TTAG’s had its issues with Charter Arms. Or vice versa. Charter really, really didn’t like it when we pointed out that the Son of Sam spree killer (a.k.a. the “.44 caliber killer”) made their Bulldog famous. We also gave their Target Mag Pug one star. And so on. Now the all-American revolver maker’s gone and introduced a 9mm version of the Pitbull, caps lock and all. “The 9mm Rimless Revolver PITBULL uses the same unique rimless cartridge extractor assembly system as the Charter Arms .40 cal Rimless Revolver. A dual coil spring assembly located in the extractor allows insertion and retention of a 9mm cartridge in each chamber of the revolver’s cylinder. After firing, the shooter can easily eject the spent cartridges for immediate reloading . . .
That would be the same system Dan slated at SHOT show for the fact that you had to prise out the spent cartridges with a blade. Of course, it’s certainly possible that the press gun was pressed into service a few too many times and Charter’s sorted its S out and anyway . . .
Nick Ecker, President of Charter Arms, added, “Shooting enthusiasts will appreciate owning an American made revolver in 9mm and finding ammo is readily available and affordable. With its reduced recoil, the PITBULL is user friendly for even the beginning shooter.”
Note to Charter: the world’s most popular firearms blog is ready to test a sample. Fair and slightly mentally unbalanced, that’s us.
Specs for the 9mm Rimless Revolver PITBULL include:
Model #: 79920
Capacity: 6 shot
Barrel length: 2.2″
Frame: Stainless Steel Glass Beaded
Grip: Neoprene
Overall length: 6.75″
Height: 5″
Weight: 22 oz.
Hammer: Spurred
MSRP: $465
I really, really, want to like Charter Arms. But I can’t. I know revolvers are actually quite a bit more complicated than semi-autos, but their reliability should be >> Glock since they are not dependent on ammo or mags.
revolvers arent dependent on ammo but glocks are????
revolvers are much more complicated than semis??? in function??? or something else??
Why would I get a 9mm revolver instead of a .38? I would go for the .38.
Why would I get a .38 when I can get a .357?
Why would I get a .357 when I can get a .44? Why would I get a .44 when I can get a .50? Why would I get a .50 when I can get a… Everyone is most comfortable with some specific weapon. If 9mm is all you can handle, then go 9mm.
That,.. and $20 on the 100ct box of 9mm at Walmart keeps me shooting every weekend. I really hope Charter get’s their stuff together on this on.
the 9mm is much more powerfull than the 38 spcl. 9mm 124 gr @1100 fps,
38 125 gr @900fps. and the ammo for the 9mm is cheaper.
Because 9 mm has much better stopping power than a .38, is just as cheap to shoot, and much less recoil than a .357, is lighter weight than a .40 and .45. Just a few reasons. It’s the most popular cartridge in the world besides the .22 LR.
isn”t this the extraction system that when you load the revolver you have to firmly push each round in till it snaps in place or it might not seat properly? i’ve only owned 1 charter arm’s, a 38 back in the 80′s. it was decent enough but it wasn’t a j frame.
I too look at this handgun and immediately say to myself…why??? With so many other revolver options in a better caliber and so many better 9mm options…
And how is a 9mm six-shot revolver any better than the M&P 9c or Glock 19, which are roughly the same price point and, even here in Calfornia, carry more ammo? Or is the 9mm revolver a solution in search of a problem?
Aren’t there some design details of the cartridge shells and bullets why 9, 40, and 45 caliber should be left to the semi-auto handguns?
Something about recoil dislodging (lengthening and preventing advancement of the cylinder) the bullets?
I read about it long ago. Something about the end of the shell casing and also the shape of the bullet head too. I’m not sure. I think a bigger problem is trying to make 38, 357, 44, usable in a semi-auto. There were also comments about how the 9, 40, and 45 semi auto could not be made to work in a lever action carbine as Marlin has with the 38, 357, and 44. Cartridge design and ballistics are way out of my areas of knowledge.
it has to do with the rimmed design of the 38, 357 and 44. think loading a 22 round into a mag for an auto pistol,only on a large scale. the lentgh of these rounds is a problem in designing an auto loader also. revolver rounds tend to be longer which makes for a grip that is much deeper from front to back.
