What is the purpose of gripping the magazine?

[Billy Shears]

I picked up the latest issue of the NRA's "Shooting Illustrated" magazine yesterday, and looked at the article therein on the venerable AK rifle. The author, wearing ball cap, obligatory black shades, and shooting gloves may be seen shooting the weapon in a manner that seems to be increasingly common: hunched forward in the "Groucho walk" with elbows close in and pointed straight down, and the support hand around the front of the AK's magazine, rather than on the fore grip.

This is a method of holding the rifle that seems to have originated with the AR for CQB type scenarios, and may have some usefulness there (thought what advantages it offers, I'm not at all sure). On the next page of the article, the author has photos of this grip, and the standard grip, with the hand on the wooden handguard, and even states "Gripping the AK's fore-end offers a greater degree of muzzle control, but those wooden handguards can get very hot after a few magazines."

Really?

Do you know how many magazines you'd have to blaze through to make those wooden handguards too hot to hold comfortably? Especially through gloves. Honestly this sort of thing looks to me like an excuse to be tacticool -- something too many people are doing these days. After all, why take an admittedly less effective grip on the weapon, that offers you less control, especially given the extreme unlikelihood of ever shooting so many rounds off in any realistic defensive scenario that the handguards became too hot to hold?

I'm a former infantry NCO, and current police detective, and I'm qualified on the patrol rifle for my job (my department issues M4-type, semi-auto ARs), and without false modesty, I can say that I am one of the better shots on my department, and I find, while holding the rifle shouldered, but muzzle-down, I am slower coming up and getting the sights on target with this "tactical" grip than I am holding onto the rifle's handguard, as well as slower swinging the rifle around laterally to engage targets to either side. Recoil control appears little different for either grip on the AR, given the low recoil impulse of the 5.56mm round, but in all other ways, this grip seems to work less effectively for me, and I have a hard time understanding how it came to be preferred by so many these days. What am I missing here?

 

[RyanM]

He may have been talking about the top handguard around the piston tube, not the lower one. The "super duper tacticool" thing to do these days is to grip the rifle as far forward as you can, with your thumb wrapped around the top.

Like the picture on here. http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/12/02/new-magpul-afg-angled-foregrip/

Actually, doing that on an AK sounds like a good way to lose your thumb when hot gas blasts out of the top, ouch.

Vertical foregrips and holding the magazine well is "90's tacticool" these days. Me, I use a VFG as far back as possible on my AR, because that's what's most comfortable to hold up. Recoil control be damned, it's a semi-auto AR and my left arm gets tired if I use a way-out-there horizontal or angled grip (contrary to what Magpul says). I also use a "90's tacticool" 3-point sling.

It's funny how people deride certain grips and slings as being "outdated and from the 90's," when the AR-15 itself was invented in 1957.

IMO, the benefit of gripping the magazine well is reduced arm fatigue, because right in front of the mag well is the center of gravity for most guns. It also works well in conjuction with a completely square stance, rather than a cross-body angled one.

 

[Billy Shears]

He may have been talking about the top handguard around the piston tube, not the lower one.

I don't think he was. The picture included with that caption shows the standard, old-fashioned rifle grip, with the left hand cradling the horizontal fore-end, the four fingers on one side, and the thumb on the other. No part of the hand was anywhere near the upper handguard.

 

[AK103K]

I dont get it either. I grip my AK's the old fashioned way, and find I have much better control, and the gun points and shoots much more naturally. I have AK's with both wood and polymer furniture, and while the handguards can and do get warm with sustained fire, I never really had any problem holding them the way I do, and I dont normally wear gloves while I'm shooting them.

About the only time I hold it by the mag, is when the gun is cradled in my right hand with the butt in the crook of my right arm, and my my thumb is on the selector. This is a comfortable way to carry the gun and still have instant control of the selector. Its not a "ready" type stance, but more of a "relaxed" ready.

 

[Boba Fett]

Can't say I've ever seen anyone grip an AK or an AR by the magazine.

I have tried and occasionally like to use the mag well as a grip on my AR. Something like this:

I've even toyed with the idea of getting one of the grips for the mag well:

But because the mag well works so well by itself, I just can't bring myself to purchase it...seems unnecessarily redundant (kind of like my phrasing there...)


I still don't get the front of the grip hold that I keep seeing the guys at MagPul do. Personally, it makes me feel off balance. Maybe if I take a carbine class I can have someone explain it to me.

I think you may be correct that the guy in the article you read was just attempting to be "tacticool."

 

[DMK]

IMO, the benefit of gripping the magazine well is reduced arm fatigue, because right in front of the mag well is the center of gravity for most guns. It also works well in conjuction with a completely square stance, rather than a cross-body angled one.

+1

Hold your arms with your hands in fists and oriented vertically, like a boxers stance with your offhand out and strong hand up close. Picture holding a rifle like that. Now rotate your hands like you would hold a traditional stocked rifle. Feel the tension in your wrists and forearms?

I also find with an AK, a vertical forend grip is ungainly for me. I find that in order to clear the magazine rotating in, I need to mount it to far forward. While not perfect either, I find that gripping the magazine is more comfortable than a VFG to far out.

 

[Mags]

Gripping an AR by the mag alone and not the mag well is just asking for feeding problems.

 

[Billy Shears]

Can't say I've ever seen anyone grip an AK or an AR by the magazine.

Remember, with an AK, there is no mag well, so if you are going to mimic this grip, you will end up holding the magazine itself.

+1

Hold your arms with your hands in fists and oriented vertically, like a boxers stance with your offhand out and strong hand up close. Picture holding a rifle like that. Now rotate your hands like you would hold a traditional stocked rifle. Feel the tension in your wrists and forearms?

I also find with an AK, a vertical forend grip is ungainly for me. I find that in order to clear the magazine rotating in, I need to mount it to far forward. While not perfect either, I find that gripping the magazine is more comfortable than a VFG to far out.

I guess it must be what you get yourself used to. For myself, the vertical grip, whether using the front of the mag well, or a separate vertical fore end only feels natural from a single position: standing squared off to the target, and even there, as I said, I find the reduced muzzle control that results from this makes me not want to use that grip.

From any other position, prone, kneeling, shooting at odd angles, the need to contort oneself into a stable firing position because of the available cover, etc. the vertical grip feels unnatural to me.

For myself, I find it easier to use the more traditional grip. It's more versatile, more stable (or I find it so, anyway), and offers better muzzle control.

 

[HorseSoldier]

Do you know how many magazines you'd have to blaze through to make those wooden handguards too hot to hold comfortably? Especially through gloves.

A couple mags through a real AK shooting 3-5 round bursts will get you there.

 

[Boba Fett]

Remember, with an AK, there is no mag well, so if you are going to mimic this grip, you will end up holding the magazine itself.

True.

For myself, I find it easier to use the more traditional grip. It's more versatile, more stable (or I find it so, anyway), and offers better muzzle control.

+1 for me with an AR. Traditional just seems to work well.

 

[Billy Shears]

A couple mags through a real AK shooting 3-5 round bursts will get you there.

And how many of us are likely to do this in any realistic self defense scenario? Hell, for that matter, how often are soldiers carrying the full-auto real thing even likely to do it? Fire discipline is taught for good reason. You only carry so much ammo. If you have to blaze up half or more of your ammo load in minutes or less... Well, I humbly submit to you that you have bigger things to worry about than whether or not your handguards are hot.

 

[Zerodefect]

You can't hold a steady aim by holding the mag. Every little movement of your support hand moves the muzzle too much. We often hold the mag when we aren't shooting, but never when we are. Its been a very, very long time since i've read any good advice in a gun rag.

Holding the end of your grips, as far forward as you can get, slows your movements making it easier to aim. It also gives you more leverage to hold the gun steady during rapid fire. It takes technique and time to learn. But is worth it.

Also if your running a vert grip. Don't grab it. Put your hand in front of it, grip the foregrips and allow some of your fingers to drape diagonal across the front of the vert grip. Like the AFG. This grip is demonstrated in Magpuls AOTTC1 dvd. Vert grips are still around to locate your hand quickly and to mount light/laser controls. Never use the broomstick grip with modern AR's, thats a technique for paintball guns.

I use a AFG on a DD rail or use a similar hold with standard M4 grips (not comfy). It's exercise when your new to it. But with enough training your arms get used to being out there.

 

[nalioth]

It greatly enhances the chance of the loss of digits in the case of a KABOOM

(a fingerless hand is a sure bet to attract the ladiez, dontchaknow . . . )

 

[Billy Shears]

Holding the end of your grips, as far forward as you can get, slows your movements making it easier to aim.

What's old is new again, apparently.

I believe the old Pennsylvania (AKA Kentucky) rifle was generally held with the support hand very far forward on the stock -- much father than what later became customary with shorter rifles. Of course, those old rifles had extremely long barrels in order to burn that slow burning black powder more completely (which allowed sufficiently high velocities even with relatively economical powder charges), which meant a lot of the gun's weight was waaaaay out there in front, and the longer grip was apparently necessary to stabilize it better.

 

[Zerodefect]

Right on. And todays AR's are using lighter stocks and heavier railed foreends. Lights, lasers, Noveske Krinks, silencers, etc. all add weight up front.

Found some pics of proper grips and the magpul grip comparo poster ( avoid the grip labeled "vertical foregrip" in the poster):

 

[RyanM]

I guess it must be what you get yourself used to. For myself, the vertical grip, whether using the front of the mag well, or a separate vertical fore end only feels natural from a single position: standing squared off to the target, and even there, as I said, I find the reduced muzzle control that results from this makes me not want to use that grip.

Exactly. And the square stance is pretty much specialized for shooting on the move, at very close quarters. And actually, a 90 degree angle on the VFG ends up giving you a pretty natural wrist angle when shooting that way. If anything, it should be angled the tiniest bit forward (like a Beretta 93 foregrip, but not as much) and to the left.

But for anything past a certain distance, that doesn't work too well since it's a little unstable compared to other holds, as noted. The VFG, IMO, trades a little stability for comfort and lack of fatigue. In the long run, stability is probably the same due to the fatigue factor.

It's a pretty specialized shooting technique, but then so is the AFG way out at the end of the gun. I suppose it is entirely possible to put a VFG and AFG on the same gun...

 

[Maj Dad]

I can tell you that holding a 30 rd mag to the rear on an M1 Carbine will decrease FTFs, in semi or full auto. A full mag will pull the rear end down just a tad or two & sometimes the bolt will override the top round. I don't experience this with 15 rd mags, but with 30s I am like the grunt with the AR in the soup, but holding the mag to the rear enough to take up any slack.

 

[Billy Shears]

It's a pretty specialized shooting technique, but then so is the AFG way out at the end of the gun. I suppose it is entirely possible to put a VFG and AFG on the same gun...

You could, but there are problems with that too. There are some interesting comments on this very thing on Grant Cunningham's blog:

From The Firearm Blog comes news of yet another AR-15 accessory: the Magpul AFG (Angled ForeGrip). Just for fun I ran it by Georges Rahbani, TBRIYNHO ("The Best Rifle Instructor You've Never Heard Of"), a man who's actually used said firearm - uncounted times - to protect innocent lives in a war zone. His reply was succinct, and one for which he's become slightly infamous: "Thou shalt not hang crap on thy rifle."

(We have a running joke about foregrips in general: we refer to them as 'Pharaoh's Beards', for their uncanny resemblance to a certain dead King of Egypt...

The issue with foregrips is that they limit how you interface with your rifle. That's a fancy way of saying that they get in the way; instead of the hardware (the rifle) allowing flexibility in use, it becomes more specialized - less flexible. The rifle no longer responds to the user's will, rather the user now must adapt to the accessory's limitations, in addition to the rifle's.

As long as the AR-15 is being shot from a standing, squared off position, the Pharaoh's Beard feels like a great invention. A real incident, however, may demand more. The shooter may have to contort himself into a stable firing position because of the surrounding cover; the opponent may be at a radical angle (in any direction) from the defender's point of view; rapid fire from a compromised 'stance' may be needed as the defender rapidly moves relative to the attacker.

When any of those things happen, the changed body position requires a modified relationship to the rifle. With a plain forearm, the support arm simply moves to the necessary position and the shooting commences. With some sort of foregrip hanging off the rifle, one of two things will happen: the shooter will doggedly maintain a grip on the thing, all the while trying to get his body to do things that it isn't structurally capable of doing, or the shooter will realize that the grip isn't working, and try to maneuver around it to get to the best placement. Sometimes he can, more often he can't, because that accessory is taking up the very space he needs. Bottom line: less-than-optimal shot placement and less-than-optimal response times.

