My New Charter Arms Off Duty .38 Special Revolver.

[Bassat]

I picked up my new CA Off Duty at Range USA this afternoon. As usual, the in-store experience was pretty good. I did pick up 2 boxes of FMJFP, also. One MagTech and one S&B. They were a bit salty, but I expect that in the store. I'll get some 148/158gr WCs after I shoot this up. I did not fire it today. That appears to be a good thing. On to my impressions...

TLDR version. It is a cheap gun. I got what I paid for, mostly. I hope it works as intended.

The good:
It is a reasonably attractive gun. It is very light. It comes in a plastic case, with a lock, and all sorts of papers nobody ever reads. It shipped with a large(r) 3-finger grip, which is OK. EVERY SINGLE AD or REVIEW I'VE EVER SEEN, this gun wears a boot grip. I can live with it. I'll pay $20 for a boot grip; I never would have paid for this grip. Finish seems about right for cheap gun, but nothing to write home about. Lockup is solid. It is made in the USA.

The bad:
Fit leaves a bit to be desired. The side plates are not machined to blend smoothly with the frame (top of the trigger guard). The ejector rod is two-piece, and both pieces are gritty/catchy, and the entire ejector system seems under-engineered. The same word, under-engineered applies to the crane, also. The entire The top of the grip, at the top of the backstrap hangs over the backstrap more than a bit. Maybe because it was made for the boot grip? I'll let you know when I put the boot grip on. The trigger is unbelievably gritty. Ditto the cylinder release. After 250 dry fires, and about 100 open/close the cylinder ops, it seems much better. There is no stacking, but can certainly feel the internals engaging. There is a noticeably tick in the trigger that I assume where it engages the transfer bar. Actual hammer release is clean and crisp, so that is something.

The Indifferent:
I really don't care about having to buy a boot grip for this gun. At least I'll also have this one for range time, if I want to use it. I ordered the black version online, and got the flat finish bare metal version. That is the store, though, not the MFR or the gun itself. Again, I don't care. The lock is a cheap plactic POS. A six-year-old could get it off with hammer, quickly.

Just a bit of perspective, if you don't mind. I've had many revolvers in the past. S&W, Taurus 85CH, Taurus 441 (.44 spl), Rossi 720 (.44 spl), and a Rossi 518 (.22LR). None of them were anything special, or much to make a fuss over. But, each and every one of them was smoother (trigger, ejector, cylinder release) and had much better fit and finish than my new CA Off Duty. (EDIT: I also have Kahr CM9, and Keltec P32. Both were better out of the box than this gun.) In defense of my new hardware, I bought for use as a pocket carry EDC. Its main test? Reliability: does it go off when I pull the trigger? Secondary test is accuracy: I'll be happy if I can put an entire cylinder into a 6" circle, in a hurry, at 7 yards. If it proves reliable, and accurate to my meager standards, I will be satisfied with my purchase.

I'll get to the range next week. It needs more dry-fire and open/close/eject action before I try to run it with live ammo. More to come.

 

[Bassat]

I gave the Off Duty a good workout and cleaning today. Dry fire ~250 times, open/close the cylinder over 100 times, and thoroughly cleaned the gun. It is WAY smoother now than out of the box. It still isn't on par with my old Rossi 720, but at least the action is smoothe... enough. Trigger, cylinder rotation, ejector rod, everything. It feels a bit more like a precision machined piece of hardware, now. I plan to get to the range Wednesday.

 

[MrSmitty]

I carried a Charter Arms off duty for close to 20 years, for quite a while it was my only handgun, Good workhorse guns, nothing fancy, but they work.....ask Son of Sam.......ok, ignore that part.....

 

[Bassat]

I got the Charter Arms boot grip yesterday. Nice almost hard rubber, with enough texture to make such a small grip use-able. It fits as poorly as the grip that came with the gun. I was hoping for better. A trip to Range USA is on the books for this afternoon.

 

[Bassat]

I carried a Charter Arms off duty for close to 20 years, for quite a while it was my only handgun, Good workhorse guns, nothing fancy, but they work.....ask Son of Sam.......ok, ignore that part.....

OK. That will be easy enough. Later today, hopefully.

 

[Bassat]

Ok, here are a few photos.
Photo 1 shows several things. Flimsy-ness of entire crane and ejector rod, though I should have gotten a shot of it while open. Notice poor fit of crane into receiver, and how sideplates hang over into trigger area, and how much space the grip takes away from getting middle finger higher on the gun. It is almost 1/2", which feels like a lot. More commentary after I fire it.
Photo 2 shows the unfinished MIM cast marks on the trigger itself.
Photo 3 shows the gap between the sides of the grip and the frame. I can't feel it when holding the gun, but it is not attractive.
Photos 4&5 show how the grip hangs above the frame at the top rear. Again, it doesn't seem to affect anything. Again, unattractive.
Photo 6 is a close-up of the bulk of the grip where I'd like to put my middle finger while firing this gun. Just a bit under 1/2" doesn't sound like much, but it is going to affect shooting this 12-ounce little teeny-tiny gun. Of course, I can always put the full-size (3-finger) grip back on - and sacrifice some concealability for the sake of control.

None of my nit-picks on this gun make me want to dump it. It is CHEAP gun. If I am ever in a situation where LE needs to confiscate it, it has served its purpose. I will reserve judgement on it until it has had a chance to prove itself at the range. If it goes bang every time I ask it to, and allows me to put lead where I want it, I will be happy with it.

After extensive reading on SD ammunition, I have decided to start with 158gr wadcutters. 148/158gr wadcutters seem to get the penetration required, albeit w/o expansion. My two favorites for 9mm and 45acp are Hornady Critical Defense, and Federal HST, HST 130gr Micro has been discontinued in .38 SPL. Not that it matters, both expanded nicely, but did not penetrate sufficiently in .38 spl. I won't be using +P in this gun.

 

[92FSTech]

It's no Smith, that's for sure, but I guess it's not supposed to be. I'll be interested to hear how it does on the range.

 

[Bassat]

Well, today's range trip was a revelation of sorts. At 7 yards, I could keep slow fire to about 3" diameter, dead at the point of aim. Aimed rapid fire expanded to about 6". The Holy Spit cylinder dump had about 20% fliers out 5"+ from point of aim. The rest were spread out vertically from point of aim downward but still on the 8" targets. Ok, it is a very short sight-radius and a crappy trigger. Accuracy and trigger control was acceptable for my first (100 rounds) outing. I was pretty tired of that little gun after 60-70 rounds. The bad parts were ejector is very short; I had to pull 2-3 casings out of the cylinder every time. That will improve with practice and technique. The even 'badder' part was the cylinder release seemed to require some finessing. It felt like the spent rounds were binding the cylinder sometimes, other times it felt like the cylinder release was almost not doing its job. Oh, and I one (out of 100 rounds) light primer strike. It went off the second time, so I possibly limp-wristed that one.

Conclusions? Unless I get appreciably better at clearing spent brass and reloading the cylinder, this will always and forever be a BUG. I trust my Kahr CM9, after 1200+ flawless rounds, to do its part if I ever need it to. I carry it 6+1 (don't trust the 7-round mag) and 1 or 2 spare 6-round mags. Right now it seems like the Off Duty is only good for a 5-round fight, then I'm on my own. Not sure I'm happy with that.

For giggles, I went out to the store after my range time and handled a S&W 442. The difference was quite noticeable. Trigger, cylinder release, and ejector were all way smoother on the brand new 442 than on my 500 dry-fires and hundreds of cylinder open/close cycles. The crane and ejector mechanisms are also made of way thicker metal. One thing I thought odd was that the S&W boot grip is cut the same way as the CA; with a lot of grip keeping my middle finger almost 1/2" lower on the gun than seems possible. Perhaps I am missing something.

 

[DadSmith]

Well, today's range trip was a revelation of sorts. At 7 yards, I could keep slow fire to about 3" diameter, dead at the point of aim. Aimed rapid fire expanded to about 6". The Holy Spit cylinder dump had about 20% fliers out 5"+ from point of aim. The rest were spread out vertically from point of aim downward but still on the 8" targets. Ok, it is a very short sight-radius and a crappy trigger. Accuracy and trigger control was acceptable for my first (100 rounds) outing. I was pretty tired of that little gun after 60-70 rounds. The bad parts were ejector is very short; I had to pull 2-3 casings out of the cylinder every time. That will improve with practice and technique. The even 'badder' part was the cylinder release seemed to require some finessing. It felt like the spent rounds were binding the cylinder sometimes, other times it felt like the cylinder release was almost not doing its job. Oh, and I one (out of 100 rounds) light primer strike. It went off the second time, so I possibly limp-wristed that one.

Conclusions? Unless I get appreciably better at clearing spent brass and reloading the cylinder, this will always and forever be a BUG. I trust my Kahr CM9, after 1200+ flawless rounds, to do its part if I ever need it to. I carry it 6+1 (don't trust the 7-round mag) and 1 or 2 spare 6-round mags. Right now it seems like the Off Duty is only good for a 5-round fight, then I'm on my own. Not sure I'm happy with that.

For giggles, I went out to the store after my range time and handled a S&W 442. The difference was quite noticeable. Trigger, cylinder release, and ejector were all way smoother on the brand new 442 than on my 500 dry-fires and hundreds of cylinder open/close cycles. The crane and ejector mechanisms are also made of way thicker metal. One thing I thought odd was that the S&W boot grip is cut the same way as the CA; with a lot of grip keeping my middle finger almost 1/2" lower on the gun than seems possible. Perhaps I am missing something.

Get ahold of Charter Arms see if they will fix the problems you're having.

 

[Bassat]

Get ahold of Charter Arms see if they will fix the problems you're having.

Maybe, after a few more range trips. I haven't fired a revolver in 20 years. Like any other skill, shooting these is a perishable skill. I honestly believe, at this point, that the CA Off Duty is a cheaply designed, cheaply manufactured piece of hardware. If/when I get to the point I can load/unload it quickly, I'd be pretty happy with it, considering what it is. I had CA Bulldog .44spl years ago. It was not significantly different. I guess I have a thing for cheap guns.

 

[92FSTech]

The even 'badder' part was the cylinder release seemed to require some finessing. It felt like the spent rounds were binding the cylinder sometimes, other times it felt like the cylinder release was almost not doing its job. Oh, and I one (out of 100 rounds) light primer strike. It went off the second time, so I possibly limp-wristed that one.

These two things are big problems, but both could be bad ammo, not the gun. What kind of ammo were you using?

I could see the cylinder may be binding with poor QC reloads that might have a slightly high primer or two, but it shouldn't be happening with factory ammo. Did you check the primers and make sure they were all flush? Does it feel like that all the time or only after shooting?

Light strikes with a revolver are not going to be caused by limp-wristing. One of the reasons I like a revolver as a BUG is that it's action is completely self-contained and not dependent upon external forces to actuate it. There's no slide to cycle or go out of battery. As such, it's an excellent choice for a gun that might be fired in any variety of non-standard grips and shooting positions, such as might be necessary in an entangled fight. A light strike in a revolver is either a gun problem or an ammo problem...it can't be blamed on the shooter.

The grips being designed to fill the space behind the trigger guard is intentional. Those light little guns have a habit of jumping around in your hand under recoil, and they'll rap your knuckles good against the back of the trigger guard when that happens. Grips that fill that space really help prevent that, and being a little bit thicker up front also helps get a solid grip to avoid that movement in the first place. The old-school Tyler T-Grip was an early design to address that issue (the ones on my 19 are a cheaper plastic version made by BK Grips). I'm a big fan of the factory S&W J-Frame rubber boot grips, too, although they could come up a little higher on the hammerless Centennial models.

When I shoot a DA revolver, I like to get my hand up as high on the horn of the backstrap as possible. This helps with recoil control and also positions my middle finger perfectly on that style of grip that fills the area behind the trigger guard. That finger comes into the grip at almost a 45 degree downward angle, not straight on from behind. That big gap between the tops of the grip panels on your gun and the side of the frame would drive me nuts, as I want a smooth transition there to spread the recoil force out over a larger area in the web of my hand. That narrow exposed metal backstrap looks like it would hurt and wear you out pretty quick. The edges created by the frame being proud to the sideplates aren't going to help either.

I've been known to trim or sand off finger grooves if they're positioned in a such a way that they pull my grip downward away from the top of the backstrap. Here's a couple of .44s that I modified the grips on. I'm still working on a better solution than the Pachmayrs for the 329 because I don't like the way they attach, they extend too far off the butt, and most importantly they don't go high enough on the backstrap. It's currently wearing wood and I'm wearing a glove.

 

[Bassat]

Well, another trip to Range USA today. The gun performed admirably. The trigger is lighter/smoother after 500+ dry fires and cylinder cycles. I did prove to myself today that cheaper is not always less expensive. I bought 400 rounds of Magtech .38 SPL 148gr LWC for a bargain basement price. I got bargain basement performance... from the ammo, not from the gun. I had a total of 9 light primer strikes with the Magtech. Seven of them fired on the second try. The other 2 got run through the gun at least once in each section of the cylinder (what term is escaping me here?) with no results. I thought 'gun' or 'ammo'? It would really smoke my goat if it was the gun. It wasn't. I went out to the retail store and got a box of Remington ammo. It all went bang without hesitation. That makes me happy. My little CA works! Next? SD ammo. Not even considering SJHP ammo or anything like Critical Defense or HST. I want a RELIABLE 148gr or 158gr LWC or LSWC. More homework.
Oh, and just for giggles, I am having so much fun with my new revolver that I am considering a 4" 6-shot all-steel .357 magnum for my next gun. Taurus 65, most likely.
EDIT 3/3/24: I ended up buying a 4" S&W 686+

