Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: What was wrong with the A1 grip?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,797
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by rob_s View Post
    I have also always wondered why they did away with a grip that works for almost everyone to a grip that works for almost no-one.

    but then, we should also ask glock the same thing. or ask Magpul why their only integrated triggerguard frontstrap for the MIAD has that stupid bump.
    I've wondered the same thing. I was disappointed when I got my full MIAD kit.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bragg
    Posts
    90
    Feedback Score
    0
    Am I the only one who uses the bump on the A2 grip as a shelf for my ring finger to get a nice secure high grip? Or do I have the smallest hands here?

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    1,861
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    I like the A1, certain setups I don't mind the A2 bump, but many others I do.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    NoVa
    Posts
    2,906
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    A1 is my perfered style - however I like the texture with the MIAD in that format much more than the actual A1 grip.

    I can live with the A2 (and did for years) on a 5.56mm gun, but the bump just rubs me raw when shooting a 7.62mm gun, I went so far as to file the bump off a demo Battle Rifle when shooting it at the LAC-M4C Industry class last year, and now run MIAD's exclusively on the demo guns (with the exception of the M110 SASS which is stock)

    Edit - coldblue (Lt. Col. Dave Lutz, USMC ret.) here is also my boss at work and the 'father' of the M16A2, if I am paraphrasing him correctly he beleived the bump was a good reasurance for troops in combat based on his experiences in RVN, keep in mind that was way before any of the aftermarket grips where ever designed.
    Last edited by KevinB; 11-10-09 at 14:05.
    Kevin S. Boland
    Manager, Federal Sales
    FN America, LLC
    Office: 703.288.3500 x181 | Mobile: 407-451-4544 | Fax: 703.288.4505
    www.fnhusa.com

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    7,152
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    Can't remember where it was, but I recall being told by someone I deemed credible at the time the the A2 ridge was for added stability by allowing the index finger better leverage while the weapon/forearm was being "twisted".

    True or not, this thread has prompted me to get another MOE, as I have another A2 that needs replacing.
    Last edited by Safetyhit; 11-10-09 at 22:29.
    "Facit Omina Voluntas = The Will Decides" - Army Chief


  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Penna
    Posts
    93
    Feedback Score
    0
    I was at a local gun shop a couple days ago.The guy had a Charles Daly carbine on the shelf and I ask to see it. It had the 1/9 twist barrel,but it also had the old A1 style rear grip on it.The store owner had said It was a NIB carbine,which it looked to be.I was just wondering why that style grip was on a NIB weapon?

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    619
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    I use A1's on my retros.....does this count?
    Low Speed, High Drag Phone Operator

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Niantic CT
    Posts
    1,964
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)
    Finger grooves were in vogue when the A2 was designed. Other then that I can see no reason for it.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Southern Indiana
    Posts
    1,888
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by KevinB View Post
    Edit - coldblue (Lt. Col. Dave Lutz, USMC ret.) here is also my boss at work and the 'father' of the M16A2, if I am paraphrasing him correctly he beleived the bump was a good reasurance for troops in combat based on his experiences in RVN...
    It was "good reasurance" of what exactly?

    The A1 length stock is also more useful then the A2 stock. The Colt "CS" stock, A1 length with A2 materials, works great.
    "The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts." Justice Robert Jackson, WV St. Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943)

    "I don’t care how many pull ups and sit ups you can do. I care that you can move yourself across the ground with a fighting load and engage the enemy." Max Velocity

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    4,710
    Feedback Score
    23 (100%)
    Well, playing the Devil's advocate, I would guess....

    1. The A2 grip aids in repeatability of hand position.
    2. The Longer A2 stock aids in prone shooting by increasing the LOP.
    3. Obviously, the A2 sights were an improvement for target purposes.

    The focus seemed to be on increasing the usuable accuracy of the rifle.

    That said, I prefer the A1 grip, the A1 stock and the A1 sights. But I am a short dude, and I hate tinkering with sights.
    If you aren't armed when you take a dump in your own home then your opinion on what is a practical daily carry weapon isn't interesting to me.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •