How about a Badger Grips picture thread?!?

Register to hide this ad
Badger grips

This is probably a repeat thread but I'm game...:D

I've add Badgers to a few more since this was taken, but you get the idea.
.

...............657-5, 7-1/2"bbl.
686-6, 5" bbl.....................
..325NG...357NG..2-1/2"bbl.
686-0, 2-1/2" bbl...............
.
BadgerGripsonSampWguns_zps3ec3d7d5.jpg


.

.
 
Last edited:
Have them on my 60 right now, had them on my 686 that I sold (like the idiot that I am) and my sp101 that I sold. Will keep getting them on all my revolvers! PS to all those who read this, it's worth the extra $$ for the emblems IMO.
 

Attachments

  • gunpic.jpg
    gunpic.jpg
    84 KB · Views: 112
I'm getting back into revolvers, and want to know what the advantages/disadvantages are to having smooth grips. All the Badgers don't have checkering. Thanks.
 
One disadvantage to having rough checkering on the grips is in shooting magnum lightweight revolvers with high recoil, like the Sc frame &/or Ti cylinder models. They just eat your hand up.

.

And, if you CC, your covering garment can get hung up on the checkering, just as it can on rubber grips. That can be an important consideration if you are able to carry concealed. Inadvertent exposure or printing is something to strive to avoid if you are serious about CCW.

I have found that grips that fit your hand well don't need an aggressive texture to keep the firearm properly indexed to your hand. The trick is to find the right grip, shape and size, and that can be a lot of T&E. The Badgers work well for me, as do Ahrends "tactical" revolver grips.
 
Here's my 642 before I took them off. This boot style has a bulge on the right half, which caused the front sight to be off by about 1/8 inch to the left within the sight radius when point shooting. Not good for a CCW.

That's too bad they didn't fit your hand properly. They look great on your 642. Thank you for sharing the pic.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top