Pistol grip psychology

[ATTICUS]

Why is it, that a rifle with a pistol grip is transormed into a military style/non-sporting/ assault type/ weapon of mass destruction by that grip. This goes beyond BATF rulings. It is a mindset, and I'm guilty of it myself. I would feel really strange taking an Fal,AK,AR deer hunting, but I don't know why. Fear of being laughed at by "real" hunters armed with their bolt action Remington 700's? Probably. I'd even feel a little strange taking the M1A (with 5 rd mag), but not nearly as much. Why do you think this is? Brainwashing?

[MeekAndMild]

Hunting rifles are designed for hunting and refined for that purpose. IMHO the angle of a pistol grip stock is wrong for semi-supported still shots from odd positions in the woods.

Sort of like the tradition we have of eating soup with spoons. I suppose a Bowie knife would work but is somehow wrong for the job.

(added later) Pistol grips do make FA fire easier, as they seem to make it easier to reduce muzzle climb with bursts. But this shouldn't be a factor in hunting. My state for instance specifically bans machine guns for hunting.

[Art Eatman]

Well, the anti-gunner mindset about pistol grips and black plastic ties in well with Cooper's dissertations on "Hoplophobia".

I have a certain negative attitude about para-military rifles or the modifications to make shotguns look "militaryish" because I'm mostly a hunter, and these guns in general are less efficient for me. And, walnut is just flat-out prettier than black plastic.

The pistol grip has the wrong ergonomics for searching around one's house in a self-defense situation. It makes for a very awkward position of one's wrist.

Art

[Ewok_Guy]

The pistol grip has the wrong ergonomics for searching around one's house in a self-defense situation. It makes for a very awkward position of one's wrist.

Duh.

[ATTICUS]

I'll agree that rifles equipped with PG's may not be optimal in some situations, but there is really no strong, legitimate reason not to use one (other than peer pressure). If someone can afford just one rifle for defense and small to medium game getting why not a PG equipped rifle? They have been incorported into every military/police weapon design for the last fifty years. They routinely travel with S.W.A.T. teams on building clearing missions. That alone seems to indicate that they are at least somewhat ergonomic for human hands, and not detrimental in putting a bullet on target at several hundered yards or a few feet. Duh ..my a**.

[Kaylee]

I think the ergonomics thing depends on how you're moving around. If you stay in a low ready/high ready position with the rifle shouldered, the pistol grip has superb ergonomics, I think.

If however you're just carrying the rifle afield, ready to snap it up to your shoulder when you see a shot -- the straigher stock of a sporting rifle feels a lot handier to me. As with so many other questions in the gunny world, I think it's a case of "well what are you gonna do with it?"

As to psychology of it.. yup, pistol grip and black-ness pretty much define Evil Scary Assault Guns. Well, that and big honkin' magazines. Hrmm.. kinda makes you wonder why a coat of "tactical" black paint ain't one of the "evil features" in the '94 ban, eh?

As to the why of the whole thing, as addressed in the original question.. hrmm.. I'd speculate it's 'cause to date, pistol grips have only really been used on people-popper type guns, so it's a simple visual association. Start making Remchester deer rifles in wood with a true pistol grip, and in 20 years, I'd wager the simple fact a rifle has such a grip won't seem "evil" or "assault"-ish. Of course, whether you'ld manage to sell such a monstroity is another issue entirely..

-K

[ATTICUS]

Anyway...what led me to bring this up was that I was sitting around yesterday, fooling with a "new to me" Fal 18" carbine. It's got a barrel, bolt, beautiful wood stocks (Art ) , uses .308 ammo - basically a dependable, accurate, all purpose rifle...... but then.. there is that evil pistol grip that makes it unacceptable to the Brady bunch and hunters alike.

I've killed more whitetail with my crossbow than any other tool- so it just makes me wonder about the logic of it all.

[Art Eatman]

There is a reason for my comment about the ergonomics of the pistol grip when doing a search around one's house in a defense situation. It is different from house-clearing by an attack group. I do make the presumption that the likelihood is of a night-time problem, and lighting is at best poor.

For one thing, I believe a port-arms carry is generally better. The weapon is in part a shield against a knife thrust. It is held close to the body where it cannot be grabbed. It can be used to sweep downward with the barrel as a club. It can be swept upward in a buttstroke motion.

To test this, hold a pistol-grip weapon in port arms and notice the awkward position of the wrist. This is quickly fatiguing. One can hold a conventionally-stocked weapon in a port-arms position for a very long time without fatigue. If one holds the weapon mounted to the shoulder with the muzzle pointed generally downward, all motions with the weapon will be awkward and slower than from a port arms position.

Art

[ATTICUS]

I agree with your tactical analogy. I also agree that military style rifles ar not the optimal choice for hunting. I'm just amazed that the perception of a rifle can change so much with the addition of so little.

I remember the assault weapons hearings in Congress a few years back and how the defenders of military style rifles were saying over and over "there is no functional difference between this rifle and a Remington deer rifle". But deer hunters (myself included) tend to rule them out of our gun line up pretty quickly. That was my only point.

BTW - A billion Asians eat soup every day and have never seen a spoon. There's more than one way to skin a cat (or eat cat soup).

[Art Eatman]

ATTICUS, I've watched the ever-increasing degree that perception outweighs reality ever since the beginning of Ralph Nader's "Let's save us from ourselves by more legislation" and LBJ's "My Great Society will make us all happy and cure ringworm."

Heck, we see it here in the perception that a pistol grip somehow improves the utility of one's home-defense rifle or shotgun...

None of it would matter except as laws are proposed and tax monies are spent. I have no interest in legislating against black stocks and pistol grips, whether or not I would ever buy one.

[Commander Fan]

I have used ARs in 6mm while hunting for the past few years. I think it has done well to introduce the sport of Service Rifle High Power to the area. People see that these are not 'closet guns' and suit the role of 'utility rifle' very well.

I easily go through an extra 100 rounds during deer season by letting fellow hunters fire my ARs. This has led to several of my friends purchasing them. And in most cases it leads to more frequent shooting. In the past, these were guys that did the yearly "3 shots to see if it's still on from last year". Now they're at the ranges every week.

The 'Black Gun' also envokes conversation from veterans and non-veterans alike. It stirs the curiosity of people not familar with it, and brings back memories for those that were issued one in the past.

I must add that I have WELL over a dozen deer-legal-calibered conventional rifles. I just don't find the ARs at a disadvantage for my style of hunting.

I have also been a bowhunter for nearly 30 years. Over this time I have met several 'hardcore' bowhunters that don't support firearms hunting. Now I see firearms hunters that don't support an additional attatchment to the firearm. It's hardly any different than a Remington model 7400 in function.

I say, whatever get's the job done. The job is bringing home the meat.

"Every moving creature that liveth, shall be food for you." Genesis 9:3

This is what it all comes down to.

[Art Eatman]

Commander Fan, I'm totally in accord with your point. Yup, anything that gets more folks shooting, or shooters doing more shooting--that's good.

I do have concern at times that people buy stuff that's more hype than utility. They have the free right to do so, of course--I just prefer that folks think before spending.

, Art

[Commander Fan]

True Art,

But it is easy nowadays to buld these rifles in the $400-$500 range with all NEW parts. The disign is simple and does not require the expensive barrel headspacing tools that are required with conventional rifles.

Most parts are built to drop-in, and the average hobbiest has the punches and hammers required. The only 'special' tool is a barrel wrench that sells for $34.

There are hundreds of people that use the 'BUILD IT YOURSELF' forum at www.ar15.com for support and nearly always end up with a new rifle in the end that funtions perfectly.

Of my 5 1/2 ARs, only two of them were factory built, and there is an endless supply of manufacturers and parts to choose from.

[chwi548]

I disagree with those that feel pistol grips are not appropriate for hunting. I use 10/22's with Choate pistol grip buttstocks frequently for squirrel and rabbit hunting. I find that the pistol grip allows me to carry the rifle more comfortably. I can control it better as I use my support hand to move brush if needed. As to the post about the pistol gripped weapon not good for clearing a house, in the motion that is required for upstrokes or downstrokes, the strong hand can move to a point where the pistol grip connects to the buttstock behind the grip for the same effect with no loss of performance. I'm kinda bothered by some of the tones coming out, in that judgements are made on those that do use pistol grips for hunting, or prejudices are coming out because of appearance. Military rifles are commonly tools designed for use in situations common to many hunting types. I'm not saying that military rifle hunters use them to pour masaive firepower into an animal, but I do feel that features such as the grip for control, accuracy, compactness, durability, ease of maintenance, etc... make for excellent hunting tools. They may not be for everyone, but I feel that all of us should be allowed to make that decision for ourselves without having to worry about other hunters/shooters berating us for it.

[Ewok_Guy]

I replaced the standard wooden stock on my Marlin 60SB with one of those Choate pistol grip stocks. I just could not stand the awkward angle when out afield.

[Nodakmarine]

Yeah, I think it's brainwashing IMHO. You get it from both ends with anti-gunners/hunters claiming that you are hunting with a "machine gun" and the PC-hunters/gun owners that think you are "unsporting" if your rifle doesn't say Browning or Weatherby on it someplace. Quite honestly though I have no problems using my M-14, AK, FN-FAL (and in ND, there is no magazine capacity limits anymore so full size magazines are no problem) for any hunting at all. Anybody that doesn't like it is an opinion that I don't care about and they can hunt on someone elses land and stay off of mine where they don't have to be bothered with the "non=sporting" apprearance of a service rifle in the hunting field.

[Art Eatman]

chwi548, you say, "...the strong hand can move to a point where the pistol grip connects to the buttstock behind the grip for the same effect with no loss of performance." Where I raise an eyebrow at this is the time required to move back to the firing grip. It's not very long, true; but it's still lost time. My thought process, here, derives from that long-ago time of bayonet drill with a Garand. (You can do all those motions without a bayonet, of course.)

My experience as a walking hunter has shown me that a conventional bolt action rides better when slung on my shoulder than does an AR-style critter. Simple as that. Sitting in a tree-stand, I can't see what difference style makes.

Brand name? What's that got to do with anything? The only thing that counts in a rifle is how well it functions and how well you can shoot it; in defense mode, you need to add how quickly you can get into action.

Still, everybody's gotta pick his own scenario that fits his chunk of world.

I've had an HK-91, four Colt ARs, and right now have a Bushmaster. It's not as though I know nothing about pistol grips.

As usual,

Art

[Archie]

Because I like the way they carry and point.

In fact, I find my Garand points easier and faster than a M-16 or variant.

When I was in service, I carried an M16, and shot it fairly well. (I qualified better with the M14 everytime.)

Also, the bulk of AR's are in .223 and I think it's just too little.

I should point out for the type of hunting I've done (Oregon brush), my little 6.5 Swede would be superior to either an AR type or my Garand. The AR is "clumsy' to me and the Garand is too dang heavy to carry all day.

Those are my preferences and my choices. I certainly don't think they should be legislated for all people at all time.

If one shoots deer sized critters with a .223, please take good, clean shots. If one wishes to hump a ten pound plus rifle through the puckerbrush all day, be my guest. And if you get a deer and I get skunked, I'll be happy for you anyhow. If I get a deer and you get skunked, I may not be as gracious.

[Jamie Young]

I think something like the FAL would be incredible awkward unless it was a Pistol Grip stock.

[MeekAndMild]

So that we can enjoy the sport more each one should hunt with whichever rifle he can comfortably shoot with consistant results sitting, squatting or standing or reclining in his/her tree stand and not knock the others' viewpoint. If they find an arquebus style curling metal buttplate best, then let them use it.

For soup I use a spoon.

[JohnKSa]

So, pistol grips aren't ergonomic?

Then why does virtually every match rifle in the world come with a thumbhole stock?

After all a thumbhole stock is just a pistol grip stock with wood connecting the bottom of the pistol grip to the buttstock.

Maybe you guys could call up Anschutz and give them some pointers on stock design.

John

[fix]

Maybe you guys could call up Anschutz and give them some pointers on stock design.

Maybe they should all call up virtually every major military power in the world while they're at it.

Art,

I've been reading your posts alot, and I think this is the first time I've ever disagreed with you. Personally, if I were inclined to clear my house...I'd take a pistol. However, if I were inclined to take a long gun, I certainly wouldn't be walking around at port arms. Maybe it's just me, but that borders on the absurd. If your attacker closes the gap on you, the weapon is protecting him just as much as you. Keep that muzzle downrange, no lower than 45 degrees unless turning corners. Honestly, I feel more "comfortable" at port arms myself but that is psychological because I've spent an awful lot of time in that position. I just can't see myself carrying a log gun at port arms into a situation that could be hostile. I'm not looking to get into a pugil stick match...

[trapshooter]

What's the difference between this:

[trapshooter]

This:

[trapshooter]

And this: