Previous Post
Next Post

That’s right – I said .40 cal, as in the .40 S&W.  This sturdy little revolver has a patented detent that allows a rimless cartridge to snap snugly into the cylinder and stay there until you intentionally eject it.  No “moon clips” needed…

I gave it a try with an inert cartridge provided by the nice guys manning Charter Arm’s booth. It takes just a little finger pressure to load, but the cartridge snaps into place. No idea how a speed loader would work, or even if a speed loader is available.

Beyond this interesting innovation, it seems to be a rugged, well made revolver.  Pull the trigger, bang.  I noted that the trigger did not have that gritty feel as my Smith J-Frame 642.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. That’s a good idea. I like the Charter .44 special, but it can be hard to find that ammo. .40 would give you similar performance, and be much easier to acquire. I don’t know where you’re finding these gritty S&Ws though. The Charters I see in the local shop all have significantly less refined triggers than the S&Ws. However, the new management of Charter seems to have improved quality control over previous incarnations of the company, and I would trust a new production Charter far sooner than I would trust a Taurus. They are a solid gun, and a good bargain. Assuming that extractor works, this pistol should get you a nice amount of stopping power for the money and weight.

    • Ammo has a nasty habit of having the bullets pulled forward under recoil, especially with small, light-weight revolvers. 38s and 357 are designed for revolvers and are properly crimped. 9mm, 40s and 45s, not so much. All to0 often we see 9mm heads jamming the works. The problem is so common, some manufactures mark their ammo “not for revolvers.”

      Being a high pressure cartridge, expect to see even more problems with the 40 with small, light-weight revolvers.

      • I would definitely stick with lighter weight bullets in a revolver. Low mass = less inertia = less pull on the case neck. I’d be doing that anyway, just because revolvers have no springs to absorb recoil, so the impulse is sharper with the same ammo.

  2. I’d be interested to see chrony results. So long as velocity remained high enough for proper expansion, it’d make a great BUG for someone that shoots/carries a .40 already.

  3. “Pull the trigger, bang.”

    I have not heard good things about the quality, reliability, and accuracy of CA. I do not now see this new gun featured on their website.

    • There’s a link right on the front page of the Charter site to this product page…

      It might be easy to overlook because they don’t say “.40”, they just say “Pitbull Rimless”. If you don’t know that “rimless” means “semi-auto cartridge”, it’s not immediately obvious that this is the one. They should probably include the caliber.

      They’ve also got a link to a Gunblast review, and Jeff Quinn seems to share my opinion that the new Charters are solid little guns.

      • Thanks Jason, I appreciate your reply. Maybe the CA are now more reliable. Personally, I no longer trust Jeff’s writing on gun reliability issues.

        • I would like to hear more about this comment on Jeff and why you don’t trust his reviews. I turned my back on Jeff for a different reason. I once met him and it was not a good experience. I then saw on You Tube his tribute to General Nathan Bedford Forest (Founding member of Klu Klux Klan). It then became more clear why he would not speak to me after he walked over to our table and I said “Hi”, but he would speak to my friend standing next to me that is white. I never had a problem with his reviews, but I have not watched his reviews in a while.

        • My guess is its the fact that gun blast has never had a negative review of anything ever. Either Jeff Quinn is the luckiest man alive when it comes to receiving T & E guns or just like the gun magazines he doesn’t want to offend the manufacturers by giving them any negative feedback.

        • Or he does the American Rifleman trick of simply not publishing a review of anything that doesn’t work well. That doesn’t mean the manufacturers don’t get negative feedback, it’s just that the feedback isn’t public. As a consumer, I prefer as much information as possible, but that’s one way of avoiding offense while not recommending things that don’t measure up.

        • That’s also a possibility. His reviews are fine if you are just looking for specs and decent pictures of the weapon.

        • Revolvers are supposed to be simple and reliable, adding something spring loaded “thingy” to keep rounds in cylinder just seems like a problem waiting to happen.
          My S&W 19 with 2.5″ barrel works for me.
          General Forest – Not only the KKK – Fort Pillow massacre by troops under his command.
          I do read his reviews for whatever info I can get.
          Haven’t ever read a review of a firearm or accessory that he didn’t like.
          Maybe they only send him the good stuff.

        • Gee, the guy at Gunblast doesn’t look like the sort of person that would pay tribute to the Klan at all.

  4. Interesting idea. Id love to check this out. I just hope Charter Arms keeps the price reasonable. In the end, its still just a Charter Arms.

  5. I remember reading something some where that they are going to do these in 9mm and 45 acp as well. A 9mm would be kinda cool as I think you could run .380 thru it no problem

    • I don’t think you could use 380s in a 9mm revolver. The rim diameter is smaller on a 380, and I bet it wouldn’t snap into their cylinder gizmo.

  6. I’d personally like a revolver (Ruger GP100 size or so) in .40 S&W and 10mm… but it seems that nobody has this idea ‘cept me… however obvious it seems.

  7. Nice idea but Charter’s quality is not great, their customer service is slow and why do I need a 2 1/2 inch thick revolver when I can get a kahr in .40 that is thin and carries more ammo?


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here