PDA

View Full Version : Charter Arms ? .40 snubbie



Corvus
11-22-2012, 11:03 PM
There are currently a few of the Charter Arms .40 revolvers on Gunbroker. Does anyone have any experience with one of these ? If not for the past reputation of the company I would probably already own one of these but there is that doubt from past stories about their handguns.

WDW
11-22-2012, 11:30 PM
In the words of Admiral Akbar, "It's a trap!"

Tamara
11-23-2012, 07:51 AM
If you were to ask me, I would tell you that Charter revolvers are wretched pulsating balls of suck and fail and don't waste your money.

The company has gone out of business three times now. Perhaps the next time it does, somebody will remember to put a stake through its heart.

NEPAKevin
11-23-2012, 11:00 AM
In the early nineties, I had a first reincarnation Bulldog which had an OK trigger that I used for a few years as a pocket gun until one day I noticed that the frame had loosened up, for lack of a better term. Considering that it was not shot heavily, this does not speak well of their metallurgy. Out of idle curiosity, I looked at a newer generation Charter that a local gun shop had on the shelf and it had very poor fit and finish. I believe they also have less resale value than a cheap boat anchor.

WDW
11-23-2012, 03:21 PM
Charter Arms sucks monkey balls to be frank. If a snubbie is what ye seek, a J frame .38 or LCR is what you need.

Tamara
11-23-2012, 04:09 PM
In the early nineties, I had a first reincarnation Bulldog which had an OK trigger that I used for a few years as a pocket gun until one day I noticed that the frame had loosened up, for lack of a better term. Considering that it was not shot heavily, this does not speak well of their metallurgy.

Yup. I had a Bulldog from... I think it was the "Charco" incarnation of the company back around the same time period. ~300 rounds of ammo, mostly PMC 240gr loads, stretched the frame enough that the nickel was coming off the topstrap in big patches and endshake had increased noticeably. Also, the screw retaining the cylinder latch would back out under recoil. Do not recommend.

NEPAKevin
11-23-2012, 05:00 PM
Yup. I had a Bulldog from... I think it was the "Charco"

Mine was also a nickel Charco in .44 Special that was retrofitted with a bobbed hammer. Mostly ran Federal 200gr LSWCHPs through it. Aside from David Berkowitz and some wanna-be bangers, I don't think there are many Carter fanboys out there.

Corvus
11-23-2012, 07:36 PM
My brother has one in 38 spec made in the early days of the original company that is still going but it doesn't get a lot of rounds. From what I can find out the new ones are not all that much to brag on.

I already have the J frame and the only reason I asked about the CA is the caliber. The Smiths in .40 are over a grand and if I am paying that it is going to take at least a 15 round magazine.

Tamara
11-23-2012, 07:53 PM
The Smiths in .40 are over a grand and if I am paying that it is going to take at least a 15 round magazine.

The Smith 646's (http://cosmolineandrust.blogspot.com/2008/03/sunday-smith-39-model-646-2003.html) have their own problems...

Two thicknesses of moon clips to account for differing case head dimensions, sticky extraction from the titanium cylinders. That, and they're worth more these days as collector's items than any sort of practical shooters.

Corvus
11-23-2012, 11:58 PM
The 646 was never under consideration. The 10mm/.40 Nightguard and 610s were the Smiths I looked at.

Tamara
11-24-2012, 09:09 AM
The 646 was never under consideration. The 10mm/.40 Nightguard and 610s were the Smiths I looked at.

Ah. Disregard, then.

Dagga Boy
11-24-2012, 08:58 PM
Why? You take an already marginal revolver, and then we are going to really tempt fate and get it in an auto cartridge. Even REALLY good guns can suck ass when you start putting things with moon clips in them. I went down this road with a Smith 625 ONCE....never again. The old Charter Arms Bulldogs and PUGs were a good back up or ankle gun to shoot a few rounds through once in a while and then leave them alone.

TGS
11-25-2012, 01:26 AM
Charter Arms is the only brand that a gun store employee has ever outright refused to sell to me.

Clue.

Joe in PNG
11-25-2012, 02:34 AM
Charter Arms is the only brand that a gun store employee has ever outright refused to sell to me.

Clue.

Wow! Normally the Standard Gunshop Procedure is to claim that any cheap gun shaped bit-O-metal behind the counter is every bit as good as the more expensive gun it looks like. That he didn't try to say it was as good as a S&W...

NEPAKevin
11-25-2012, 09:53 AM
Not everyone is professional enough to own a .40 Charter.

Alaskapopo
11-25-2012, 04:32 PM
The Smith 646's (http://cosmolineandrust.blogspot.com/2008/03/sunday-smith-39-model-646-2003.html) have their own problems...

