Why do we want front vertical grips?

[shoobe01]

Front vertical grips, especially RIS add-ons for ARs and such, seem to be all the rage based on discussion and the number and variety now sold.

The thing is, I don't get it. Rifles seem fine to me with horizontal grips, and no part of any of my rifle training indicates you want anything else. I see lots of talk about the pros and cons of specific items and mounting techniques, but not of the actual application or doctrine surrounding them.

For certain special techniques, like stockless SMGs or shotguns in push/pull mode, they seem to make some sense to me. I got along pretty well with my Mossberg Bullpup's front front grip, but also did fine without it. Use in riflery (stocked, shouldered weapons being aimed) is what I am most interested in.

 

[Old Fuff]

Frankly, I'm not interested in vertical grips (forends). But on the other hand I don't think it's any of my business if someone else wants one. Crooks will make anything they want and ignore any attempt to prohibit them.

The only people that consider them to be an issue is the anti-gun crowd that have taken it upon themselves to designed guns to be the way THEY think the guns should be - for others - who they claim don't NEED them no matter what they are.

 

[Chuck Dye]

What you mean we...?

It took a moment to realize exactly what you are asking. In my own experience, the only front grip I have used other than the standard forearm was on a fully tricked out Anschutz 54 free rifle that was more climbed into than mounted to the shoulder. I think only a tiny minority of shooters are interested in either a front pistol grip or a palm rest.

 

[Hkmp5sd]

One reason is ergonomics. Some people find a vertical foregrip more comfortable than a horizontal foregrip. On some of my full auto weapons, the vertical foregrip increases the controllability. Even when shooting in semi, it helps keep the sights on target when shooting rapid single shots.

 

[tire iron]

***CAUTION****LONG ANSWER*******

For strictly target shooting - they offer no benefit.

For "martial use" - many feel that they have a HUGE benefit.

Here is why:

First - with a vert grip - one's "fighting stance" is the same of rifle/carbine/shotgun/handgun. In other words - it is more natural to hold your hands with the palms perpendicular to the ground. It takes added effort to rotate one's hands either palms up. The hands "naturally" go to palms 'straight up and down' or palms down. The vert grip works WITH your body. You don't have to force your hands to go 'palms up'.

Second - "fighting" with a longarm uses WAY different technique than does "target shooting".

Most of us have been taught to shoot using ‘target’ shooting methods as opposed to ‘fighting’ shooting methods. In reality, the two are as similar as stock car racing and driving to work. The only REAL similarities are that the vehicles both have 4 tires, a steering wheel, an engine and seat belts. However, the similarities pretty much end there.

With Stock Car racing, the tracks are of known length, width and condition. The driver may go and walk the track if he desires. His equipment is specialized, made specifically for driving on these ‘known’ tracks. His competitors are of similar skill level, know the rules and abide by them (for the most part).

Target shooting is also very specialized. The shots are made at known distances. One is not under any serious time constraints. The equipment is specialized, with ‘target triggers’, ‘target sights’, ‘target stocks’, ‘target barrels’, ‘shooting slings’, ‘shooting jackets’, etc. If one’s weapon malfunctions, an “alibi†is declared, allowing the competitor to re-shoot that portion of the course. There are MANY rules that must be adhered to in the spirit of ‘sportsmanship’ and ‘fairness’.

However, if one tries to take these ‘target rifles’ and these techniques into the combat or fighting arena, one quickly discovers that this is the WRONG tool for the job. (The target guns are unnecessarily heavy, the components can be fragile, the target slings useless, the shooting jacket too restrictive, the ‘rules’ can get you killed, blah blah blah)

In target shooting, there is NO movement. All shots are fired to a target that is a known distance. One studies the effect of wind by range flags and observing the mirage effect.

The target stance is characterized by having the body perpendicular to the target. The feet are shoulder width apart and pointing in the same direction as the upper body (at 90 degrees to the target), the body is totally relaxed, the breathing controlled and slow, the firing arm/elbow stuck out at 90 degrees to create a nice pocket for the stock, the support hand forms a cradle for the front of the weapon, the rearward pull of the weapon into the shoulder is accomplished with the middle, fourth and fifth fingers of the firing hand. For this stance, one needs the longer length of pull as characterized by the M16-A2 stock. (Length of pull is the distance from the trigger to the rear of the butt stock. With the ‘A2 – and most ‘target rifles’ this distance is 13.5â€)

Fighting or combat is altogether different. Movement is the key to success. Shoot. Move. Communicate. Also shootmovecommunicate (at the same time). The ‘targets’ shoot back. There really are no rules. “Alibi’s†do not exist. It is “OK†to shoot someone while they are in the middle of mag change and no one will prosecute you for fighting “unfairâ€. One couldn’t care less about wind and drift. One is not concerned with getting an absolutely perfect sight picture, coupled with flawless sight alignment, followed up with stellar trigger control. One only wants to get hits on target! Center of mass is preferable, but ANY hit is GREAT! Follow up with more hits if necessary.

The fighting stance and the target stance have nothing in common. First off, while in the ‘fighting stance’ the upper body is NO MORE than 45 degrees to the target, with less being better. How many of us when we run or move quickly do so with our upper torso at 45 to 90 degrees??? Nobody! If combat shooting is not about moving, then your idea of combat is severely mistaken. So, one should ideally have one’s upper torso facing the threat allowing one to move (run) and still keep the weapon trained on the threat.

The elbows should be ‘down’; BOTH hands are gripping the weapon (not a death grip – but a ‘controlled grip’ like when gripping a hammer.) and the upper body in a relaxed but alert state. (This allows for ‘fluid movement’ – movement that is SMOOTH – not jerky.)

Some folks ‘poo-pah’ the front handgrip of the M4 RAS type arrangement. Most of this ‘poo-pahing’ comes from ignorance. These people, in almost every case, form their comments from target shooting – and they are right. For strictly target shooting, where the support hand does not ‘grip’ the weapon, but merely cradles it, the front handgrip is utterly worthless. BUT, we are talking about a fighting instrument here, NOT a target piece, and under those conditions, the front handgrip is VERY useful.

The feet are facing the target, with a slight amount of ‘turn’ or ‘blading’ being acceptable. However, keep in mind that it really doesn’t matter what the feet are doing as one should not be standing still anyway. One should be MOVING.

The legs are ‘flexed’ or slightly bent, so as to allow one to move quickly, and to act as ‘shock absorbers’ while moving. If you find you are ‘skipping’, ‘hopping’ or ‘crabbing’ with your legs instead of walking or running naturally, then your upper body is angled too far away from the target. Square your shoulders to the target more (so your shoulders are more parallel with the target) until your ‘foot work’ is more natural and straight. You want to walk or run as you would if you did not have a weapon in your hands, or as close to it as possible.

The upper torso is also leaning forward at the bottom of the rib cage (not the hips) to afford easy movement, and to somewhat negate the recoil forces of the weapon as it discharges.

A shorter length of pull with regards to the butt stock make it much easier to assume and keep the fighting position. The collapsible stock on the CAR-15/M4 series all the way closed (9.7†LOP) or open to the first stop (10.6†LOP) seem to work best for most people.

The butt stock it placed more in the collarbone area than out on the shoulder. This allows one to see the red dot/front sight without have to ‘kant’ one’s head over and down to see the sight(s). In other words, keep your head erect, without any weird head movements.

So - bottom line - on a "target rifle" - they may or may not be of any use. But for a "fighting rifle" - I want one (and do have them) on mine - whether it is a "real" foregrip like I have on my M4gery - or whether it is the magazine that I grasp like a foregrip on my AK and FN-FAL.

cheers

tire iron

 

[Citadel99]

tire iron,

Well said. I was going to answer along the same lines just without as much detail or grace.

Mark

 

[tire iron]

Citadel,

Thanks for your kind words! My wife would be shocked to hear that I did something with "grace"!

cheers

tire iron

 

[Jeff Timm]

In real CLOSE, Close Quarters Battle, it gives you another good handle, if someone grabs your fancy rifle.

Geoff
Who is beginning to think the M-4 Carbine in 10mm might be a good idea.

 

[MrMurphy]

Tire iron said what i was going to say before I could.



There's already an M-4 in .357 Sig out there somewhere..... I've seen it in Guns & Weapons for Law Enforcement.

 

[artherd]

Slight increase in controlability under rapid-fire.

Good place to mount a light (or controls for one.)

You're a bit faster on-target and swinging the gun around.

The only real cost is some negligible weight, none with the SureFire grip if you already are mounting a flash-light anyway.

Bottom line:
I'm in favor of ANYTHING that helps me shoot the other guy FIRST.

 

[Harry Tuttle]

a vertical front grip adds 3 CDI points

 

[Mulliga]

Another reason is heat toleration. A SAR-1 without a vertical handguard can heat up pretty quickly.

 

[Mr. Chitlin]

I put one on one of my AR's a while back, not really knowing if I would like it or not. This particular AR is used in 3 gun matches. Since I have started using it, it just seems to be a more natural and comfortable position for me to hold the rifle. Also, after a 50 or 60 round course, your hand is still away from the heat, as Mulliga stated. As the others have said, for target shooting, specially from a bench with sandbags, it is in the way, but for fast action, I wouldn't be without it.

 

[NordicG3K]

Did somebody say "M-4 carbine in 10mm?" Hmmmm, now that sounds like great idea to me!

 

[shoobe01]

Tire iron -- and many others --, I don't just shoot target style sitting still. That's actually the reason I asked. I am absolutely not in any dangerous profession, so do not run around with my rifle while people shoot at me. However, the sport shooting and training I have done assume this sort of work. I took one rifle class, and have traded learnings from many others who have attended further classes. And shoot IDPA/IPSC courses, usually for tactical survival instead of time and winning.

In all cases, I encounter very few vertical front grips or the techniques you mention. When I had a pistol caliber carbine, especially, I tried the shooting head-on (less bladed) techniques you seem to mention, as they provide bettter mobility. I even thought it might have applications in full-sized rifles. I was, however, critisized for shooting a stocked gun in an un-rifle-like manner. Even my training for movement with a rifle assumes you will be fairly bladed to the target, and simply move while in this otherwise classic rifle-like manner.

I also find it interesting that everything else you say jibes with what I have been trained or feel myself. Knees bent, lean a tad forward, arms down, etc. Just the degree of blading and front grip are different.

I also wonder when this became apparent to enough people that it was okay to put front grips on your rifle? For example, we specifically chose to remove it from the Thompson when it became the M1 version. At some point, recently, there has been a small doctrinal shift. The SOPMOD kit includes one, so I gather it was around then, and is certainly official at some level. Can anyone tell, anecdotally, how many of these are seen at the big rifle schools these days (Thunder Ranch, etc.)?

I also wanna make it clear, I am not trying to argue. I really want to know what is up with this apparent disconnect in our shared training doctrine.

 

[tire iron]

shoobe01,

I certainly understand your thoughts - and I can tell that you are not being 'argumentive'.

Presented here are some thoughts/ramblings of mine.

Every Marine is taught to "target" shoot. Unfortunately - only some units within the Marine Corps are taught to actually "fight" with a rifle.

Target shooting is so ingrained in our 'shooting society' that it controls much of what is considered 'doctrine'.

For the sake of disscussion though - lets throw out ALL of what we were taught regarding 'shooting'.

Lets look at this problem (fighting or moving and shooting with a long arm) with a 'totally' clean slate.

How do humans move?? Do they move 'bladed'? Do the 'crab' when walking forward? Do they take one big step and then with the trailing foot bring it up just rearward of the forward foot??

No - we move forward, shoulders square, taking as big or as small of steps as the terrain provides.

Our head is erect, our eyes 'level' and our center of gravity is slightly forward.

This provides the BEST options for a human to react to sudden changes. He can move front/back/sideways/oblique - down - up - anywhere QUICKLY.

So - why would some that is carrying a longarm hamstring themselves by 'blading'?? All it does is COMPLICATE movement.

The reason this information is just coming out - is that SHOOTING and MOVING is something that is very NEW to the military training doctrine. It is even LESS evident at "shooting schools". The reason why is 'cardboard' doesn't shoot back!! Cardboard will wait ALL DAY for you to stand there and shoot. Cardboard will not move.

Because cardboard doesn't force us to move - and since almost all ranges will not allow movement - the "errors" of trying to integrate "target shooting methods" with "fighting" methods has been slow in coming.

However - in the Special Operations units of the military and the more progressive SWAT teams in the country - they have been practicing shooting while moving for a couple of decades now.

THAT is where this "new" doctrine comes from. THOUSANDS of hours doing "force on force" (thanks to simunitions/paintball and now airsoft) has shown CONCLUSIVELY that the old method....well.... SUCKS! It gets guys KILLED. It does NOT permit smooth fluid movement. It promotes un-natural movement - it leads to jerky motion - it SUCKS when trying to move while 'bladed'.

So - I applaud you for your initiative in "figuring this out" on your own. Don't let Joe Smoe talk you out of what you intuitively knew would be a "better way". The guys telling you it is 'wrong' are steeped in the 'old school method' of "target shooting".

Get them in a CQB environment with simunitions and they will be believers in NO TIME (*pain* is a powerful motivator!). BTDT!

Don't look at what TR and other "schools" teach - but check out photos of our SpecOps boys have on thier M4s. (Since the odds are you will not be training with them to see how they "do it" - you can see how they "do it" by looking at thier equipment. These guys' LIVES depend on what they carry/use - it is NOT just a 'pay-check' for them. Some intructors/schools haven't "been anywhere or done anything" except go to other schools taught by other guys who havent been anywhere or done anything too. So what they teach may or may not be worth anything.

BTW - here are some photos I have found:

Special Forces in the PI - note both elbows DOWN - leaning slightly forward - NOTE FOREGRIP

Force Recon on board ship - practicing - note both elbows DOWN - leaning forward at bottom of rib cage (not necessarily the waist!) NOTE FOREGRIP

Regular USMC - note the Marine on the left - and the Marine in the center - heads erect, elbows down - they LISTENED and ready to SHOOT WHILE MOVING. However - check out the Marine on the right - CLASSIC target stance - elbow OUT - head dropped over to side - he is ready to SHOOT but not MOVE. He must square his body, lift his head in order to get ready to move. Then he CAN'T shoot while moving!

Hope this helps,

cheers

tire iron

 

[fix]

What tire iron said...particularly

The vert grip works WITH your body. You don't have to force your hands to go 'palms up'.

that part. This sums it up in a nutshell. For too many years, shooters adapted their bodies to the weapon. Now, we've finally learned to do the opposite.

 

[skebe]

Because they're tactically delicious.

=)

Oh and I find it more comfortable, personally.

p.s. I don't want to get back elbow shot off from sticking it out so that's why I shoot my rifles with both elbows down.

 

[DMK]

I realize this may not work for all rifles, but for AR-15s, why not just grab the front of the magwell?

 

[fix]

Magwell hold creates potential conflict with ejection port under stress, resulting in burned fingers...or thumb for us weak handed shooters.

 

[Correia]

DMK, putting to much pressure on an AR mag to the rear can cause malfunctions. I prefer vertical foregrips, when I use a FAL or an AK is just grasp the magazine as a foregrip and there is no danger of malfunctions due to the rock and lock nature of the magazine.

Tire, great post.

 

[tire iron]

DMK,

As long as one is aware of the potential problems brought up by "fix" and "Correia" - then one CAN use the mag well of an AR.

Correia is also correct in that the MAGAZINES of the AK/FN/M1a can be used as "fore grips" since they all employ a front lug for lock-up as well as a back lug - making these sturdy enough to use as 'fore grips'.

Remember too - that we are not "pulling" back with the fore-grip with any real force at all. We are only pulling back enough to the keep the long arm on our shoulder - we are not to trying to 'control' the recoil.

If you stay RELAXED - not commatose - but "relaxed" - the long arm will recoil and come back down all in its own faster than you can pull the trigger the second time.

I mean think about it - we have a rifle that weighs a minimum of 7 pounds and are launching a projectile that wieghs somewhere between 55 and 150 grains. The weight difference is HUGE (with a 7 pound rife with 150 grain bullet - the rifle weighs 326 TIMES what the bullet does). So if you relax and let the rifle shoot - it will do a MUCH better job of coming back on target than you will by "musceling" it. (In fact - if your dot or sight is staying "up" after a shot - you are not relaxed enough and are trying to "fight" the recoil.)

The front and rear grips aid in "flying" the long arm. SMOOTH course corrections. SLOW IS SMOOTH. SMOOTH IS FAST.

(Thanks for the kind words Correia!)

cheers

tire iron

 

[Chris Rhines]

I used to use a vertical hold on my AR - however, during a carbine class I found that pulling the gun back into my shoulder with my weak hand would drastically increase felt recoil and muzzle rise. I switched to a semi-vertical hold (grasping the rifle at the junction between magwell and fore-end) with no rearwards pressure, and did much better.

Try for yourself, and see what works. A good test is to shoot .25 splits (4 shots/second) into an IDPA target at ten yards - with a good neutral hold, you should be able to keep every shot in the -0 ring at that pace.

- Chris

 

[tire iron]

Chris,

That is the "key" -

grasping...with no reward pressure.

Whether or not one uses a "fore grip" or uses the mag well - DON'T PULL BACK like you were taught to do (this is with essentially non-recoiling firearms - with heavy recoiling firearms - revert to your "old" training. )

cheers

tire iron

 

[BDM]

My only gripe with the foregrips was the expensive systems needed to attach it until I discovered rails that attach to the handguard so now I can still use my carbine in a traditional target hold or add the fore grip for combat shooting and I did it for under $100,got a good grip"Tango Down grip" and a good rail.As far as the marine in the picture in a traditional target hold with out a fore grip you can learn to hold a rifle in a traditional way with both shoulders down and head straight with both eyes open.If he had both eyes open his head would not be canted to the right.being able to shoot and move is determined more by how you are aiming than if you have a fore grip or not.He is aiming traditional with one eye open,canted head.Both eyes open head would be straight regardless of the hold.The fore grip is more natural but I can do either without much effort.I like both ways because I dont like to get lazy and fall into any niche.Its like optics,love my aimpoint but Im also good with my iron sights.I will say its easier to switch shooting lefty with the fore grip than lefty with a traditional hold.