pistol grip ??

[gunssb]

okay so what's the reasoning behind gun grabbers not liking the pistol grip ? I put a pistol grip on my mossberg 500 and I've so much better control now. But can't do it on any centerfire rifle here is the reason only so all the new semi-autos can be banned ?? I would just like to know the real reason if any and not get into cali bashing...thanks!

'cause you can conceal it easier ?

[gunssb]

Originally Posted by Logansdad

'cause you can conceal it easier ?

eh ? I guess that was humor - cause how do you conceal a SKS

[Dennis]

The truth is there is no reason
no technical reason other that it is a shared charcteristic of most assault rifles.
the "pistol" grip rifle has zero effect at to its leathality is is a ruse
for people that have zero knowledge about firearms.

[BattleRifleG3]

There is a reason. We were sold out.

The antis were trying to figure out how to ban gusn a step at a time, and were looking for a law that only banned "evil" guns that "only criminals" could ever want. So they looked through catalogs and impulsively decided "oh, that looks scary" and such. But they still needed to figure out what features to restrict. In comes Bill Ruger, whose Mini-14 is less popular than the AR-15 due to low reliability and accuracy. The advantage he has is that the Mini is based on the older design of the M1 Garand and M14, utilizing a one piece wooden stock with an integral curved grip instead of the vertical pistol grip. An AR-15 requires a straightline stock for its cycling mechanism and that requires a vertical grip beneath. It also has only a small side ejection port with the rest of the action closed off to keep as much dirt out as possible. Thus it requires a detachable magazine. The same is generally true of the AK, though its design is a little more flexible. The AK and AR-15 are the primary competition of the Ruger Mini series. Ruger had a fixed magazine version of his Mini in mind to corner the market as the only gun able to survive such a ban.

Now Ruger didn't get his way entirely, the congress ended up with a list of five features from which only one could be had on a rifle, and only if it already had a detachable magazine. But California's ban left the Mini-14 the only gun that survived their ban, all thanks to Ruger's whispering in the anti's ears about which features to ban.

The company may be currently changing their direction. I'll be keeping an eye on them. In the meantime, I'll only buy a used Ruger.

Now if you want to actually be rational about what makes pistol gripped guns different, here's why. Notice how the separate pistol grip came in pretty much when full auto became standard among standard issue rifles. The antis claim it's only to spray a zillion people without aiming. Nonsense. There are two reasons. 1.) A straightline action (little or no muzzle climb) requires that the grip be separate from the buttstock, especially if the action assembly is partially housed in the buttstock. 2.) A pistol grip is the natural position of the hand.
The question shouldn't then be why do we have pistol grips now, but why didn't we before. The reason is that with repeating, then self loading, then automatic weapons, the use of the bayonet decreased. A single piece stock is crucial to having a heavy rigid arm capable of bayoneting or buttstroking someone when you're out of ammo. Notice how the shape of the stock slowly moved towards a pistol grip as the magazine capacity and rate of fire increased. It's not to spray people, it's because you had a lower chance of running out and having to use your gun as a polearm. Notice the straight stocks of the 1903 Springfield, 1896 Mauser, and Mosin Nagant, then the mildly knobbed SMLE, then the curved 98 Mauser, and finally the M1 Garand and SKS. Then there was the M14, which due to its non-protruding grip was hard to control compared to the FAL. Even the FAL had a separate grip, but it and the stock were still close to a shape ideal for impaling and the metal buttplate was good for buttstroking. The AKs were equally tough but didn't have as buttstroking a shape. Finally, with adoption of the 223 round, we saw a drastic increase in the number of plastic and folding stocks, because the use of the bayonet and the rifle as a beating implement was effectively over.

[gunssb]

grrr...sorry, I won't be buying another ruger. I know some people like them but we're too far back up against the wall to take anymore of this crap in this state

brg that was a really useful post about the bayonet/pistol grip :right:

my SKS has a folding stock and a pistol grip

[gunssb]

Originally Posted by Logansdad

my SKS has a folding stock and a pistol grip

la la la la la *hands over ears* - I can't hear you

[BattleRifleG3]

Ding dong, the ban is dead! Unless everything about it's pre-89, make sure your US parts are in compliance.

Originally Posted by gunssb

cali bashing...thanks!

Californicated has it's own AWB

[NorCalAshnjikov]

Originally Posted by Logansdad

Californicated has it's own AWB

Yes. It's so-fing retarded its not even funny.
http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/dwcl/12275.htm

There is no way I can get a semi-auto rifle with a comfortable pistol grip.

[Thrawn]

Originally Posted by Logansdad

my SKS has a folding stock and a pistol grip

Originally Posted by gunssb

la lala la la *hands over ears* - I can't hear you

So does mine, with a thirty round mag, also have a twenty rounder. :nod: :right: :cheer:

[ducktapehero]

Mini-14 is less popular than the AR-15 due to low reliability and accuracy

Accuracy yes, the mini-14 is much less accurate than an AR-15 but I doubt the less reliable part.

[BattleRifleG3]

The Mini's action is more inherently reliable. But finding reliable mags is a whole different matter. With the Mini it's the minority of mags that work, with the AR, it's the minority that don't.
Indeed, though, the Mini action would be less sensitive to the elements. I should have been more clear on that.

[ducktapehero]

I'll agree with that. I love the "concept" of the mini-14 but the execution sucks.

[Dennis]

oww I cant agree the ruger is a fine rifle the M1 garand action is tried and true.
I thing the accuracy issue is incremental at best.
there is so much more ar15 accuracy enhancements avalible and the ar design lends it self to being made more accurate.
the mini 'ssights arent as easily adjusted as the M1 and the scope mounting is tenuous at best.
the mini action is still dependant on the triggergroup squeezing the wood against the reciever.
when the wood gets squozed everything gets loose.
all these variables do contribute to mini 14 's not being as accurate
but only slightly.
as far as Bill Ruger wispering in to the ears of politicians
I dont know
it wouldnt suprise me.

Ruger doesnt have the reputation it once did
the Mk III .22 is crrrrrr a p
the service automatics arent what they could be
the vaquero's are way cool but the sp101 could be better
there could be so many obvious improvements.

[Gyrene]

Actually in California, you can buy pistol Grip equipped rifles, and they do appear to be the same as those you can buy in the rest (most of it anyhow) of the USA.

An AR-15 look-alike is the FAB-10 which has a fixed 10 round magazine and you have to pull the rear pin to pop it open and load it with a stripper clip. The good news is you can fit any AR-15 upper; the bad news is you need to work out its little nuances before you can rely on it. Once you get it working, they are ok (not great, but ok). A Rear Pin is available that has a large ring on it (sort of like a grenade pin ring) to enable the shooter to be able to be positive with the pull when opening it up to reload (saves fingernails, too).

Currently the builders of the FAB-10 supply you with a copy of an Approval letter from the California DOJ, showing that they are legal without having to be registered as Assault Weapons (which you can't do since 1 January 2000).

I have seen guys pop the FAB-10 open and reload with a stripper clip, and be ready to fire within half a second of others dropping and inserting a new magazine with an AR-15.
--------------
Some people are also remanufacturing FN-FALs, by fixing 10 round magazines, so they require a "TOOL" to remove the magazine, which makes the Quasi FN-FAL available to California shooters. Again, they need to be reloaded with a stripper clip, and believe me, most of the time they can be reloaded with basically one motion as fast a the two motions required to reload a fresh 10 round magazine.
-----------
I have seen other California Legal rifles with fixed 10 round magazines that would normally be "Assault Weapons" under the current laws, but they are legal due to the non-removeable 10 round magazines
----------
I have seen an AK-Something that was also California legal, without a detachable magazine, it too was reloaded with a stripper clip.
-----------
Another version of the AK was redesigned as a "Pump Action", and it uses standard AK-47 magazines.

These all have the pistol grip, and most have a muzzle brake.

[BattleRifleG3]

I actually was aware of those rifles, but they were innovated only in order to comply with a ban intended to eliminate them. The one thing I can't imagine is a stripper fed AK. How do they fit the stripper clip in?

[Gyrene]

BRG3 - OOOOPPPPssss. I had one, and I know better. I was thinking one thing and my fingers typed something else (I do have the flu). I am not sure what I was thinking, it is very clear that the AK series is not set up to take strippers unless you are loading directly into the magazines outside the rifle.

[BattleRifleG3]

Some people have improvised a fixed AK mag by either mounting a drum and loading from the back or by putting a thumb tab on the follower and drilling a hole in the back of a banana mag to load each round in. But no strippers.

I had a few fixed mag setups in mind before the ban died for the rest of us.