Two thicknesses of moon clips to account for differing case head dimensions, sticky extraction from the titanium cylinders. That, and they're worth more these days as collector's items than any sort of practical shooters.

I know a few shooters that love them for revolver division in USPSA.
Pat

Alaskapopo
11-25-2012, 04:40 PM
Why? You take an already marginal revolver, and then we are going to really tempt fate and get it in an auto cartridge. Even REALLY good guns can suck ass when you start putting things with moon clips in them. I went down this road with a Smith 625 ONCE....never again. The old Charter Arms Bulldogs and PUGs were a good back up or ankle gun to shoot a few rounds through once in a while and then leave them alone.

I love moon clipped revolvers. If I were to carry a revolver for self defense and could not use an auto it would be my JM 625. You can reload it so much faster than a revolver with speed loaders. In fact the matches I have used it in I was able to only place a few places lower than normal. With my 19 using speed loaders I usually end up on the bottom of the pack due to poor reloading speed.
Here is the difference.
625
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9x87wXNIjGk
19
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TF6GzC1LtfU

Speedloaders are not nearly as easy to use as moon clips.
Pat

Tamara
11-25-2012, 06:15 PM
I know a few shooters that love them for revolver division in USPSA.
Pat

Of course. They were designed as gamer guns and their shortcomings can be worked around, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. (For example, going with gamer loads reduces the extraction stickiness issue, and competition shooters don't usually mind anally sorting brass for rim thickness...)

Dagga Boy
11-25-2012, 08:13 PM
I love moon clipped revolvers. If I were to carry a revolver for self defense and could not use an auto it would be my JM 625. You can reload it so much faster than a revolver with speed loaders. In fact the matches I have used it in I was able to only place a few places lower than normal. With my 19 using speed loaders I usually end up on the bottom of the pack due to poor reloading speed.
Here is the difference.
625
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9x87wXNIjGk
19
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TF6GzC1LtfU

Speedloaders are not nearly as easy to use as moon clips.
Pat

My brand new purchased, un-modified, S&W Model of 1988 rarely would get through all six rounds with getting all of them to go bang with either training or factory duty loads. I kept my S&W 25-7 Model of 1989 .45 Colt and shot competition with it and carried it defensively. THAT ONE was one that I staked my life on.

Corvus
11-25-2012, 10:41 PM
Noticed a small .40 revolver on Gunbroker tonight made by that fine SA company Taurus. Never owned a Charter Arms or a Taurus so I don't know if that is a step up from Charter or not ?

WDW
11-25-2012, 11:02 PM
Noticed a small .40 revolver on Gunbroker tonight made by that fine SA company Taurus. Never owned a Charter Arms or a Taurus so I don't know if that is a step up from Charter or not ?

Nope. They are equally shitty.

Alaskapopo
11-26-2012, 01:26 AM
Of course. They were designed as gamer guns and their shortcomings can be worked around, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. (For example, going with gamer loads reduces the extraction stickiness issue, and competition shooters don't usually mind anally sorting brass for rim thickness...)

No disagreement on the fact we do reload and can sort our brass.
Pat

Alaskapopo
11-26-2012, 01:35 AM
My brand new purchased, un-modified, S&W Model of 1988 rarely would get through all six rounds with getting all of them to go bang with either training or factory duty loads. I kept my S&W 25-7 Model of 1989 .45 Colt and shot competition with it and carried it defensively. THAT ONE was one that I staked my life on.

I have 2 moon clip revolvers. One a 25 mountain gun that started life as a 45 colt and then I had the cylinder cut to take 45 acp with moon clips and the other is the 625 JM both run great.
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Revolvers/625.jpg
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Revolvers/Mountaingun.jpg

Tamara
11-26-2012, 08:09 AM
My brand new purchased, un-modified, S&W Model of 1988 rarely would get through all six rounds with getting all of them to go bang with either training or factory duty loads. I kept my S&W 25-7 Model of 1989 .45 Colt and shot competition with it and carried it defensively. THAT ONE was one that I staked my life on.

Other than occasionally bending a moonclip when I was inexperienced and didn't know what I was doing wrong, I never had an ignition issue with any of the three .45ACP 625s I've owned, and a couple of them saw at least moderately serious round counts. (I've never fired the near-mint pre-25, but I'd assume the same from it.) Similarly satisfactory performance from the moonclipped 325, 610, and 627. The 325 did have reliability issues, but they had nothing to do with moonclips; the flyweight .45ACP snubby was a kinetic bullet puller for uncrimped budget 230gr FMJ loads...

Smith provided two thicknesses of moons with the 646 because manufacturers can't seem to get their $#!+ together re: rim thickness on .40S&W.

TGS
11-26-2012, 11:37 AM
Noticed a small .40 revolver on Gunbroker tonight made by that fine SA company Taurus. Never owned a Charter Arms or a Taurus so I don't know if that is a step up from Charter or not ?

As mentioned, they're equally shitty.

If you want a cheap, small revolver, get an Armscor. They seem to have a reputation for being serviceable (albeit rough and unrefined) and only cost $200 new.

Or, just buy a used S&W j-frame 642. With the least bit of bartering skills you should be able to get a used one for under $300.

Tamara
11-26-2012, 11:59 AM
Noticed a small .40 revolver on Gunbroker tonight made by that fine SA company Taurus. Never owned a Charter Arms or a Taurus so I don't know if that is a step up from Charter or not ?

Taurus gives me a sad. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with them from a design or materials standpoint, but a recurring massive indifference to the concept of quality control makes buying one a pretty big gamble.

Averaged across the years, I'd say you probably have a two-in-three chance of a satisfactory ownership experience with most models in their catalog, provided you don't expect the thing to endure massive round counts or anything. Personally, I wouldn't risk a dollar in a Coke machine that only ate it one time in three...

Dagga Boy
11-26-2012, 04:43 PM
I have 2 moon clip revolvers. One a 25 mountain gun that started life as a 45 colt and then I had the cylinder cut to take 45 acp with moon clips and the other is the 625 JM both run great.

Well, that is not fair. You have two that work and I didn't get one that worked. Why would anyone need to have two guns that work when I was unfairly deprived of one through no fault of my own. You should redistribute one of them to me so that I can also have one that works. I tried to have a working one and I wanted to have one like yours. I don't even need your fancy mansion one, you can just send me the regular living wage one. It would be the fair thing to do.;)

Alaskapopo
11-26-2012, 05:28 PM
It is sad that Taurus quality sucks so much because they have some good ideas or concepts. For example they make a 5 shot Tracker in 44 mag that a friend of mine has. Its the perfect size as a woods gun in bear country (where I live) but I would not trust a Taurus. I wish Smith would make a 5 shot .44 mag on their L frame. While their at it I would also like a 9mm J frame build around that cartridge with a short cylinder to match with a Scandium frame. I would also like to see a J frame in .327 mag with a 6 shot cylinder. (Scandium frame)
Pat

TGS
11-26-2012, 05:56 PM
It is sad that Taurus quality sucks so much because they have some good ideas or concepts. For example they make a 5 shot Tracker in 44 mag that a friend of mine has. Its the perfect size as a woods gun in bear country (where I live) but I would not trust a Taurus. I wish Smith would make a 5 shot .44 mag on their L frame. While their at it I would also like a 9mm J frame build around that cartridge with a short cylinder to match with a Scandium frame. I would also like to see a J frame in .327 mag with a 6 shot cylinder. (Scandium frame)
Pat

Grab a shovel and some vodka. I'm sure it can be done. :cool:

Corvus
11-26-2012, 07:09 PM
Or, just buy a used S&W j-frame 642.

OK , I should have explained better to start with.

I have J and K frames and the only attraction of the Charter Arms was the caliber. I have come into ownership of a bulk of .40 ammo that was loaded very light. It will run in my 1911s if I go down to a 9 lb recoil spring if that gives an idea of power factor.

Just thought if I could find a cheap snubbie in .40 it would be cheap practice with a small revolver and recoil wise it might not be far off what I carry in the j frames. If the gun was junk after a couple thousand rounds it would be Ok , just don't want it junk after a few hundred rounds. Once the ammo is gone I probably would go back to .38 spec. so I did not want to drop a grand on a Smith.

thanks for the info , I will scratch the Charter and Taurus off the list.

Tamara
11-26-2012, 07:22 PM
Well, that is not fair. You have two that work and I didn't get one that worked. Why would anyone need to have two guns that work when I was unfairly deprived of one through no fault of my own. You should redistribute one of them to me so that I can also have one that works. I tried to have a working one and I wanted to have one like yours. I don't even need your fancy mansion one, you can just send me the regular living wage one. It would be the fair thing to do.;)

Seriously?

I know a guy who had issues with his Gen4 Glock 17... ;)

Tamara
11-26-2012, 07:25 PM
Just thought if I could find a cheap snubbie in .40 it would be cheap practice with a small revolver and recoil wise it might not be far off what I carry in the j frames. If the gun was junk after a couple thousand rounds it would be Ok , just don't want it junk after a few hundred rounds. Once the ammo is gone I probably would go back to .38 spec. so I did not want to drop a grand on a Smith.

thanks for the info , I will scratch the Charter and Taurus off the list.

This is sensible thinking. There isn't, to my knowledge, a worthwhile .40 cal revolver solution to your dilemma.