Savage 42 vs Double Badger.

jaguar

jaguar

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Location
south eastern ontario
Kicking around the idea of one or the other.
Have a vintage Model 24 .22/.410 which is great, but in lovely shape & not for knocking around in the truck.
The 42 is nice enought but priced a bit above the D-Badger.
Also the D-Badger is available in 22 mag over 410 which might be the seller.
That along with its ability to fold up so compact.
Opinions welcome, esp like to hear from someone who has a D-Badger in 22mag.
Cheers
Jaguar
 
I'm still waiting with my fingers crossed for the new badgers that are .22/20ga and resemble the older M6 scouts.
 
Due to my medical condition, compolsive gun buying, I currently own both. The weather has been a bit cold to to a side be side comparison but will when I can but at this point I like both but hate the sites on the Savage. If Savage had better sights I might not have bought the Badger.
 
Funny that you mention the sights HeadDamage. That is about the only thing I would upgrade on my old Model 24; those flimsy rear sights. Would be nice to have a more solid version that could be changed out with the originals rather than the gun being modified.
Thanks for the input.
Cheers
Jaguar
 
I have the 42 in 22mag 410. shot it this weekend and it shoots great. agreed the sights are not the best but overall i wont part with it.
 
No love for this little gun eh . Well if they come out with more caliber selections I may be tempted to get another one or the Chiappa depending on price and availability .
 
I've taken the double badger and 42 out to the range. I'm sort of stuck, I like both.

With the 42 I don't like the sights and extractor system on the 42 (fiddly removing 22lr brass), nor do I like the fact that it doesn't fold in half. I do like the way it feels/handles and the action release is really slick, makes reloads for the 410 barrel quick and easy.

With the double badger I don't like the action release and the triggers are a bit tricky with gloves due to limited space, also the fit and finish is a little rough but not horrible. I do like the feel of the gun and the sights are great as are the extractors. I did loosen and lube the action pivot point to easy opening the action but it is very awkward compared to the 42 in this area.

The 42 has a sort of trigger think in front of the trigger guard that you pull and the action drops open. The badger requires you to operate the trigger guard like a lever action to open the action but it is stiff and awkward to do, I found it easiest to keep hold of the gun with my right hand and pull the guard down with my left hand, this required the loosening of the action pivot to allow the action to drop open. Without loosening this method would not work.

Overall I find that I'd give the edge to the badger due to the sights and the lower price though they are both neat guns.
 
I have a 42 and am very pleased with it. Its no beauty queen but form and function are top notch. The sites are horrible so I installed an EGW rail with a red dot. Its the kind of gun that makes you feel like a kid again-great to grab n go when you want to tromp through the bush with the dogs or there's a chance of seeing some small game. Great for the quad for chickens. Price is a bit high but fair if you consider the price of a 410 and a 22.

Jeff Quinn's take on the 42: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPpx9p4s5EE
 
Last edited:
My preference is the 24's (and 242's) but you might also check out the Baikals in either 22LR and 22WRM over 410 if the 42 doesn't appeal to you. About the same price and made with wood rather than plastic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom