever since. I shoot it at the range every weekend. I've probably put 1200 rounds of my own hand loads through it. Never had any trouble with it at all. Lockup is tight & cylinders well aligned; patterns are tight at 12 yds. Cylinder gap is excessive at 0.011", but still seems to do just fine. For the price, I'm very satisfied. Wouldn't hesitate to purchase another.
I own a 1970's Undercover and I like mine just fine. I have heard that newer ones suck. But mine is a nice little gun. I guess I don't think any 5 shot revolver is worth as much as a 1911 so I won't be buying a new smith made out of some alloy that makes it painful to fire.
Phil DeGraves
Member
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2006
- Messages
- 1,531
No offense meant. I was (unsuccessfully) trying to make a humurous reference to comments received on another thread.
- Status
