RevolverFanatic said:
Good for you guys....really. But are you going to sit here and say that side by side, you can equate a Charter Arms gun to a Colt, S&W or, Ruger?
If you say yes, you are not being truthful. And in most cases, it's because you own one. To use a cliche'; they are the "poor man's" revolver, and always have been.
If it makes you feel good to pay less for something, so be it. But I would not waste my money on anything not of premium quality.
Charter Arms is not a premium quality gun.
You're very good at spinning your distaste for Charter Arms. Have you considered writing for o'Bama?
Out of the box, a Python is smoother, and nicer, than any Ruger. So, since the Ruger is not the best, you can not ever own a Ruger, either?
Every type of product is within a spectrum. Most expensive, to least expensive, smoothest to roughest, most accurate to least accurate, heaviest to lightest. If within any spectrum, there is a point which if the product exceeds minimum acceptable standards, then it's personal preference how much above that point the product needs to be, to be acceptable to the buyer, either in price, performance, appearance, or a combination of all factors.
So, if a Ruger is not high enough in the spectrum to meet your standards, then don't buy it. If a Charter is even lower, in the same spectrum, then don't buy it.
The next guy, me for example, sees a modern Ruger in this spectrum, and I rate it fair-to-good for finish, mediocre for trigger pull, excellent for accuracy, and acceptable for cost. Overall, it is very acceptable to me, especially considering the price, and the fact that it will probably last forever. To me, Charter is very close to Ruger, but costing somewhat less. The Charter weighs much less than other Ruger revolvers, with the exception of the LCR. So, for a snubbie .38, the Charter remains my choice. I cannot expect a Charter to compete with a Security Six, or a GP 100. A 20 ounce Charter, that can fit in your pocket, will never shoot as well as a Security Six that weighs nearly twice as much. But, that Security Six is not gonna fit in your pocket, either. Apples to Oranges. In other words, you cannot compare a Charter to a Blackhawk, a Redhawk, or most other Ruger firearms. You can only compare it to a LCR. And nobody knows if a LCR is gonna be shooting as good in 25 years as my 25 year old Charter does.
And, comparing Charter to Smith or Colt? Yep, those two are without a doubt, nicer than my Charter. Does a Model 36 Smith shoot better? or more accurately? Or will it last longer? Don't know. I've never had any of them fail. One thing I do know...When I'm carrying my Charter, under motorcycle leather, I sure wouldn't want to have to worry about sweating on a nice Smith.
Now, I suppose everybody has a point in the acceptability spectrum, in which if a product falls below a certain point, they will not accept it. Your standard is obviously higher than mine. All I know is, my Charters always work, they're as smooth and well made as any modern Ruger, but they're lighter than Rugers all-metal counterparts. I also have a standard on this spectrum chart, in which I will not buy a brand of gun. Taurus, and Rossi, for example, are below this point, to me, and I will not own them.
So, this acceptability point is arbitrary between different folks. You hate Charters, and I like them.
WAYNO.
I have tried my best to buy it from him :lol:
