reliability of CA 44 bulldog

[Grizzly2]

I had a transfer bar break on my Ruger New Model Blackhawk. They probably don't have a reputation for that, but who knows?

My Bulldog is an older Stratford model from the early 80's. CA polished it up nice and reblued it for me. My hands are not that large - usually wear a large glove, and xtra large in some gloves and I find the trigger guard likes to come back and slam the knuckle of my middle finger. The newer rubber grips they come with are the most comfortable and help the most with that particular problem.

If you buy your pants with "deep" pockets you can pocket carry a 3" Bulldog. They ride just below the open pocket and are not visible. It's most comfortable in a belt holster and light enough to be worn every day without discomfort.

I'm glad I bought mine and do enjoy shooting it. You may find it needs the screws checked for tightness after a range session. Especially the crane screw and also the ejector rod. CA has a good customer service dept and they try hard to keep everyone happy. I sent my older model in for some work and to center its poi. Mine needed a barrel replacement to center poi on target and does now. I've settled on 200 grains bullets in mine. Std velocity works out just fine. Too many have proven that trying to up velocity only loosens these light guns up over time - sometimes it doesn't take too much time. But then, I've seen +P 38s loosen a steel S&W 36 with the old pinned barrel also.

[458winshooter]

I bought mine new in 2008 and have had no issues with it save one. I have posted before that taking it to the range once I fired several rounds through it in a short time frame and the cylinder started dragging because it had heated up. I have always loaded it with max or near max loads and it has not given any other problems.

[Drm50]

The way I see it if you are carrying a gun you are doing it for self defense, life & death situations. Why would you trust your life to a product that isn’t top shelf? We already established CA revolvers are not durable. How do we know when it will fail? You aren’t going to fire it much because because of this. I can’t wrap my head around why anyone would use them for more than a range toy. I’m not just badmouthing CA either. There is a bunch of guns on the market that are not something I would want to stake my life on.

[lee n. field]

Originally Posted by Drm50

The way I see it if you are carrying a gun you are doing it for self defense, life & death situations. Why would you trust your life to a product that isn’t top shelf?

Because you can afford it.

Originally Posted by TruthTellers

^ I can attest to the broken transfer bars. My Professional broke after probably 800 dry fired trigger pulls. My guess is that all their transfer bars are MIM and while I don't hate MIM like some do, when it comes to parts that have to take repeated impacts, a transfer bar is the last part I would want to be MIM'd.

My Undercovers' transfer bars looked to me like a stamping, rather than MIM. And there very little radius between the upright and the "flag", which is where it broke, each time. Looked like metal fatigue.

[rclark]

How do we know when it will fail?...

I don't feel it will 'fail'. Wouldn't carry it if it did. It is just over time with lots of shooting it will loosen up, and probably get out of time. So, just don't shoot it a lot. No need. There are many other .44 Specials that you can 'shoot a lot'.

[Drm50]

Ok, I can see, the what I can afford angle, on any inexpensive gun. Any gun is better than no gun. There aren’t to many guys on gun forums just to talk about their Charter Arms revolver. When my boy was right out of school he was taking Police Cadet trading. The kid was a good shot with handguns but, but he was one of those kids that could break a cannon ball with a rubber hammer. At the time I had at least 6 assorted 38sps. S&Ws & Colt. What I did was buy him brand new CA .357, Police Bulldog I think was name of it. The instructors on the shooting were all presently LEO or retired ones. I knew about all the Law within 100mile or
so. When boy broke out the CA, instructor took it, gave Shawn his 686 to use that day. Told him to take CA home and tell me If I didnt send him back with a decent gun he was coming to see me. They only shot 38sp ammo in course.

[ccSnoopycc]

If the new bulldogs coming out of the factory are anything like the undercoverette I just bought then they will be a very decent firearm. I am very pleased both with the value, lockup, and overall feel of the guns they are currently making.

