PDA

View Full Version : Pistol grips on AR's but not shotguns....


Godspeed
October 25, 2000, 03:36 AM
For the record I don't have a pistol grip on my Nova, nor do they make one, nor do I desire one. I do wonder, though, why do all assault rifles come with a pistol grip these days yet with shotguns the debate rages? Wouldn't it be more effecive to train with one system perhaps? What makes the assault rifles different from the shotguns that would necessitate a not PG stock?



------------------
Best Regards,
Godspeed

Dave McC
October 25, 2000, 06:01 AM
The thought is that a PG gives better control under full auto conditions. I've doubts, having fired the M-14 with and w/o a PG.Full auto control is borderline with either.

I've some experience with folding stocks with PGS, naturally. I regard them as good for an adversary of mine to have.

I've done good work with the standard stock, and doubt I'd do better with a PG stock, tho I might nor do worse. Whatever works for you...

Al Thompson
October 25, 2000, 07:14 AM
Godspeed, this issue gets a bit confusing due to definitions. Most of us loath the shotgun with a pistol grip "only". Examples would be the "Defender" series or the Pachmayr retrofit pistol grip. Stocks with a pistol grip and a full butt stock, ala an AR-15 are fine.

The true PG only guns look cool but are very difficult to hit with. I used one in a three-gun match and did well. However, I did raise it to see the sights..........

I've owned the in-famous Remington folding stock and an 870 with the pachymayr PG. None of my SGs have one as we speak.

Giz

ModIMark0
October 25, 2000, 06:42 PM
I had picked up a Sage International collapsing stock with a pistol grip for an 870 (which I don't have yet) a few months back. While I have heard a couple of favorable reports on it and am impressed with its construction/design , I don't know anyone that has or had one to get first hand information on it. Anyone here familiar with it?

Intel6
October 25, 2000, 08:09 PM
Mod1Mark0,

You hear very little about the Sage Int'l stock. I was looking to possibly get one for my 870 but since I have the factory Remington folder on it I am in no hurry. I like the way it (the Sage stock) folds up on the weapon but it also keeps you fron having a sidesaddle shell carrier in it. After I found out how to modify my sidesaddle to fit on my 870, I am a happy camper. I wanted the sidesaddle so I could always have spare shells on the weapon without having to carry extra shells.

Here is a pic of my 870 with the the Rem "humpback" stock:

http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=119160&a=1529566&p=18373483&Sequence=3&res=high

ctdonath
October 25, 2000, 08:33 PM
Can one get a "humpback" stock for a Mossberg 500? where?

patrickt66
October 25, 2000, 09:30 PM
I think the fact that a 12 guage recoils a lot heavier than a .223 has a lot to do with it.

Badger Arms
October 25, 2000, 09:51 PM
You can get one though Choate.
http://www.choatemachinetool.com/

http://www.choatemachinetool.com/images/top_folding_stock.jpg

Shawn Dodson
October 25, 2000, 10:17 PM
I prefer a full stock PG on all my long guns for two reasons: 1) commonality between weapons facilitates commonality in shooting technique and 2) a full stock PG reduces the strain on my firing hand wrist when I'm in an indoor ready position, especially for long durations.

------------------
/s/ Shawn Dodson
Firearms Tactical Institute (http://www.firearmstactical.com)

Dave McC
October 26, 2000, 06:43 AM
Good points, Shawn. Were I not a dinosaur, recalling when even military rifles lacked PGs, I'd do the same. However, my ancient reflexes are grooved in,and I do fine with my standard stocks.

As for folders....

My agency opened a new prison in 1981, and we had about 6 weeks to train and qualify over 200 new officers on the 38, shotgun and Mini 14. Some genius at HQ had decreed that we didn't need no STEENKING towers, but that having what they euphemistically called "Rapid Response Vehicles" on the perimeter would suffice. The vehicles were Chevettes, and they obtained folders for some 870s and told us to get them qualified PDQ. 200 rookies, 3-5 instructors, one useless training officer,a few truckloads of ammo(big trucks of ammo) and it was summer in Md.

The rookies were a mixed bag, with few veterans, some dopers and drunks, quite a few friends and relations of the convicts, and some sterling individuals. The big hangup in qualification(besides the usual Bozo Factor) was that folder. Us instructors had to qualify to 90% to stay an instructor, and I had to work harder with that folder to do so. We also had to give demos to the rookies, and as a mere Sgt I was the one out there in the heat. So, I got lots of practice with the folder.

Most of the rookies found it hard to qualify with the folder. A couple got their faces cut from that early factory folder, and Remington recalled them and gave us replacements with fewer sharp edges. There were a few lawsuits.

The other problem with those folders was the butt was of smallish dimensions, and one rookie with shotgun experience likened it to having someone try to hammer a canoe paddle into his shoulder.

I took one buxom rookie to the Emergency room, she had on one of the old style bras with a little metal buckle on the strap. Yup, it cut the heck out of her,and she insisted on showing it to the whole darn firing line. Nothing like a little blood to get morale down...

A few years later, sanity broke out, towers were erected, and the folders were taken off line to a collective sigh of relief from all concerned.

Finally, it's ironic that the AR series of rifles, with the .223 cartridge that recoils very little, has a better stock design for handling recoil than serious shotguns do.

Godspeed
October 26, 2000, 03:31 PM
Just to clarify my question a little, I am refering to full stock shotguns with a pistol grip, much like those on the AR or other assault rifles. I have read many threads on the PG VS Full stock debate and I have come to two conclusions myself.

1: PG wo/ stock is a bad idea.
2: PG with stock isn't much of an advantage so my Nova will do just fine how it is.

I wonder though as I contemplate an assault rifles purchase (yes Rosie it's an ASSAULT rifle) why they ALL have pistol grips. Commonality of training, such as Shawn suggested has come to mind as a drawback to my current setup. Full auto control sounds like as reasonable explanation as any. Pity we can't (easially) buy/afford one of those...

------------------
Best Regards,
Godspeed

Dave McC
October 26, 2000, 07:36 PM
I've fired full auto M-16s, M-14s, and some AKs. M-14s are a bear to control full auto even with the E2 stock. Loved the rifle, but kept it on semi most of the time.

There may be a good market for a full stock w/ PG,it'd take a new design. Straight stock, PG, elevated sights a la M-16,maybe a double stack magazine or the traditional tube. That stock would take a lot of felt recoil away, and a weight,say of 8lbs dry, would be one outstanding close range weapon. Make it a semi, or pump.

Ledbetter
October 27, 2000, 01:33 PM
Greetings,

Right now my Mossberg 590A1 is wearing a pistol-grip full stock, a weaver sight rail from B-Square, a Trijicon Reflex II mounted way forward, and a pistol grip forend. I don't know if I'd be very good defending myself with it, but it kicks major a$$ at pointing at things and blowing them up. Put the dot on something, squeeze the trigger and it's gone. Close to the design Dave McC described, with the sight up high.

Regards to all,

Ledbetter