Straight vs pistol grip stocks

[dgludwig]

I see no advantage to a straight stock on a SxS with a single trigger either but with double trigger's there might be an advantage in that when you leave the front trigger for the back you can slide your hand a bit also rather than simply removing it from the front trigger.

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, even though some respected authors have opined otherwise, the notion that a straight stock was developed to accommodate shooters accessing the second trigger quicker by sliding their hand back is pretty much bunk. I've shot guns having double triggers for decades and can attest to the fact that moving your hand instead of your finger to trip the second (back in most cases) trigger makes no sense whatsoever. The following quotes are from writers who feel the same way:

John Barsness, in his book Shotguns for Wingshooting says this: "...Shotgunners argue about whether the straight or pistol grip works better. Some say the straight grip allows you to slide your hand back and forth between the two triggers of the typical side by side. This sounds logical, but both barrels of any decent two-trigger gun can be easily fired without moving the hand more than a tiny fraction of an inch, if at all. The rear trigger lies on the far side of the gun, positioning both triggers equally distant from the shooting hand...".

Don Zutz, in his book The Double Shotgun, opined, "...Without pet prejudices and preconceived notions, and unencumbered by a concern for sheer style, the straight grip was developed and retained because it met practical and theoretical needs on twin triggered doubles having the normal (for those times) splinter forearm. This does not especially include the supposed need for hand slippage as the shooter switches from one trigger to another, although that has traditionally been the justification for the straight grip. Trigger switching can be done as easily without sliding the entire hand, and many shooters who believe they need slippage room actually don't move their trigger hand as much as they believe they do, if at all...".

Finally, Michael McIntosh, in his book Shotguns and Shooting, explained, "...Actually you can find similar statements elsewhere in print, either implying or stating flat out that you have to slide your hand backward on the grip to pull the rear trigger. I don't know where this got started, but if you shoot a two-triggered gun, you know better. If you've never fired one, take my word for it: You trip both triggers without moving anything except your finger...To fire both barrels you simply pull the front trigger, slide your finger over it and on to the back one. It's all one motion, nothing moves but your trigger finger, and none of it affects the way the stock feels in its length of pull...".

[briandg]

I feel that pistol grips give a far better hold, more consistent placement of trigger and fingers, for example. Wrapping your hand around a broomstick, or locking it in absolutely with a 90degree grip?

Certain primitive weapons didn't even sit against the shoulder. For a rifle, this is natural.

[Don Fischer]

Straight stock with double trigger's works for me. Guess you just have to pick your expert. I'm certain there are a lot of people that would prefer a pistol grip stock. I did try a pistol grip with double trigger's once. Found myself pulling my finger out of the first and trying to stab it into the rear trigger. Again I am certain that guy's familar with pistol grips an double trigger's don't have that problem. I suppose the bottom line is what your used to is what you should shoot.

[the possum]

Straight grips were pretty much standard on most guns even with single barrels for a long time. Now that I think about it, I'm not sure that I've ever seen a flintlock (long gun) of any kind with a pistol grip. The closest were some Kentucky rifles and target guns that had a really fancy metal extension behind the trigger guard, but not all had that, and I'm not sure I'd really consider those a pistol grip anyway.