Is .22 LR or WMR the better pair for a .410 combination gun? - Page 2

450mar · June 19, 2013, 03:24 AM

22 mag. The best choice.

Picher · June 19, 2013, 07:10 AM

I've had a couple of 24s, one a .22LR/20 ga. and the other a .357/20 ga. I found serious deficiencies in both as follows:

*Heavier than many rifles or shotguns;
*Factory sights poor;
*Way too heavy to carry long distances, especially with scope mounted;
*Scope height raises line of sight to an uncomfortable level;
*Triggers were not conducive to accuracy;
*Difficult to find a front sight to accommodate receiver sight;
*May not be able to find a receiver sight to fit;
*Accuracy is not on par with many bolt-actions;
*Break-open action is slow for plinking;
*The barrel selector on the hammer is better than the old receiver-mounted selector;
*My shotgun barrels had full-choke barrels, which were too tight for upland shooting, IMHO.

Generally, I don't like exposed-hammer shotguns or rifles because they're too slow to cock when flushing birds.

The original model .22/.410 is probably a good barnyard pest gun.

450mar · June 19, 2013, 03:44 PM

Why did you buy them without research???

Picher · June 19, 2013, 05:02 PM

"Why did you buy them without research???"

Because I was a young fella, and traded guns quite often, trying as many kinds as possible. The concept seemed good to me as a young adult, but they didn't really fit my needs. I was a trading fool, buying or trading for over 25 guns within three years, but never owning more than 3 at a time.

My dad never owned a gun, so he wasn't much help. I also read a lot of gun magazines, and you know that they almost never say anything bad about any gun.

Hawg · June 19, 2013, 05:37 PM

I would get more use out of a .22 LR than a WMR.

mavracer · June 19, 2013, 05:47 PM

Quote:

The concept seemed good to me as a young adult, but they didn't really fit my needs.

I certainly see how that could be a problem. They are a anomoly in the gun world. They're at their best when you really don't necessarilly plan on shooting. It's not a good shotgun and like you say scoping it is impractical so it's only a so so rifle. They make a pretty effective small game tool. If you miss with the rifle you have the shotgun ready for the running rabbit. But to me they make a nearly perfect longgun for trecking around the farm.

Pahoo · June 19, 2013, 09:02 PM

Quote:

The original model .22/.410 is probably a good barnyard pest gun.

Every December or January, a group over in Jackson country, IA., gets together for a bunny-hunt. We make sure we have plenty of snow on the ground. The fella in charge usually brings three Beagles. We hit a number of local farms and we get a bunch of rabbits and sometimes, other stuff. Most of us have either .22LR/.410 or .22LR/ 20Ga. We do a lot of switching back and forth and get plenty of head shots. This is where the 24's and I foresee the 42's, are at their best. ......

Also, every year I hunt Squirrels on land that the landowner requests I use a shotgun. I just take my 24BDL and when the chance presents itself, Pop them with a .22-Short. ....

Quote:

I found serious deficiencies in both as follows:

I've never see a 24, that did not have some kind of a problem. Most are minor and can easily be repaired. I hope we won't say the same about the 42.
Be Safe !!!

Picher · June 20, 2013, 06:58 AM

My first 24 had the selector on the receiver, but when the hammer snapped off and the gun sent to the factory, they installed the new hammer with the selector on it and left the non-functioning side button. I wonder how many are still like that today?

Mine was a deluxe model, having a hard chrome, or other metal plating and a checkered stock.

The choke was extra-full, making a 3" pattern at about 20 yards.

Pahoo · June 20, 2013, 10:09 AM

Quote:

I wonder how many are still like that today?

Well, at least one, in IA. It was at an auction and spotted it right off. There were plenty of folks interested in it as they bring good money around here. What I did not know, until you posted, was that it could be a factory conversion. That is too bad but as it does detract from it's value. ...

Be Safe !!!

**44 AMP** · June 28, 2013, 01:18 PM

Personal choice would be the .22LR/.410. This is in part because I already have other guns in those calibers. But only in part.

One has to remember just what the Savage combo guns were intended for. The were meant to be survival/camp & pest guns. Not dedicated hunting guns (to which they are inferior in many ways) but a single gun, firing a wide enough variety of ammo to be able to keep you fed in a pinch.

Not the best at a lot of things, but good enough to work, at short ranges. Some models had butt traps to hold ammo.

.22Rimfire is enough for all small game, without being too much, even for the smallest game. For me, I never had a situation where the .22WMR was either needed or more useful than the .22LR. IF you NEEDED to take a larger animal, they make these things called slugs, and even the "puny" .410 will take bigger game better with a slug than any .22 rimfire, WRM included (within its range & accuracy limitations).

If I need something more than the .22LR can deliver in a rifle, I go to the .22 Hornet next. Reloading the Hornet makes it cheaper than the .22WMR, once you have the brass and start up costs (dies, etc.) covered.

Stored with a couple boxes worth of ammo (some of each important load), in a boat, canoe, plane, or other vehicle, it takes up very little room (less if stored in a case broken down). You might think its heavy, but I never found them heavier than a repeating rifle or shotgun, and certainly lighter than two guns. Not big on firepower, but not meant to be.

Single aimed shots at edible game, at short ranges is their purpose. Sure, you can do that job with lots of guns, guns which would be much better at other things as well (sport hunting, personal defense, etc.). But having one single gun package, as "insurance" makes sense to some folks.

Some put one of these types of guns in their camp equipment, not with the intent of using it regularly, just wanting something just in case its needed. Potting the heads off bunnies with a deer rifle can be done, its just neither easy nor simple with a dedicated big game rifle.

You can cut all the wood you need with a hatchet (and a lot of sweat). An axe is usually better, and neither one is a sword or a compound bow. No body belittles the hatchet, for being only what it is. Why do it to a particular gun?

MattShlock · June 28, 2013, 10:16 PM

With a .410 on the bottom I'd say it is irrelevant. With a more substantial shotgun, i.e. a 20 ga., I'd DEMAND the .22 Mag. Like on this Model 24. I'm waiting for them to make a new .22 Mag/20 ga.

Rifleman1776 · June 29, 2013, 09:08 AM

I bought one for my son for his first gun. It was .22lr/20 ga.
The .22lr is very versitile and well proven to be useful. The mag. is expensive and has limited application that the lr cannot handle.

22-rimfire · June 29, 2013, 09:22 AM

My 2-cents.... I would choose 20ga/22 WMR combo if given the choice. This is not a gun you're going to take out to plink with. So the ammo cost is not an important decision point. The 22 Mag is much more effective than the 22LR.

alaskabushman · July 2, 2013, 12:22 PM

I think a little bit of your decision depends on where you live. In my area there is very little small game...no rabbits...no squirrels...pretty much just weasels and crows(believe me I wish it were otherwise). For a survival/camp gun my pick would be the .22 mag, despite what other people say it IS more powerful and IS more effective than the classic .22LR. At 100 yards the .22 mag is as fast as the .22LR at the muzzle (in fact the .22 mag is closer to the .22 Hornet than it is the .22LR). Bullet weight selection is about the same between the two but you can find good high performance bullets in .22 mag like Hornady critical defense or Speer Gold Dot for great expansion.

As others have pointed out a break action rifle isnt going to chew through the more pricey .22 mag like say, a 10/22. I have often wished my Springfield M6 was a magnum since I dont really take it out to plink, and only ever grab it on occasions when the .22 mag would be nice. A real nice touch on the new Savage gun would have been to follow in the steps of Taurus and make it a .410/.45 colt/.22 LR (or .22mag). Yes I know slugs out of a .410 can basically do anything you need out of a small combo gun like that, but still...I like to have options.

All that said, you cant go wrong with the good 'ol .22LR, its been around a long time, and in another 100 years people with STILL be arguing which current magnum is better or worse than the .22LR...fact is, it just cant be beat for fun, cost, accuracy and guns available for it. Nothing really compares to the .22LR...its on a higher plane.

SteelChickenShooter · July 2, 2013, 04:42 PM

For me a combo sounds like a small game hunting or pest control garden gun. If you hunt rabbits or squirrels, a .410 / .22LR is pretty good. If you want to shoot heavier garden pests like woodchuck or raccoons the .22 Mag is a stronger choice. A backyard coyote that could be a threat against puppies being let out to potty at night, the .22 Mag / shotgun is better. Just depends on where you live, what you expect to encounter and then what you expect to do. A 22LR and a 22Mag are both good for one thing or another depending on what you have to deal with. Personally just for me, I'd sort of like to have a .22LR / .410 as one firearm as well as a 20ga / 22Mag combo as another.
I am rural and agricultural. My choice of firearms might differ. I am also not ignorant that home invasions have taken place not far away. So hunting, garden pests, intruders all have some weight in firearm choices.

SRE · July 4, 2013, 08:37 PM

Please look at the Savage Model 24. The older version of the now Model 42. I have many of them and to make it short and simple, put a scope on it as the iron sights suck. I personally do not like the way the 42 looks and its, from he info and feedback ive received, not as accurate as it should be for todays price standards.

MattShlock · July 5, 2013, 08:58 PM

You can't safely use the shotgun-half of a 24 with a scope (LER custom scout mount, maybe)!

WV_gunner · July 6, 2013, 10:27 AM

I recently took the scope, scope mount, and the hammer extension from my 24V .30-30/20 gauge. Looks much better, lighter, and now makes the 20 gauge more usable since it had low profile mounts and blocked the sights. I'm looking forward to shooting it now. It's hard to believe how much of a difference in looks. The scope and base never looked right with the case hardened receiver.

June 28, 2013, 01:18 PM	#35
44 AMP Staff Join Date: March 11, 2006 Location: Upper US Posts: 30,496	Personal choice would be the .22LR/.410. This is in part because I already have other guns in those calibers. But only in part. One has to remember just what the Savage combo guns were intended for. The were meant to be survival/camp & pest guns. Not dedicated hunting guns (to which they are inferior in many ways) but a single gun, firing a wide enough variety of ammo to be able to keep you fed in a pinch. Not the best at a lot of things, but good enough to work, at short ranges. Some models had butt traps to hold ammo. .22Rimfire is enough for all small game, without being too much, even for the smallest game. For me, I never had a situation where the .22WMR was either needed or more useful than the .22LR. IF you NEEDED to take a larger animal, they make these things called slugs, and even the "puny" .410 will take bigger game better with a slug than any .22 rimfire, WRM included (within its range & accuracy limitations). If I need something more than the .22LR can deliver in a rifle, I go to the .22 Hornet next. Reloading the Hornet makes it cheaper than the .22WMR, once you have the brass and start up costs (dies, etc.) covered. Stored with a couple boxes worth of ammo (some of each important load), in a boat, canoe, plane, or other vehicle, it takes up very little room (less if stored in a case broken down). You might think its heavy, but I never found them heavier than a repeating rifle or shotgun, and certainly lighter than two guns. Not big on firepower, but not meant to be. Single aimed shots at edible game, at short ranges is their purpose. Sure, you can do that job with lots of guns, guns which would be much better at other things as well (sport hunting, personal defense, etc.). But having one single gun package, as "insurance" makes sense to some folks. Some put one of these types of guns in their camp equipment, not with the intent of using it regularly, just wanting something just in case its needed. Potting the heads off bunnies with a deer rifle can be done, its just neither easy nor simple with a dedicated big game rifle. You can cut all the wood you need with a hatchet (and a lot of sweat). An axe is usually better, and neither one is a sword or a compound bow. No body belittles the hatchet, for being only what it is. Why do it to a particular gun? __________________ All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.

July 5, 2013, 08:58 PM	#42
MattShlock Senior Member Join Date: April 8, 2013 Posts: 251	You can't safely use the shotgun-half of a 24 with a scope (LER custom scout mount, maybe)! Last edited by MattShlock; July 6, 2013 at 12:19 PM.

June 19, 2013, 03:24 AM	#26
450mar Member Join Date: May 3, 2013 Posts: 18	22 mag. The best choice.

June 19, 2013, 07:10 AM	#27
Picher Senior Member Join Date: December 14, 2004 Location: Maine Posts: 3,701	I've had a couple of 24s, one a .22LR/20 ga. and the other a .357/20 ga. I found serious deficiencies in both as follows: Heavier than many rifles or shotguns; Factory sights poor; Way too heavy to carry long distances, especially with scope mounted; Scope height raises line of sight to an uncomfortable level; Triggers were not conducive to accuracy; Difficult to find a front sight to accommodate receiver sight; May not be able to find a receiver sight to fit; Accuracy is not on par with many bolt-actions; Break-open action is slow for plinking; The barrel selector on the hammer is better than the old receiver-mounted selector; *My shotgun barrels had full-choke barrels, which were too tight for upland shooting, IMHO. Generally, I don't like exposed-hammer shotguns or rifles because they're too slow to cock when flushing birds. The original model .22/.410 is probably a good barnyard pest gun.

June 19, 2013, 03:44 PM	#28
450mar Member Join Date: May 3, 2013 Posts: 18	Why did you buy them without research???

June 19, 2013, 05:02 PM	#29
Picher Senior Member Join Date: December 14, 2004 Location: Maine Posts: 3,701	"Why did you buy them without research???" Because I was a young fella, and traded guns quite often, trying as many kinds as possible. The concept seemed good to me as a young adult, but they didn't really fit my needs. I was a trading fool, buying or trading for over 25 guns within three years, but never owning more than 3 at a time. My dad never owned a gun, so he wasn't much help. I also read a lot of gun magazines, and you know that they almost never say anything bad about any gun.