“Bullet head” Media-speak for bullet.
“Bullet” Media-speak for cartridge.
I remember something like that. The recoil would unseat the bullet slightly from the casing such that the last bullets in the cylinder would stick out too far for the cylinder to rotate. Magnum handgun ammo has an extra tight crimp for that and the pressure that a 9mm doesn’t normally have.
Yes. Here’s the straight poop:
Revolver loads are crimped into a cannelure in the bullet to prevent the bullet from moving. The rim of the case is slightly crimped into the groove on the bullet, and this doesn’t matter to headspacing the cartridge because a rimmed case headspaces on the rim.
Semi-auto chamberings, however, must not be roll crimped into the bullet because the case headspaces on the mouth of the case. Semi-auto rimless ammo uses a “taper crimp” which won’t hold the bullet as positively as a roll crimp into a cannelure.
Under heavy recoil, non-crimped rounds can “walk” the bullet out of the case slightly.
Personally, I think using moon or half-moon clips to burn semi-auto ammo in a wheelgun is a “solution in search of a problem.” It isn’t as tho there’s a lack of weapons that will launch a 9, .40 or .45 round downrange. Why use a revolver? Use a semi-auto to launch semi-auto ammunition, and a revolver to launch rimmed ammo (ie, there’s no reason to own a Desert Eagle just to launch .44 Mag revolver ammo).
Everyone,
Thanks for your replies and thoughts on the issue. I appreciate it.
i had to shake the cobwebs loose from my head on this one. a 9mm revolver only makes since if you bought one of those ruger blackhawks that were being sold in the 70′s. one cylinder for 38 and 357 and one for 9mm. the extraction system was old school loading gate with a push rod.
The 9mm revolver is a solution for those who own a full sized 9mm and
want a backup in the same caliber, or possibly for those who want cheap ammo,
so it does serve a niche, just a small one.
That being said, I own a snub nose, and it’s a .38.
Common man: moon-clips > unreliable extraction
Charter Arms engineer: unreliable extraction > moon clips
I don’t know why I’d bother, when Charter .44s are so awesome. Look, Charter, I know the whole Son of Sam thing is uncomfortable, but .44 is a nearly perfect self defense cartridge. It’s been doing the job since the black powder days. Give me 5 shots of .429″ wadcutter, and I’ll storm the gates of hell itself. And you make the smallest 5-shot double action .44 revolver! What’s not to like? The design is great, and I’ll bet it wouldn’t take much to clean up that trigger. You’ve got a piece of American history in your portfolio. Ride it hard and put it away wet.
I’d love to see the return of the .44 Special as a readily available round–on the shelf in the store, not order on-line, I mean. I’d even be pleased with an uploaded .45 Colt round in a modern revolver. But a 9mm revolver doesn’t do it for me. Mogg says that it would be good for people with a 9mm semi-auto, but the technique for loading one is different from loading the other, so you’ll either be carrying two different spares or working rounds out of one to feed into the other. In addition, revolvers stay relevant because they can handle wide variations in power that would choke a self-loader, and they can fire Magnum cartridges without having to rig up some walloping great gas mechanism like the Desert Eagle.
All of that being said, if someone wants to give me a Medusa, I’ll take it.
The only thing that distinguishes this revolver from a .38 is the cost of ammo, at the cost of increased complexity and more to go wrong. Not sure it’s worth the effort. And for lead round nose, the difference in price is negligible. True, it is easier to find 9 in a variety of bullets almost anywhere, but I see .38 Special at Wally World too.
Add my vote for a return of the .44 Special as a self-defense round.
There’s no need for a .44 Magnum in a CCW piece, and the flash and horrific report of a .44 Mag in a short barrel length weapon is plenty of reason to not use it. The .44 Special, however, is like the .45 Colt: Highly under-utilized in CCW applications.
What I want is a reliable, five-shot revolver in .44 Special or .45 Colt, with a 2.5 to 3″ barrel, and 32 ounces or less in weight. The Charter Arms Bulldog is OK, but I’d like a better execution of the concept. Why S&W won’t *consistently* produce a .44 Special in stainless or one of the lightweight alloys is one of the mysteries of the gun market I do not understand.
You could just load down your .44 Mags to .44 Special specs. It’s not like the gun is sensitive to load power, as in a semi. Just a thought.
If you’re packing a .44 Mag just to shoot down-loaded rounds, you’re packing around a lot of extra weight you don’t need. As soon as a gun gets heavy, you get less inclined to carry it.
That’s what people miss in the CCW weapon design space. It’s not what I “could” do to make it fit the requirements, it’s that I want a weapon that is well thought out in all aspects to be a weapon that I strap on every day when I get dressed. That means it has to be light, concealable, effective, etc. I want a weapon that “just works,” is light enough to not be wearing to pack around all day, and shoots a bullet big enough to be very effective.
If push comes to shove, I might just have to build my own.
“I want a weapon that “just works,” is light enough to not be wearing to pack around all day, and shoots a bullet big enough to be very effective.”
——
Sounds like a recipe for a compact 1911 from a reputable manufacturer.
Dyspeptic Gunsmith:
“What I want is a reliable, five-shot revolver in .44 Special or .45 Colt, with a 2.5 to 3″ barrel, and 32 ounces or less in weight. ”
How about the S&W Governor? It’s a six-shot, 29.6 ounce revolver with a 2.75 inch barrel capable of firing .45 Long Colt, .45 ACP (with 2-shot mini-moon clips), and the .410 2.5 inch shot shell. It’s a fun combo and a blast to shoot. MSRP of $679.
Try it, you’ll like it.
All of these .410/.45 Colt revolvers are again, solutions in search of a problem IMO. I’ve looked at them very closely, and for a nightstand gun, maybe. For a CCW gun? No way. Part of what makes a good CCW gun is that the overall length is short, so you can get it out of a holster as quickly as possible.
What I want is simple: A light, 5-shot revolver in .44 Special or .45 Colt, with an exposed but bobbed hammer. I want it in stainless, with a 2.5 to 3.0 inch barrel, I want it to come in under 30 ounces (unloaded) weight.
S&W has done something like this, the S&W 396:
http://www.smith-wesson.com/wcsstore/SmWesson/upload/other/ProductPR/Night%20Guard%20396.pdf
The problem is, the gun rags have everyone thinking that the best guns for CCW are all semi-autos, and now we have a rash of perfectly silly CCW pistols. The few gun rag scribblers who admit that there’s some advantages to a revolver all seem to fixate on the .357 Mag.
The revolvers that make sense (small, with big, slow, low pressure rounds) aren’t in big enough demand by the public, and S&W ends up dropping them. The Charters and Taurus products just aren’t up to the level of fit and finish I’d want in a revolver – at least not without my working on said revolver for a couple days to clean a lot of things up. But when one of the things that I’d have to clean up is the timing of the lock-up… that’s when I decide that I need to look elsewhere.
IMO, everyone in the damn gun rags who advocates for a .357 or .44 Mag revolver as a carry gun should be forced to light off two rounds from one of their magnums indoors in a small room, without hearing protection. That will cure their adolescent fascination with “Magnum Mental Masturbation” in a hell of a hurry.
actually the only time i am glad to live in ca. my wife wants one of those 410/45 revolvers. they ain”t legal here so i don”t have to try to talk her out of it.
Great comments. They are ones to reflect upon. You wrote:
“The problem is, the gun rags have everyone thinking that the best guns for CCW are all semi-autos, and now we have a rash of perfectly silly CCW pistols. The few gun rag scribblers who admit that there’s some advantages to a revolver all seem to fixate on the .357 Mag.”