Most people test these things in a range-perfect stance of some sort; they don't push themselves or their equipment. In such undemanding circumstances, foregrips seem to work well. The further from that ideal world, the less well they work. You can decide for yourself if that's meaningful to you.

I see this frequently with students in class. Georges Rahbani, who I've mentioned many times in this blog, runs his 'Fighting Rifle' course as a triad: three separate 2-day classes, based on real-life encounters, that rapidly ramp up critical survival skills. The first class has the students working on fairly traditional range platforms: standing, kneeling, etc. Foregrips seem to work in that environment, because they're designed to facilitate just this kind of handling. The environment isn't asking much of the shooter, which is important to understand.

By the time the second class rolls around, students discover that they're not in Kansas any more. The environment now asks much more of the shooters; the concept off 'ideal' is dispensed with, and 'field expedient' becomes the new paradigm. As that occurs, the students who showed up for the first class with gizmos and gadgets on their rifles find themselves hurriedly removing them during breaks.

Why? Because they've discovered that their options are limited, not increased, by added hardware. They've learned that the situation dictates their response, not the other way around. The more universal their equipment, the easier they can adapt their response to the situation; the more specialized the gear, the less they're able to do so.

 

[Uncle Mike]

Seriously...there is a right and a wrong way to hang onto your CQB weapon with your forehand? Please.......hehehehe

I don't know, but my arm gets tired if I stick out there too long, I like the 'mag' grip!

 

[Billy Shears]

Seriously...there is a right and a wrong way to hang onto your CQB weapon with your forehand? Please.......hehehehe

Really, I would not be so quick to sneer at the notion. "Right" and "wrong" is not the best way to put it. "More effective" and "less effective" would be better. Given the mechanics of the human body, some things are going to be more efficient than others. And if highly proficient shooters with experience in real gunfights have found that some things that work well on the range in controlled conditions in fact compromise versatility and flexibility in the highly fluid, highly unpredictable, and less than ideal conditions of real world gunfights... Well, as I said, I would not be so quick to sneer.

Almost anything can be made to work, if you train with it hard enough. The question is, however, is that the most efficient method? A less efficient technique may work for you, but only at the cost of requiring increased training time to master it, when a simpler, more efficient technique might work better, require less training time, and improve your results.

 

[RyanM]

You could, but there are problems with that too. There are some interesting comments on this very thing on Grant Cunningham's blog:

Just out of curiosity, and a serious question: is Grant a fan of bullpup layout guns? It seems like he would be, since there are actually some positions where it's most comfortable for me to hold an M4gery by the bottom of the magazine, sort of like a target shooting grip (some of the real old single shot target guns had palm rests in that location). There's some "crap hanging from your rifle" that you have no choice about, and a bullpup puts some of that out of the way. Seems to fit with his philosophy.

 

[Zerodefect]

No real wrong way.

If your stuck in a position where the mag grip works best for you then so be it. Best for you is the best for you. The more grip styles and positions you memorize and can use effectively the better.

When I transition from right handed to left handed I either do the "Magpul Costa style" move both hands then move the gun to the left shoulder, or if I'm moving or have time I move my weapon side hand to the magazine, support hand to the grip, then lower muzzel and move to my left shoulder for lefty shooting. It's a bit slower but smoother, no worries about snagging and can be done on the run.

if someone pops up during that, you can bet I'll be shooting with the magazine as a grip till I get time to get my support hand back forward where it belongs.

 

[Billy Shears]

ust out of curiosity, and a serious question: is Grant a fan of bullpup layout guns?

No idea.

I've never cared for them because they can't be switched to fire from the opposite shoulder if you have to shoot around cover that would otherwise require you to expose your whole body (the FN2000 conveys all the expended cases down a tube to drop them out below the muzzle, in an attempt to address this issue). Also, with a bullpup, you have to accept slower magazine changes than you can get with an AR, and it's harder to get a good trigger with the long linkage necessitated by moving the action so far to the rear.

 

[Zerodefect]

I love how the FS2000's weight sits into your shoulder. Less arm fatique and lower "swing weight". Cool rifle, a good solution for those that like their support hand in close.

 

[Driftertank]

Do you know how many magazines you'd have to blaze through to make those wooden handguards too hot to hold comfortably?

AK forearm on fire.

That's about all I have to say about that.