June 19, 2013, 05:37 PM	#30
Hawg Senior Member Join Date: September 8, 2007 Location: Mississippi Posts: 16,381	I would get more use out of a .22 LR than a WMR.

June 20, 2013, 06:58 AM	#33
Picher Senior Member Join Date: December 14, 2004 Location: Maine Posts: 3,701	My first 24 had the selector on the receiver, but when the hammer snapped off and the gun sent to the factory, they installed the new hammer with the selector on it and left the non-functioning side button. I wonder how many are still like that today? Mine was a deluxe model, having a hard chrome, or other metal plating and a checkered stock. The choke was extra-full, making a 3" pattern at about 20 yards.

June 29, 2013, 09:08 AM	#37
Rifleman1776 Senior Member Join Date: April 25, 2010 Location: Arkansas Posts: 3,309	I bought one for my son for his first gun. It was .22lr/20 ga. The .22lr is very versitile and well proven to be useful. The mag. is expensive and has limited application that the lr cannot handle.

June 29, 2013, 09:22 AM	#38
22-rimfire Senior Member Join Date: February 19, 2005 Location: Tennessee Posts: 5,323	My 2-cents.... I would choose 20ga/22 WMR combo if given the choice. This is not a gun you're going to take out to plink with. So the ammo cost is not an important decision point. The 22 Mag is much more effective than the 22LR.

July 2, 2013, 12:22 PM	#39
alaskabushman Senior Member Join Date: January 3, 2013 Location: S.E. Alaska Posts: 146	I think a little bit of your decision depends on where you live. In my area there is very little small game...no rabbits...no squirrels...pretty much just weasels and crows(believe me I wish it were otherwise). For a survival/camp gun my pick would be the .22 mag, despite what other people say it IS more powerful and IS more effective than the classic .22LR. At 100 yards the .22 mag is as fast as the .22LR at the muzzle (in fact the .22 mag is closer to the .22 Hornet than it is the .22LR). Bullet weight selection is about the same between the two but you can find good high performance bullets in .22 mag like Hornady critical defense or Speer Gold Dot for great expansion. As others have pointed out a break action rifle isnt going to chew through the more pricey .22 mag like say, a 10/22. I have often wished my Springfield M6 was a magnum since I dont really take it out to plink, and only ever grab it on occasions when the .22 mag would be nice. A real nice touch on the new Savage gun would have been to follow in the steps of Taurus and make it a .410/.45 colt/.22 LR (or .22mag). Yes I know slugs out of a .410 can basically do anything you need out of a small combo gun like that, but still...I like to have options. All that said, you cant go wrong with the good 'ol .22LR, its been around a long time, and in another 100 years people with STILL be arguing which current magnum is better or worse than the .22LR...fact is, it just cant be beat for fun, cost, accuracy and guns available for it. Nothing really compares to the .22LR...its on a higher plane.

July 2, 2013, 04:42 PM	#40
SteelChickenShooter Senior Member Join Date: May 12, 2011 Posts: 863	For me a combo sounds like a small game hunting or pest control garden gun. If you hunt rabbits or squirrels, a .410 / .22LR is pretty good. If you want to shoot heavier garden pests like woodchuck or raccoons the .22 Mag is a stronger choice. A backyard coyote that could be a threat against puppies being let out to potty at night, the .22 Mag / shotgun is better. Just depends on where you live, what you expect to encounter and then what you expect to do. A 22LR and a 22Mag are both good for one thing or another depending on what you have to deal with. Personally just for me, I'd sort of like to have a .22LR / .410 as one firearm as well as a 20ga / 22Mag combo as another. I am rural and agricultural. My choice of firearms might differ. I am also not ignorant that home invasions have taken place not far away. So hunting, garden pests, intruders all have some weight in firearm choices.

July 4, 2013, 08:37 PM	#41
SRE Senior Member Join Date: May 15, 2011 Location: Southern York County, PA Posts: 145	Please look at the Savage Model 24. The older version of the now Model 42. I have many of them and to make it short and simple, put a scope on it as the iron sights suck. I personally do not like the way the 42 looks and its, from he info and feedback ive received, not as accurate as it should be for todays price standards.

July 6, 2013, 10:27 AM	#43
WV_gunner Senior Member Join Date: December 14, 2011 Location: WV Posts: 938	I recently took the scope, scope mount, and the hammer extension from my 24V .30-30/20 gauge. Looks much better, lighter, and now makes the 20 gauge more usable since it had low profile mounts and blocked the sights. I'm looking forward to shooting it now. It's hard to believe how much of a difference in looks. The scope and base never looked right with the case hardened receiver.