It would be great if a quality 44 special revolver was offered in a CCW piece. I prefer wheel guns for home defense and the same if I start CCW. I bought my SP101 for it’s overall quality build and design, and not to fire 357. I’m experimenting and researching ballistics now. I’m not really much interested in the 357 magnum selection. I am interested in the 38 special +p HP type of round for defense.
aharon, the gun i carry at home is a j frame smith. i use the load that is called the “fbi” load. a +p round with a 158 grain lead semi wadcutter hollowpoint. i also have this load in my smith model 10. it has a reputation as a formidable load and i’ve found it to be accurate in fixed sighted guns.
jwm,
Thank you for your reply! I appreciate it. You might be interested in going to the website of Grant Cunningham. He is a gunsmith that specializes in s&w, colt, and ruger revolvers and teaches self-defense classes using the revolver.
check these two links out to his site:
http://www.grantcunningham.com/blog_files/stopping_power_series.html
http://www.grantcunningham.com/self_defense_articles.html
BTW, I believe Grant uses the same load that you do.
For those who ask “why a 9mm revolver” some of us just flat out like revolvers more than semis. I like to say that an automatic pistol is a machine, but a fine revolver is a work of art.
As for “why 9mm” my primary thought would be cheap ammo. As I’ve groused about elsewhere on TTAG, the big commie ammo factories don’t seem to want to crank out .38 Spl or .357 Mag so my only choices are to reload (time consuming) or buy retail (at roughly 2x the cost of bulk 9mm.)
Having said that, I’ve been exposed to enough Charter Arms products to stay away. They’re definitely on the bargain-basement end of things. S&W made a couple of 9mm revolvers in the 80′s and 90′s, interestingly they fetch high prices now because of their rarity, especially the K frame 9mm (the numerical designation escapes me at the moment.)
The S&W 9mm revolver that didn’t use moon clips was a Model 547. A friend has one, and the extractor mechanism is obviously rather unique. There is also a little pin in the frame that sits above the firing pin; its job is to keep the tapered 9mm cases from moving rearward during firing. Overall, it’s a neat little gun, and an interesting piece of wheelgun history.
How about this for why. When the antis get around to banning all semi-autos, you will have something “legal” to use with all the 9mm ammunition…
Does anyone know if it will be offered with a 4 inch barrel?
I’m not familiar with charter. if the reviews say they are of good quality on reliability , I would love to have a 9mm revolver. For conceal and carry.
I am a revolver fan. I have three Smiths and a Ruger at present. I have a few semis in .45 and one 9mm to use up the cheap 9mm ammo I have. I will buy the 9mm Charter if the reviews are favorable because it is a revolver and the ammo is cheap (and effective). I will then ditch the 9mm semi. There is no fuss with a revolver. Since I use a handgun for defense and shooting pleasure and not in conjunction with knocking down doors I think five or six well placed shots will do me.
Waiting for one of these for a long time. The reason being that a 9mm length cylinder would make a much more concealable revolver. Not having that feature, this one seems to have no real purpose.
Saw one once built on a standard S&W frame, builder unknown. The barrel was set back to meet the cylinder and barely protruded beyond the front of the frame. I’d rather see one on a shortened frame.
i had a buddy that worked an er trama room at a hosptial. most horrific wounds and doa’s were from 357 mag. he said he would rather get shot by 45 acp than 357 mag based on the blood n guts he saw. b t w i own both and have nothing bad to say about 9 45 or 357. all awesome in my book. unless you hand load, not sure 44 spl is a top option.
I have been hoping and wishing somebody would produce a 9mm revolver again for my wife to carry. I have a KelTec p3at, which I love, but my wife has weak hands and has problems pulling the slide back to chamber the first round. I would prefer a 9mm over a 22mag or a 32. I think the .40s&w would be a bit snappy for her. I know the 380 and 9mm are very similar so I’d have to be on my toes to keep the ammo seperate, if we go this route.
Plus I’d like to graduate to a larger round for winter carry. In the summer when I usually wear shorts and a Tshirt, the 380 is nice and easy to carry as well as conceal. In the winter when heavier clothing is the norm, a larger caliber revolver would be more practicle. For me, I’d look for a 38 or 357.