[salvo]

I bought a brand new stainless .44 bulldog around 2009, got it home, cleaned it up and gave it a good look over. The cylinder was so far out of time you could look down the barrel and see a crescent section of the face of the cylinder on every chamber it was so far out of time.
Never even shot it, took it back and that was it for me and CA.
I probably should have tried another, just never did. Two Ruger flat tops kept me happy with 44 spl. A double action would be nice though!

[JERRYS.]

Originally Posted by salvo

I bought a brand new stainless .44 bulldog around 2009, got it home, cleaned it up and gave it a good look over. The cylinder was so far out of time you could look down the barrel and see a crescent section of the face of the cylinder on every chamber it was so far out of time.
Never even shot it, took it back and that was it for me and CA.
I probably should have tried another, just never did. Two Ruger flat tops kept me happy with 44 spl. A double action would be nice though!

wow. two earlier bulldogs I had to shoot about 200 rounds through before they went out of time and had pins and screws come loose. I had very good luck with an Off Duty snub .38 and a 3" Pathfinder .22lr. out of the .44spls I had two that were junk, one that was useable and one that was good. that said I end up getting one every now and then... a lesson hard learned for me...

[ViperR]

Well, I have a CA Patriot 2 1/2" in .327 Fed Mag and that round is really brutal in this snub. So, to keep the revolver from wear/stretching, I only shoot 32 H&R Mags out of it and I shoot it every range trip.
I also reload, having accumulated a lot of brass for it. I push the 32 H&R reloads to +P specs and the revolver is working great.
I was concerned about a steady diet of the .327's, so I'm sticking with the 32 H&R's.
Since this is a fairly new model (discontinued now), the quality is very good being made in the Shelton, CT factory.

[balin]

I have Bulldogs that I like. One of the original 3 inchers. And one of the newer models i got many years back. Accurate enough but I probably wouldn't want to put thousands of rounds through them. I am interested in the .41 magnum that they came out with a while back.

[Cheapshooter]

We already established CA revolvers are not durable.

Do you have a mouse in your pocket that agrees with you? Because "we" have established nothing about Charter not being durable. Maybe in the elitist world of gun snobs, but certainly not in the practical real world.

[Hal]

reliability of CA 44 bulldog

If you have any doubts about it - save your money and get an S&W M69 instead.
Since the M69 is a .44 magnum, it will stand up to the hottest specials w/no concerns.

Why risk having something fail you at a critical moment?

[Msauter]

The CA Bulldog is a unique gun ... there is nothing else out there to fairly compare it to. The S&W 69 weighs 34 oz and costs $800, whereas the CA Bulldog weighs 20 oz and costs $400. I have a newer Bulldog and like it a lot ... I don’t use it much, as I didn’t buy it as a range gun. I do trust it for carry.

[Hal]

The CA Bulldog is a unique gun ... there is nothing else out there to fairly compare it to. The S&W 69 weighs 34 oz and costs $800, whereas the CA Bulldog weighs 20 oz and costs $400.

Unique or a marketing ploy?
Many of the responders here in this thread have raised durability issues with the CA Bulldog.
I've long suspected the Bulldog was brought out just to cash in on the ".44 craze" of the Dirty Harry movie hype.

(& please don't throw the fact that Dirty Harry was a .44 mag & the Bulldog is a special in my face - both are .44s & the public at that time - both shooters & non shooters just looked at it as a .44)

I strongly suspect the gun itself was built and designed around the anemic factory 246 grain lead round nose bullet that was standard fare in that era.

Today - .44 special ammunition has evolved - but - since many of the better loads warn not to use them in the Bulldog - it apears that the gun itself hasn't.

I'll stick with what I believe to be the best approach - which is - if there's any doubt, remove it by making a different selection.

I did that myself. I always wanted a CA Bulldog - but - I quickly became disenchanted with the performance of the .44 special round itself.

I bided my time until I was able to affordably step up to a .44 magnum that offered close to the same carry possibilities of the Bulldog.
I'm content to trade off weight for more available power & price for both reliability & durability.

[JERRYS.]

Originally Posted by Hal

Unique or a marketing ploy?
Many of the responders here in this thread have raised durability issues with the CA Bulldog.
I've long suspected the Bulldog was brought out just to cash in on the ".44 craze" of the Dirty Harry movie hype.

(& please don't throw the fact that Dirty Harry was a .44 mag & the Bulldog is a special in my face - both are .44s & the public at that time - both shooters & non shooters just looked at it as a .44)

I strongly suspect the gun itself was built and designed around the anemic factory 246 grain lead round nose bullet that was standard fare in that era.

Today - .44 special ammunition has evolved - but - since many of the better loads warn not to use them in the Bulldog - it apears that the gun itself hasn't.

I'll stick with what I believe to be the best approach - which is - if there's any doubt, remove it by making a different selection.

I did that myself. I always wanted a CA Bulldog - but - I quickly became disenchanted with the performance of the .44 special round itself.

I bided my time until I was able to affordably step up to a .44 magnum that offered close to the same carry possibilities of the Bulldog.
I'm content to trade off weight for more available power & price for both reliability & durability.

the Bulldog is great idea, and Taurus actually executed it very well with their 445 I think it was. I wish I would have gotten one of those Taurus guns 20 plus years ago. Charter Arms has good inexpensive revolvers in the lower calibers but the Bulldog .44spl has only lately been brought to better standards. The original C.A. Bulldog was a good gun, well fitted and finished, I had one, but was the epitome of carry a lot and shoot a little. then there were the down years where suspect workmanship ruined the reputation, I had two. The last Bulldog .44 spl. I had was a matt stainless gun. while the finish was barely average, the fit was pretty good. I didn't shoot more than a few hundred rounds in it and it was still locked up tight and properly timed. I traded it off because that's just something I do.

[Hal]

The original C.A. Bulldog was a good gun, well fitted and finished, I had one, but was the epitome of carry a lot and shoot a little.

I didn't shoot more than a few hundred rounds in it and it was still locked up tight and properly timed.

See- this is my main issue with the Bulldog - even its supporters qualify that it's not meant to be shot a lot.

Which begs the question - how much is too much?
Where is it that you think the line should be drawn where the gun is reliable - and at what point after how many rounds is it not?

When should you quit firing it & get another one?
(after a couple of times ldoing that - then those high priced S&Ws that us "gun snobs" own start looking cheap in the long run ).

the Bulldog is great idea, and Taurus actually executed it very well with their 445 I think it was

While I'm not a big fan of - no - strike that - I dislike Taurus so I'm not a fan of them at all.
(no bashing - it's pure personal dislike on my part. I don't like Brussle Sprouts either..)
There were three of their guns I did like.
That .44 spl, the small .45 Colt & the small .41 mag.

Would I sell an apendage for an S&W L frame in .41 mag? Probably not, but, I would part with a pretty big chunk of stimulus money .

But - anyhow - this is drifting away. The OP asked about reliability & it seems to be really a crap shoot. I just offered an alternative with the S&W & now another alternative is the Taurus. I know nothing about the Taurus - so - I can't comment on it. It came and went too fast for me to notice it,

[rclark]

When should you quit firing it & get another one?

Well, since mine is just 'handy' if needed and rarely shot (no need)... It will easily last the rest of my life. A good buy in my opinion. Why over think it?

[Hal]

Well, since mine is just 'handy' if needed and rarely shot (no need)..

If you're comfortable with that ......

The C-word thing closed down the gym/pool from March 15th through May 24th.
Our Spring here in NE Ohio was cold & miserable - which kept me from my daily bicycle ride.

It was amazing how long it took me to recover from just a few months off.

I believe in keeping "sharp".

If it all the same to those that "shoot little" - I find I need to stay in touch a little more than a "little".

