Hubbry Logo
Vertical forward gripVertical forward gripMain
Open search
Vertical forward grip
Community hub
Vertical forward grip
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Vertical forward grip
Vertical forward grip
Vertical forward grip
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
ISSC MK22 rifle with a vertical forward grip.

A vertical forward grip or foregrip is a vertical pistol grip mounted on the fore-end of a long-barrel firearm, designed for grasping by the frontal support hand (or "off hand").

Use

[edit]
An M4 carbine showing a GPS-02 "Grip Pod", a type of vertical grip that has a deployable bipod inside the handle

Forward grips aid in the maneuverability of the firearm, since the natural angle of a person's outstretched hand is more oriented to grasping objects at a vertical angle, rather than a horizontal one perpendicular to the body.[1] Foregrips can decrease accuracy in precision rifle shooting if the shooter tends to "muscle the weapon".[2]

Vertical foregrips can have features located inside the inner diameter, such as a deployable bipod inside the grip's housing.[3] The grip may also have a tactical light and the control switches molded into the grip's assembly. Other designs may contain storage space for spare parts, spare batteries for optics, weapon lights, or small first aid gear.

Stubby grip

[edit]
CBJ-MS with stubby grip

A shorter version is referred to as a "stubby grip" and is primarily intended to keep the shooter's hand from moving forward of the muzzle.[2]

Angled forward grip

[edit]
AR-15 with a Magpul Industries Angled Fore Grip (AFG®)

Angled forward grips can provide similar functionality to vertical forward grips. They differ in that a vertical foregrip is more useful for "driving" the weapon, while an angled foregrip is more effective at pulling the weapon into the shooter's shoulder while keeping the offhand wrist in a comfortable and manageable position, which helps with accuracy. Some angled foregrips are designed to be used with the C Clamp grip which allows good pointability (as vertical foregrips allow) as well as better accuracy because of the shooter's more firm purchase on the weapon. [4]

Legality on pistols in the U.S.

[edit]

The legality of vertical foregrips on pistols in the United States is unclear. In the United States, firearms are categorized by the National Firearms Act and firearms manufactured with specific features are subject to restrictions and controls.

In May 1993, in response to legal action brought by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF), the South Carolina District Court's finding of fact concluded that a pistol modified with the addition of vertical fore grips was still a pistol and not any other weapon device.[5]

In an open letter sent to Federal Firearms Licensees in April 2006, the ATF stated their interpretation of the law: that installing a vertical forward grip on a handgun is the same as manufacturing an Any Other Weapon (AOW) category firearm and subject to registration and taxation, with significant penalties for manufacturing or possessing such an unregistered weapon.[6]

The ATF has stated that angled grips do not make an AOW from a handgun.[7]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Vertical forward grip

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A vertical foregrip (VFG), also known as a vertical forward grip, is a firearm accessory consisting of a vertical handle attached beneath the fore-end of a rifle or carbine's handguard, oriented perpendicular to the barrel axis, enabling the shooter to securely grasp the weapon with the support hand for enhanced stability and control. Designed primarily for modular rail systems such as Picatinny, VFGs facilitate consistent hand placement, mitigate recoil, and reduce wrist strain during extended carry or firing, particularly in tactical scenarios involving barriers or close-quarters engagement. Emerging in the late 20th century through U.S. military adaptations like the Special Operations Peculiar Modification (SOPMOD) kit for the M4 carbine—inspired by earlier bullpup designs such as the Steyr AUG—VFGs proliferated with the adoption of rail-mounted accessories, transitioning from specialized use to widespread civilian and law enforcement applications. While praised for improving handling on shorter-barreled weapons, their utility remains debated, with some marksmanship experts, including former Navy SEAL instructors, criticizing VFGs for potentially undermining traditional rifle fundamentals by encouraging suboptimal grip techniques. Legally, VFGs are permissible on rifles with barrels of at least 16 inches under federal law, but attaching one to a pistol reclassifies the firearm as an "any other weapon" (AOW) under the National Firearms Act, necessitating ATF registration via Form 1, fingerprints, a photograph, and a $200 tax stamp prior to installation.