If your wife has weak hands the Charter 9MM might not be the gun for her. Although I do not own a trigger pull gauge I can tell you that it is significant. Based on the known trigger pull of other revolvers I own I would estimate it in the 14-16 pound range. Definitely dry fire one before you purchase it.
does the pitbull revolver extract unreliably?? if the primary market for the revolver is/was as a backup weapon of the same platform/caliber as a primary/duty weapon, continuous and repeated extraction wasnt intended anyway…though it would be nice if it does extract reliably.
i can see that if a primary weapon in 40cal failed for some reason the pitbull can be fired and loaded from the magazines (using all the ammo if necessary) of the failed primary weapon (a semi auto) likely quicker than loading magazines into a another type of semi auto back up weapon.
it would be nice to have all one caliber laying around too incase it was needed….and likely more economical for rec shooters and home defense.
does the pitbull system have advantages over moon clip type revolvers??
if you dont need an extra part that can be confused with a quarter or lost easily or bent easily why not advocate the charter system or somethign similar…..whats there to complain about except perhaps the guns lack of quality, if it is actually a real weapon??
i dont know if a difference of approx 1/2 inch in overal cartridge length in a 9mm and 38spl makes that much difference in concealbility. if what i read is true the pitbull is a 6 round cylinder and larger than 38spl 5 round cylinders.
“”a 9mm revolver only makes since if you bought one of those ruger blackhawks that were being sold in the 70′s. “” what?
does it make sense as a backup weapon to a primary 9mm semi-auto as well??
“”the 9mm is much more powerfull than the 38 spcl. 9mm 124 gr @1100 fps,
38 125 gr @900fps. and the ammo for the 9mm is cheaper.”"
ballistically, the 9mm from a revolver would fall somewhere in between teh 357 mag and 38 spl right??
“I don’t know why I’d bother, when Charter .44s are so awesome.”
i read that the charter arms pitbull was intended as a backup of same caliber/platform as a primary/duty semi-auto. i dont think 44s are in any semi autos that are use by police and the vast majority of semi auto owners. true???
“Semi-auto chamberings, however, must not be roll crimped into the bullet because the case headspaces on the mouth of the case. Semi-auto rimless ammo uses a “taper crimp” which won’t hold the bullet as positively as a roll crimp into a cannelure.”
i dont know what you are saying here or if its even true??? if ti is true, does the charter arms pitbull system over come any problems with tapers and headspaces with respect to the guns intended operation??
“isn”t this the extraction system that when you load the revolver you have to firmly push each round in till it snaps in place or it might not seat properly”
is not seating properly a function of all revolver extraction systems?? are you being dishonest and/or obtuse?
if its a real real gun it appears to me that you push the cartridge till its flush with the cylinder…..seems simple enough.
From the videos I have seen,folks shooting the 9mm and the .40 s&w models of the Pitbulls, the extraction system seems to work fine.I like having a revolver as a choice for a backup to my autos,revolvers are more reliable,in the long run.All you have to do if a round does not fire pull the trigger again,if you have a failure to fire with an auto,you have to clear,rack,and that takes time you may not have in a ccw moment.
Contacted Charter Arms spoke with Dee Ecker,she advised that with the firearms market like it is now,there are back orders on all of their revolvers.The 9mm is the most sought after weapon,next is the .38 Undercover.I am waiting also for the .45 acp version coming out in late fall,that should make a lot of shooters happy,I know it will me!I have a DAO .38Undercover that shoots better than my colt or s&w ,but my ruger 101 shoots as good as my C.A. .38.
Want to add,I took my Charter Arms DAO .38 Undercover to my states,(Mississippi),ccw enhanced class,it’s the class where you go through training and qualify with your weapon,I shoot a score of 98 out of a possible 100, not bad for a 2 inch barrel snubbie.Really like Charter Arms revolvers and they are bringing about some innovations to the firearms industry.If anyone is curious about the class, what it does is let you be able to carry in more places that are on the forbidden list,except in courtrooms,no way.Ya’ll have a good one and Keep your powder dry.
Just bought one for the wife, loves it, no issues with extraction, or loading. The fact it uses the same ammo as my Glock 17 is a plus. She can use the same ammo, normal or speciality rounds that I do. Gun works flawless. Nough said!
John how does she handle the recoil?I have read that the 9mm revolver does not kick as bad as the .38 Undercover,my wife does not like the recoil,maybe if the recoil is not as bad,she could handle the9mm.