Experiances with charter arms bulldog?

[megatronrules]

I was wondering if anyone here has any experiance with the new charter arms bulldog in .44 special? I really like the idea of a 3inch big bore revolver for concealed carry,but don't know of anyone who makes one currently. I've seen some the used S&W guns but they cost alot. any help on thsi would be great thanks.

 

[dave-o]

I had a CA Bulldog like 15 or 17 years ago. Didn't shoot it much, and it was no S&W, but it never failed to go bang and didn't seem like a POS really.

All told, though, I think I'd rather have a Smith, or perhaps a Ruger SP101. .357 mag or even .38 really make functional defense rounds. I admit, though, that there's just something about that big 44 calibre hole.

dave-o

 

[magsnubby]

Can't say as to the durability of the Charter 2000 guns, my Bulldog Pug only has maybe 500 rounds through it, but the the original Bulldog was alot more durable than people give it credit for. I have an original blued 3" Bulldog i bought in 1980. Between my dad and me, we put about a zillion rounds, mostly light target loads, through that little beast. It's still just as tight and accurate as it was the day i brought it home, and doesn't shave lead or do any other wierd stuff.

If you don't reload and plan on doing alot of shooting, you'll probably be better of with a good .357.

 

[RGBydand]

Listen to Dave-0 and magsnubby. Both have good advise. IMHO, a Ruger SP101 .357 magnum with the 3" barrel is a good choice. You get to practice with cheap (relatively) .38spl ammo, and have the .357 velocity for defense. The more you can afford to practice, the more proficient you will become with your new firearm, this can save your life. AND the 3" barrel will give you added velocity over a 2" barrel due to more powder burn (with both .38+p and .357 Mag). Another advantage to the longer barrel would be less muzzle-flash, again due to more powder burn IN the barrel. I don't know much about Charter's reliability, but fit and finish seems shoddy to me (sorry to say), from the ones I've seen or handled. Rugers are known for their ruggedness and ability to shoot MANY rounds and never go out of time. Rugers and Smiths ARE more money, but in the long-run, you will be happier with a higher quality product.

 

[Moonclip]

Good concept but marginal quality and caliber a bit big for frame which hurts durabilty but it is a carry a lot gun/ shoot a little. I'd also recomend a SP101 instead for most people. I've about given up on the 44spl bulldog concept due to por qc and quality but do still have one example.

I've had to replace mainsprings in 2-3 of these guns, it seems a weak point in them.

 

[bpisler]

I like my 1st generation bulldog,it's handy,
easy to carry and loves 240gr LSWC loads.
it's accurate enough out to 20 yards but
weighing 20 oz's it can be a handfull.I've put
about 1000 rds thru mine and it's still tight
and well in time,best $150.00 revolver i ever
bought.

 

[obiwan1]

I have a 3" first gen and a 4" first gen (target model). The 4" had a burr or something and you could feel it bind during DA fire. I had to send it to the factory for "tuning". I still have them as my house guns loaded with Glasers. The problem was always how to carry a reload. Speedloaders are bulky and difficult to conceal. There are no "speed strips" in .44. I really wish there were. DeSantis makes a cartridge carrier in .44. If I were to start carrying the Charters today that's what I'd buy.