Full Stock Vs. Full Stock w/ Pistol Grip

[xtrarnds]

Hello !!

What is the purpose of having a pistol grip on a conventional length buttstock?

A post-ban Benelli MI is limited to 5 rounds when equipped with the pg stock as opposed to 7 rds w/ the convventional buttstock. I'm trying to decide which one to buy.

TIA

[JNewell]

The only point of the PG buttstock, as far as I know, is that it permits somewhat more control of the shotgun while it is held at the shoulder one-handed with the firing (strong) hand. This could be important, for example, if you are reloading while maintaining control of a threat, or doing a switch-to-slug drill.


[This message has been edited by JNewell (edited June 25, 2000).]

[jthuang]

In addition to John's concise answer, a pistol grip on a full-length buttstock allows for better recoil control while firing from the underarm assault position. This position, used in close quarters or houseclearing, favors the pistol grip stock.

The pistol-gripped full stock is said to be less retainable in weapon retention situations. My longarm classes have not really addressed this distinction -- since the proper thing to do, unless you are well trained in longarm retention and disarming, is to let the goblin have your gun, draw your handgun, and let him have some of that too.

I'd say go with the conventional stock and 7 round magazine tube. You can still use a conventional stock in the underarm assault position and it is more retainable. The additional capacity is much more valuable, IMHO, than a pistol grip stock. Although I will admit the pistol grip stock does look devilishly kewl.

By the way, I had the same decision to make back in November of 1998, right before NICS kicked in. CDNN was closing out the last of the HK-stamped Benelli M1 Super 90 Tactical shotguns, for good prices -- you could get: (1) standard stock, ghost ring sights, three choke tubes, factory 7 shot magazine for $689; or (2) pistol grip stock, ghost ring sights, three choke tubes, factory 5 shot magazine for $699. An additional ten bucks would ship either gun to your favorite FFL in the lower 48. I chose #1 for the reasons above.

HTH,

Justin

------------------
Justin T. Huang, Esq.
late of Kennett Square, Pennsylvania

[JNewell]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>The pistol-gripped full stock is said to be less retainable in weapon retention situations. My longarm classes have not really addressed this distinction[/quote]

Humm, interesting? I don't mean to contradict anyone, just to supplement -- a very experienced instructor I know showed us what is sort of like a hammerlock applied to the PG with the strong-side forearm, which pretty much locks the rifle (or shotgun) in, and is quite fast if you were at the underarm assualt position. Very hard to "defeat,", but...

...I still agree re: presenting a backup weapon, if possible. Even if you can lock the longarm down as described above, you most likely have a stalemate, since you can't get to the trigger to shoot the BG off the longarm. To paraphrase Gabe Suarez and echo what Justin said, if the BG tries to take your longarm, let him have it...then let him have it with your backup weapon! Ehhmmm...this assumes you have ready access to your backup...&lt;g&gt;