|
|
Post by tdoyle on Mar 7, 2013 23:52:24 GMT -5
Looked at the savage model 42 today .22 l.r. over .410, saw no way to mount a scope, liked it but my old man eyes need a scope, would even consider a red dot.
|
|
|
|
Post by savagecombo on Mar 8, 2013 15:17:17 GMT -5
Looked at the savage model 42 today .22 l.r. over .410, saw no way to mount a scope, liked it but my old man eyes need a scope, would even consider a red dot. With so many Savage 24s on the market every day, I don't understand why you would even consider the "toy like" 42. SC |
|
petemi
Will probably stay
Posts: 69
|
Post by petemi on Mar 8, 2013 15:54:20 GMT -5
I'm surprised that instead of continuing the 24, Savage brought out that ugly piece of junk.
Pete
|
|
|
|
Post by savagecombo on Mar 8, 2013 19:19:27 GMT -5
I'm surprised that instead of continuing the 24, Savage brought out that ugly piece of junk. Pete Quality built guns like the 24 are too expensive to manufacture today. The 42 has what appears to be two barrels pressed into a cheap receiver block and then attached to a "BB gun" type stock. But the 42 falls right into today's way of thinking with "use it a few times and then throw it into a land fill." SC |
|
|
|
Post by cas on Mar 8, 2013 23:11:53 GMT -5
I played with the 42 quite a bit at the Shot Show and I think it's a great $150-$175 utility gun.
Savage however….
|
|
|
|
Post by vancmike on Mar 16, 2013 12:39:37 GMT -5
cas, what was the trigger like? If they'd put the Accutrigger on it, I'd pay as much as $180......
however......
|
|
|
|
Post by savagecombo on Mar 16, 2013 19:30:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by tdoyle on Mar 17, 2013 0:12:13 GMT -5
i have 6 model 24's and 3 baikal model izh 94 combo's, simply interested in the newest model, didn't ask for snide remarks just advice on scope mounting if possible,thanks for all your help.
|
|
|
|
Post by Karl on Mar 17, 2013 8:50:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by tdoyle on Mar 17, 2013 16:39:14 GMT -5
Thanks Karl
|
|
petemi
Will probably stay
Posts: 69
|
Post by petemi on Mar 19, 2013 11:49:44 GMT -5
i have 6 model 24's and 3 baikal model izh 94 combo's, simply interested in the newest model, didn't ask for snide remarks just advice on scope mounting if possible,thanks for all your help. I'm sorry. I don't mean to be snide. I just feel it is a sorry state of affairs for our nation when our manufacturers compromise quality for cost and/or move their operations overseas. I remember a time when we had pride. I guess I'm just too old for our new values. I think I'll go to Walmart this afternoon just to see if I can find something made in the USA. I found some toilet paper the last time I was there. Pete |
|
|
|
Post by cas on Mar 19, 2013 12:12:51 GMT -5
^ The food. And don't tell me there's any difference between the Kraft American cheese I buy at Wal-Mart for $3.25, than the same size Kraft American cheese the grocery store wants $5.25 for. But now were off topic and turning political, which is out of bounds. Savage couldn't make a Model 24 that anyone wanted to buy, for a price anyone was willing to pay. And I'm including all the years they made the 24F. The MSRP for that ugly monster was shocking. That's the 42's biggest problem, you can still find stacks of used 24's for less money than the 42, but the 42's not 1/3 the gun any used, beat up clunker 24 is. The 42's not a replacement for the 24, it fills the niche of the Springfield Scout. It's certainly more ergonomic for shooting. But again it's twice the production price the Scout was and I wasn't afraid parts were going to snap off the Scout if I dropped it. It instilled the feeling of neither durability or longevity. It felt like a Kel-Tec, but with fragile little add ons than were likely to snap off.  |
|
|
|
Post by vancmike on Mar 20, 2013 9:48:23 GMT -5
Just to follow up.....I trust giving an opinion on a firearm isn't being "snide...." It's giving an opinion. But it's hard to judge the Mdl 42 without appearing to be snide to its fans.
Now I admit I haven't fired a Mdl 42.....but yesterday, I wandered down to one of our fine retailers (mostly so I could look for 22 ammo and make snide remarks if anyone asked me about availability and prices of same) and did indeed find a Mdl 42 in stock.
I think cas is being unfair to Kel-Tec....the 42 appears much less rugged than the Kel-Tec pistols I've fired (or attempted to fire, in between jams).
Appearance is subjective. So some may not find the 42's looks and design ugly (..."look, Maude....it's got way-cool red stripes and manufacture's branding...."). But the rear sight, which appears to be of some sort of mystery material, looks like it could snap off just sliding it into a case.
The extractor, which hangs out on both sides when the action is closed, is so large it hampers loading of shells. Maybe I could get accustomed to that.
The stock has that hollow sound usually available only on plastic trucks I've purchased for my grandson. It does have a nice thump, just behind the pistol grip.....maybe it was intended to be multi-purposed into a drum for children's rock groups.....
OK, I'll stop. I'm sounding snide.....
|
|
|
|
Post by cas on Mar 20, 2013 10:35:50 GMT -5
The biggest turn offs to me, price aside, were the sight which as you (and I) said, look like they will snap off. That and the little sheet metal tab extractors. They brought to mind all the Marlin 22 bolt action extractors, with a much sturdier metal.. and the problems I ran across with those. I can't see the ones on the 42 holding up.
I know it sounds like we're just bashing now. The thing is the gun really started to grow on me the more I played with it. But those two things just killed it. I'd buy the wobbly Chiappa Double Badger for less money first.
|
|
|
|
Post by vancmike on Mar 20, 2013 13:55:45 GMT -5
I haven't seen the Double Badger in person yet....is it wobbly at the hinge?
I have seen other Ciappa: the Mini-Sharps, 1911-22 and 1874 Sharps. My impression is that their higher-end models have a nice level of fit and finish, the lower-priced models not so much.
|
|