[rclark]

Hal, that is what I have other heavier revolvers for . I shoot quite a bit when I can and would like to shoot more if the 'w' word wasn't getting in the way... Or contests at the range that closes the range to the rest of us on weekends.... Every time I took my little Bulldog to the range though (At first it was at least once a month)... guess what ... it shot to the same place... every time. So I quit doing that. Instead, I'll shoot the GP-100 .44 Special or myrid of other sixguns instead and once in awhile blow the dust out of the Bulldog for fun. Must times the Bulldog will just be somewhere 'handy'.

A good read: Taffin on his .44 Special Bulldogs

[Grizzly2]

I'd think that anyone with any experience at all will notice when their Bulldog is starting to get "iffy". You "will" notice it loosen up in areas it used to be tight and this usually only seems to happen when you shoot loads that are hotter then standard. When that happens, if it is a new one, send it back and have CA fix it for free. If they can see it has been abused though I'm not sure if they will. Something to look into first. If it's old and from an earlier mfg, pay out the $49.95 and ship it back for repairs. You either like this lightweight .44 Special or you don't. I love the way it carries, either on the belt or in deep pockets of pants that I check before buying that do have deeper pockets.

It's light enough not to weight you down or aggravate aging bodies. It's easy to reload for especially if you have plenty of supplies laying around from your .44 magnum days. If you want a little extra ooph without stressing out the gun carry Underwood full wadcutters. They have to be more effective then many .38 special rounds that probably won't expand from a snubby.

One day at a lgs I saw an Interarms Rossi 720 for the first time. I couldn't believe my eyes, a 3" 5 shot .44 special with adj sights about the size of a K frame in stainless no less that felt perfect in my hand. I agonized over buying it and would have years ago when I got out on the farm and in the woods more. But for everyday carry, the weight at 30 ounces or so was just a bit more then I felt I'd be comfortable with so I reluctantly passed.

Shortly thereafter I bought an older Stratford 3" Bulldog. CA rebuilt and rebarreled it to make it shoot to poa. It's a keeper for me mostly because of the ease with which it carries and shoots. They polished and reblued it so it even has some appeal to my eyes. I really like nice bluing more then the current flat black look popular today.

[Hal]

You either like this lightweight .44 Special or you don't.

Don't get me wrong - I do like the Bulldog. I just don't trust one. There's a world of difference in that & that to me is exactly what the OP is asking about.

[Grizzly2]

The OP asked, "reliability of CA 44 bulldog
Have read or heard that some of the Charter Arms are better made than other ones due to dates made ect. Would like to get information on this before buying one. Any valid information welcome. Thanks"

This was linked earlier by "lee n. field" (see below) which answers the op's question. the 2nd Generation are the ones to avoid that have the worst reputation and the most problems. I like the finish of the 1st generation better than today's 3rd generation. But, some of the problems of the 1st have been corrected in the current 3rd. Buying older models sight unseen on line is very risky. I've done it twice now and both need work which starts at $49.95 + shipping costs. One common problem with the older models is that the cylinder will slide back along the ejector rod when play has developed in the crane and the cylinder will slide past the stop in the frame put there to not allow this. Newer models include an O ring to prevent that. Newer models also incorporate a better front frame pin so that it doesn't back out so easily after a long range session. They also seem to keep the front crane screw tighter. I don't know how other then I think they use a thin plastic washer. There may be more to it then that. I like the older front sights better then the new design.

I've actually had more Rugers and Smith & Wesson revolvers break or stop functioning then I have my Charter Arms. I had to keep tightening all the screws and pins on my Stratford 3" Bulldog after each range session until I sent it in for repairs for that issue and for shooting left. Now it has remained tight for multiple sessions. But I had a model 19 S&W that needed the ejector rod tightened often also. I had a Ruger Blackhawk break a transfer bar. I've not had either CAs stop functioning yet.

As has been said already, do not try to shoot hot loads in these lightweight guns. You will shoot them loose and they will go out of time. But even a S&W all steel 3" model 36 with a pinned barrel shot loose after less then 50 rounds of +P were fired. When I foolishly traded it off years ago, there was a gap showing between the frame and crane when closed. I doubt that would have happened with only std rounds. They were not +P rated in those days. From what I hear and read, that will still happen even with .357 J frames obviously rated for magnum usage when used often with magnum loads.

I currently have an older Stratford 3" Bulldog .44 spc and an older Stratford Stainless Undercover. At the range the Bulldog works flawlessly. If I put it away clean and oiled I expect it to still be reliable when I carry it. I don't try to make a pseudo magnum out of it with handloads and consequently I'm not shooting it loose to where it will fail.

Now the Undercover is another story. It will either be pawned or sent back to CA service to be tightened back up. It was also bought used and is in need of repairs. It shoots to poa perfectly with wadcutters or 158 gr loads and I'm very tempted to keep it and have it repaired. It fits my hand well with the new classic grips or the older Bulldog grips and the stainless is perfect for edc especially during the hotter months.

If I had it to do all over again, I'd probably just buy new ones and treat them properly and not abuse them with hot loads as many of the older guns may have been. I'd expect them to be reliable once they proved themselves with a few hundred rounds threw them. Remember, back in the early days of CA many in law enforcement carried these as back ups for years. They weren't range toys but were carried and qualified with along with enough range time to keep you familiar with them.


This is the link posted earlier:
"I've been researching the Charter Arms Corporation - 1st Generation revolvers for a couple years now.
This is the updated serial number info that I have - based upon around 800 data points
The earliest 1st Gen - ~0 to ~19,000 have NO barrel ADDRESS and s/n is on lower right corner on right side of frame. CA company founded in 1964, first production pieces of the Undercover model produced in 1965
Bridgeport CONN address - ~19000 to ~315,000 1967 - 1973
Stratford CONN address - ~316000 to ~1,090,000 1974 - ~1991
All marked as Charter Arms Corporation

2nd Generation - CHARCO, Ansonia Conn adress - 1,090,000 to ??? ~1991 - 1999

3rd Generation - CHARTER 2000 - Shelton Conn - 0 to where ever they are today.

From the 26 pieces in my collection (all 1st Gen) and from dozens more that I've had the opportunity to observed and fondle, I'd say that around s/n 600,000 the finish was made a lot finer - although the integrals (lock work, action) was at least as good as the earlier ones. I have or have read magazine articles that cover pretty much of the production life of the 1st Generation, and during that period (around late 1980, early 1981) it seems that CA attempted to capture more of the market by doing so, also in April of 1981, they introduced Stainless Steel revolvers into the mix, for the first time.
Some of the articles lamented that the earlier pieces, although rough finish, were rather inexpensive (~60-65% of S&W) and when CA began their "modernization" process, the finishes got better but the prices increased to about 85 to 90% of the S&W line for comparable models.
During the 2nd Generation, the CHARCO (Charter Arms COMPANY), under new management and reorganized, the quality was definitely more spotty and haphazard. I've seen CHARCO produced guns with Stratford marked barrels, obviously using up old stock.
The earliest CHARTER 2000 pieces I had the opportunity to handle (some fairly early 4 digits s/ns - were uniformly, poorly fitted and finished and had some horrendous and gritty actions.
That seems to have been rectified under MKS's (circa 2008) new leadership and the most recent pieces I've handled - s/n's in the high 100,000 range have been "decent" but not as fine in finish and action as the mid years of the 1st Generation. This is simply my studied opinion based upon experience."

[PocketCamera]

think its on their website or in their downloadable gun catalog. their guns are not meant for heavy use. think of "a box of 50 rounds fired over a year,,,, a cylinder at a time"

[TRX]

I bought one in 1982, qualified with it, and carried it at work for a couple of years. It digested a lot of cheap Federal .44 Special, and still locked up tight when I sold it.

If I find another that's local and doesn't have an outrageous price tag, I'll probably buy it to replace the .38 snub I often carry.