Poll, Using the magazine as a grip.

[DoubleTapDrew]

As for CQB, there are lots of different techniques taught, but I do not favor grabbing the mag/magwell for this. I prefer grabbing the rifle as far forward on the handguard as possible. This gives you better leverage and muzzle control.

It seemed like a few years ago in the AR-15 world, holding the magwell was all the rage. After that, it became en vogue to hold the handguard out as far as possible (and that's when midlength and rifle length FF handguards started showing up on everything). I'm not sure which is "better" but it seems like holding the rifle further out would allow for quicker, intuitive transitions on multiple targets (seems like the 3-gun guys started doing it first), but may allow more muzzle wavering on distant targets from that unsupported hand out there.
I may be way off base but that's just my take on it. Also, I think you kind of need to use the mag as a handgrip if you want to use your M203

 

[BushyGuy]

it should be ok, look at the M203 Grenade launcher underneath the M4, they use the mag for a handle.

 

[Zerodefect]

I can't aim with a magwell grip at all!

I reach out as far as I can on a rail so I have better leverage and steadier aim. Threegun/Magpull style.

That soldier in the old WW2 pic with the M1 probally couldn't hit the side of a barn holding the M1 like that. LOLz. That pics insane, who comes up with that stuff?

The magwell grip may be effective if your stuck in a tight spot and your enemy is in a bunker/ditch only 30 feet away. Where your improvising an odd position, and trying to stay as small as possible. Much like a paintball senerio. Note that allmost all paintball guns use a short "magwell" type grip.

 

[LemmyCaution]

That soldier in the old WW2 pic with the M1 probally couldn't hit the side of a barn holding the M1 like that. LOLz. That pics insane, who comes up with that stuff?

Um, the Army? It's from the army field manual for the M-14, which dates it a lot closer to the Vietnam War than WWII.

Also, it's an M14, not an M1.

Also, you might want to have a look at some of these images:

http://www.google.com/images?q=offhand%20position%20shooting

 

[HorseSoldier]

Um, the Army? It's from the army field manual for the M-14, which dates it a lot closer to the Vietnam War than WWII.

And yet still rooted in the principles that we should train our troops to be able to soundly smoke the hell out of Picketts Charge. Quaint, and wholly ineffective when its two-way go time.

 

[madcratebuilder]

When I went to the two week Squad Designated Marksman course put on by the Army Marksmanship Unit back in 2008, the only way we were allowed to shot was by holding on to the front of the magzinewell and the magazine. After two weeks being on the range and shooting every day, things have a way of sticking with you, and now the only way I shot my issue M16A4 or my personal M4 and A4 clones is well holding onto magzinewell and the magazine.

Interesting that the MU taught that method. I do use the mag well/mag when operating my 14.5 rifle, not so much with the longer barrel rifles. That photo of the M14 goes against everything I've been taught about that rifle. Holding the M14 mag or resting the rifle on the mag is sup[pose to be bad juju, so I have never have.

 

[AK103K]

Um, the Army? It's from the army field manual for the M-14, which dates it a lot closer to the Vietnam War than WWII.

Also, it's an M14, not an M1.

Also, you might want to have a look at some of these images:

http://www.google.com/images?q=offha...ion shooting

What youre showing there, and in most of the pics in the link, are more or less just traditional offhand "target" positions.

If you look at the rest of the positions in the same manual, youll find that they too are just basic "target" positions.

That offhand position with the M14 works OK, and I always used a modified version of it (I dont hold the mag, but the stock forward of it) when shooting HP and the DCM matches, but it is what it is, and not really of much use when your utilities arent starched, and your boots arent bloused and shiny.

 

[ultradoc]

I was taught not to by uncle sam. even resting the mag on the ground was a no no

 

[benEzra]

It's certainly OK to do so (from both a safety and reliability standpoint, IMO), but I find that I am faster and more stable in transitions if I place the left hand as far out on the handguard as possible (and hence the left arm relatively straight), with the thumb over the top of the handguard.

IIRC, the tucked-in, squared-up "shorty grip" encouraged by gripping the magwell, or a VFG placed very close to the magwell, was primarily intended to help entry teams square their armor up to a straight-ahead threat, and to take up less space in an entry stack, neither of which is really applicable to most shooters. And at least for me, it amplifies the tendency to overswing and/or "bob".

 

[PandaBearBG]

I think its fine, I do and sometimes do the mag "monopod" in a pinch, whatever works best for you. If the gun jams or kabooms, well its time to get a better gun.

 

[M91/30]

Your probably more interested in AR's but I use the magazine as a grip all the time on my 10/22 (25 and 33rnd mags) only problems ive ever had was if i really pushed on it and i got an occasional feeding issue but that was only with the loose fitting BC mags. Works fine with gsg-5 as well.

 

[LemmyCaution]

And yet still rooted in the principles that we should train our troops to be able to soundly smoke the hell out of Picketts Charge. Quaint, and wholly ineffective when its two-way go time.

Of course you are correct, but the poll does not ask if it's OK to use the magazine as a grip in combat shooting. It just asks the question generally. And the answer, as regards the M-14 in traditional position shooting, is 'yes.'

And also, I was responding to the poster who stated that the soldier in the illustration 'couldn't hit the side of a barn' with that stance. Which is incorrect, as that stance is very well accepted for offhand target shooting.

 

[henschman]

It seemed like a few years ago in the AR-15 world, holding the magwell was all the rage. After that, it became en vogue to hold the handguard out as far as possible (and that's when midlength and rifle length FF handguards started showing up on everything). I'm not sure which is "better" but it seems like holding the rifle further out would allow for quicker, intuitive transitions on multiple targets (seems like the 3-gun guys started doing it first), but may allow more muzzle wavering on distant targets from that unsupported hand out there.
I may be way off base but that's just my take on it.

No, you are very much on-base! The far forward support hand technique for CQB is all about muscling the barrel onto target, which you have to do in a dynamic environment involving moving, and targets presenting in different places. It allows you to control your muzzle more quickly and more precisely than other methods, but you are still ultimately relying on your muscles to hold up the rifle. This is necessary for CQB, but it is the OPPOSITE of what you want to do for precision marksmanship. Precision marksmanship is all about minimizing muscle input. That's why precision shooters use a loop or hasty sling, or a bipod, or sandbags... it allows you to relax your support hand, and use solid, consistent elements like bone, sling, and ground to build your position instead of muscles.

Personally, I like to have my serious battle rifles set up for doing both CQB and precision. The best method I have come up with so far is a 1 or 2 point tactical sling for carrying the rifle, but also an M-1/M-14 issue GI web sling attached to the support arm in the "loop" position, with an extra hook or a QD swivel on the front, so it can be quickly attached and removed from the rifle. You can use the far-forward support hand method for CQB, and then if you need extra precision for a longer shot or a smaller target, it's as simple as hooking up the GI web sling, wrapping your wrist, and taking a solid position.

If you know what you are doing with a sling, you can get just about as stable as you could with a bipod. However, it is a lot more versatile since it can be used in any position, and it takes up a lot less weight and bulk than a bipod. It also actually keeps the rifle in your shoulder pocket, unlike a bipod, so it is great for rapid fire.

I don't put bipods on anything except for long range bolt guns that are intended to be fired slow fire from long distances.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

No, you are very much on-base! The far forward support hand technique for CQB is all about muscling the barrel onto target, which you have to do in a dynamic environment involving moving, and targets presenting in different places. It allows you to control your muzzle more quickly and more precisely than other methods, but you are still ultimately relying on your muscles to hold up the rifle. This is necessary for CQB, but it is the OPPOSITE of what you want to do for precision marksmanship.

Good description. One of the main purposes I use the magwell hold for is comfort - if I have to hold the rifle at ready for an extended period of time, the far forward grip doesn't work because it relies a lot on muscles and even the big muscles in your shoulders and back can only stay in the game so long if they are bearing all the weight.

 

[henschman]

Yeah, that is a good point Bartholomew. I didn't think about the possibility of using a magwell hold for holding the rifle on target for a long time. This might be especially helpful for cops, who sometimes have to hold their weapons aimed toward the threat for a long time for a standoff-type situation.

If you have to remain aimed at the threat from the standing position, using something like a High Power type position might be nice... using that elbow on the rib cage, with support hand against the mag, to minimize muscle input. Better if you can just take a different position, like kneeling, or maybe use a wall or car hood for support in that type of situation, though.