 

[Bassat]

Another update. I took my new 686+ to the range, and figure as long as I'm hauling some .38 ammo, I may as well take along the Off Duty. Last trip, I had some misfires w/MagTech ammo, about 1 per cylinder. I put 25 rounds of MagTech through it with no issues. I also fired (or attempted to fire) 25 rounds of either Fiocchi or Federal (can't remember, too lazy to go look in range bag). There were 3 mis-fires out of those 25 rounds. All 3 went off on the 2nd hit. I contacted Charter Arms customer service, and explained the issue to them. Their response was, "Shoot 250 rounds of something that works. Then get back with us." Not exactly re-assuring, but at this point, I'm not absolutely sure it is the gun. I have ordered 4 more boxes of 4 different brands of .38SPL, and another box of Remington (which worked the first time). I hope to get back to the range on Wednesday this week. That will be with the G21, and possibly the 686+. Waiting on new ammo to run through the Off Duty.

 

[92FSTech]

It should ALL work. Did that same ammo work in the 686?

 

[Bassat]

It should ALL work. Did that same ammo work in the 686?

I get it; the gun should fire whatever I put in, within reason. All factory, brand-name ammo, for sure. I'll put a few cylinders of different ammo through when I get it. Not in a hurry, I'm not carrying this until all is resolved. Essentially, it is still in the 'break-in' period. No, I did not try any of the LWC in the 686. Only FMJ, so far.

 

[92FSTech]

A revolver shouldn't require any break in for reliability. Its trigger and action may smooth out some as it accumulates trigger cycles, but it's not going to get better at igniting primers over time. I've never had a problem with Magtech or Fiocci ammo, and I've shot a lot of it, especially Magtech. If it's Federal that's giving you trouble, that's an even bigger problem as their primers tend to be the easiest to ignite.

Did you get a chance to look at the rounds that didn't fire? Is the primer impact centered on the primer? Anything else would indicate a timing issue.

 

[Route 45]

I guess I have a thing for cheap guns.

How much have you spent on ammo to make sure it's reliable, and you still don't 100% trust it?

Might want to rethink your math.

 

[Bassat]

I get the last two points: ammo expense, and fresh out of the box reliability. My problem is the inconsistency of the error. First range day, 100 rounds (50 Magtech, 50 S&B), 1 misfire that went off the second time. Second range day, out of 100 MagTech I had 9 misfires, 7 of the went off on subsequent hits. 2 never went off, even after 5-10 hits, at least one in each charge hole. Then 50 rounds of Remington w/o a problem. Third trip, 5 cylinders of Magtech, and not one misfire. 5 cylinders of Fiocchi (I checked), and one misfire in each cylinder full, but not in the same hole. It shoots Magtech, and S&B, then it doesn't shoot Magtech. It shoots Remington. Then it shoots Magtech and is inconsistent w/Fiocchi, IN DIFFERENT charge holes almost every time (5 mis-fires in 4 different locations). BTW, all misfired rounds had primer hits that looked just like all the other primer hits that did work.

I don't know what the problem is, but I am willing to collect a bit more data. If that data helps CA fix/replace the gun, all well and good. If the problem shoots itself out, I'm fine with that, too. If it doesn't, a day at the range with a gun that is acting up is still way better than a day at work. And I am going to shoot all that ammo, anyway. Next trip, I will keep spent rounds, segregated by brand, and hold out the mis-fires. I'm not even sure if I should try the misfires a second time. They may have more diagnostic value unfired. I am not in a hurry here.

 

[92FSTech]

I'd also try shooting the same types of ammo in your 686...maybe divide the boxes in half and shoot half in each gun. If the problem is present in both guns, you know it's the ammo. If not, then it's almost certainly a gun problem.

 

[Bassat]

I'd also try shooting the same types of ammo in your 686...maybe divide the boxes in half and shoot half in each gun. If the problem is present in both guns, you know it's the ammo. If not, then it's almost certainly a gun problem.

That is a good idea. It is boogered up a bit by the inconsistency of the Off Duty, but if ALL of it works in the 686, that makes a pretty loud statement.