New .22lr/410 combo gun

[epijunkie67]

http://www.savagearms.com/firearms/model/Model42

They have revived the old concept of .22lr over a 410 shotgun barrel. Hard to find but a few places have them running about $400, which is actually cheaper than used model 24s (the old wood stocked version of this) are going for right now. They are also supposedly coming out with a .22mag/20 gauge version some time in the future.

I saw a video review of this one on youtube and it looks interesting. Very light. Personally for a "throw under the seat of the truck" walk around woods gun I prefer the synthetic stock due to it's better weather resistance but I can see how the lack of wood might bother some people.

Anyway, just thought you guys might be interested in knowing this new little toy is out there.

 

[planetmobius]

Saw them. I still like the old 24's better.

 

[rhinoh]

I've seen them in WalMarts around here quite a bit.

 

[Bushpilot]

I don't think the new Savage 42 can compare to the old model 24's. The most obvious weakness of the new gun is the manual extractor. It is a cheap, plastic and metal sliding button that is located between the barrels. It's bad enough that the cases do not automatically extract when you open the breech but the metal extractors are so thin and flimsy that you can literally bend the metal back and forth with your fingernail. All in all I think it's way over priced at $400 plus. I realize that the main attraction of the gun is having a rifle and a shotgun in one but for about the same amount of money you can buy a new 22 rifle AND a shotgun that are BOTH built better than the Savage 42.

 

[mdauben]

The most obvious weakness of the new gun is the manual extractor. It is a cheap, plastic and metal sliding button that is located between the barrels.

I'm something of a Savage fan, and always loved the old Model 24 rifle/shotguns so I was really excited when I first heard about the new Model 42. The more I hear about the new gun, however, the more disappointed I become. I think I'll just step up my search for a good used Model 24 instead.

 

[epijunkie67]

Personally I'll be more interested in seeing the .22 mag/ 20 gauge version if they ever come out with one.

 

[Pete D.]

both?

I realize that the main attraction of the gun is having a rifle and a shotgun in one but for about the same amount of money you can buy a new 22 rifle AND a shotgun that are BOTH built better than the Savage 42.

True enough. Try carrying them both at the same time.
About carrying....the old model 24 weighed six and a half pounds. This new combo weighs nearly two pounds less at four pounds eleven. A walk in the woods gun for sure.
Pete

 

[Bushpilot]

True enough. Try carrying them both at the same time.

It would easier to carry both than it would be to get off 4 or 5 shots in quick succession with the Savage 42...LOL

My point was that Savage really isn’t giving buyers their money’s worth, in either materials or design.

 

[Pete D.]

You wanna explain that four or five shots in quick succession? I am supposing that you are referring to the manual extractor slowing things down on the 42.
Maybe so....I don't see that as a major issue since break open guns - extractor or not - are not rapid fire guns in any case.
I am trying to imagine a scenario in which a person would need to shoot rapidly with either gun and have it make a difference. Rabbits? Birds? A turkey?
Help me out here.

Pete

 

[Bushpilot]

I think you answered your own questions Pete. I'm referring to the cheesy manual extractor. Even with the least expensive single shot shotgun, which often has an automatic ejector (or at least an automatic extractor, let along a manual extractor), you can be ready for reasonably quick follow-up opportunities in a variety of bird and small game situations. Plus, you really need to either turn the 42 upside down to empty it or change hands, holding it by the extractor buttons while unloading or have three hands. One to hold the gun, one to use the extractor and another to pull out the extracted shell. If you don't turn the gun upside down or let go of the gun to grab the shell, the spent shell might fall back down into the chamber. It's simply a poor design.

 

[Pete D.]

ok

OK. Thanks.
Pete

 

[jgreystoke]

Did they have to make it so ugly and flimsy looking?

The 24s were great guns, solid and handsome in a businesslike way.

 

[HOWARD J]

I liked the old ones
I had a model 22/410
Then later I had a model 24

[/URL][/IMG]
model 24

 

[gazpacho]

This is a firearm whose intended use is for rough conditions. This is a truck gun, and a back country hiking gun. I've held it, and frankly it looks like something that should have orange plastic instead of read, and have BG emblazed on the buttstock. I'm surprised they didn't put plastic Fire sights on it.

I rather have the Baikal IZH94.