History

Origins and Early Development

The vertical forward grip traces its origins to early submachine guns designed for automatic fire, where it facilitated better muzzle control and operator stability. The , prototyped in 1918 and commercially produced starting in 1921, incorporated a vertical foregrip in its initial models to counter during sustained bursts, a feature particularly valued in close-range engagements. U.S. adopted Thompsons with vertical foregrips as standard issue in the , while British orders retained them until the horizontal foregrip supplanted the design on the M1928A1 variant around 1928 for compatibility with sling swivels. This configuration addressed the causal need for a hand position to absorb vertical forces inherent to high-rate fire, predating widespread use on due to traditional wooden handguards limiting modularity. Early development as a modular accessory for accelerated in the late amid demands for enhanced ergonomics in . The U.S. Command's program, established in September 1989 to upgrade the , integrated vertical foregrips to support and palm-up holds, drawing from precedents while adapting to systems introduced in the . Improvised grips—often fabricated from handles or PVC piping—emerged on AR-15 variants in the late and early among tactical users seeking similar control without integrated designs. A pivotal advancement occurred in 1995, when released the first standardized, rail-mountable vertical foregrip for military adoption, enabling precise attachment to the M4's forward rail and formal inclusion in Block I kits by the late . This shift reflected empirical testing showing reduced wrist strain and improved pointability under dynamic firing conditions, transitioning the grip from niche SMG feature to essential rifle enhancement.

Military Adoption and Evolution

The vertical forward grip entered U.S. military service in the mid-1990s as part of the Special Operations Peculiar Modification (SOPMOD) program, which aimed to enhance the modularity of the and similar platforms for forces. developed the first standalone vertical grip compatible with MIL-STD-1913 rails, receiving military contracts that facilitated its integration onto Rail Adapter Systems (RAS) and Rail Interface Systems (RIS). This adoption addressed the challenges of mounting multiple accessories, such as lasers and lights, which crowded traditional handguards and necessitated improved forward control for recoil management during suppressive or close-quarters fire. SOPMOD Block I, with development roots in the early and initial fielding around 1997, standardized vertical grips within U.S. Command kits, enabling operators to maintain a two-handed stance for enhanced stability in dynamic engagements. Early designs emphasized construction for lightweight durability, allowing grips to serve as handstops or substitutes in prone positions. By the early , these grips proliferated during operations in and , where they supported rapid and muzzle discipline under full-auto fire rates exceeding 700 rounds per minute. Military evolution reflected tactical shifts toward modular weapon systems, with vertical grips evolving from basic cylindrical forms to ergonomic variants incorporating storage compartments or bipod integration, as seen in the Grip Pod system adopted across U.S. Army, Marine Corps, , and units by the mid-2000s. However, post-2010 assessments noted limitations in certain stances, prompting transitions to shorter "stubby" grips or angled foregrips for compatibility with modern holds that prioritize barrel alignment and speed. Despite this, vertical grips remain in select and foreign military inventories, underscoring their proven utility in high-volume fire scenarios over two decades of .

Design and Technical Specifications

Core Components and Ergonomics

The core components of a vertical forward grip include a mounting base, a vertical grip shaft, and optional integrated features such as storage compartments or modular attachments. The mounting base typically employs a Picatinny-compatible clamp or adapter secured by thumbscrews or locking mechanisms to ensure stability on rail systems, allowing for precise positioning along the fore-end. The grip shaft, perpendicular to the rail, features an contour designed for the support hand to wrap around securely, often with aggressive texturing on the front and sides to prevent slippage under stress or with gloved hands. Some models incorporate water-resistant compartments within the shaft for tools or batteries, accessed via screw caps that maintain structural integrity. Ergonomically, vertical forward grips promote a neutral position and full palm grasp, enabling the shooter to apply downward and rearward to counter muzzle rise and enhance control during impulses. Optimal placement positions the grip as far forward as arm extension allows, aligning the support under the barrel to minimize and fatigue over extended engagements. This configuration supports instinctive pointing and rapid target transitions by leveraging the hand's natural strength, though individual fit varies by hand size and stance, necessitating adjustable or contoured designs for comfort. Studies on handling indicate such grips reduce operator strain compared to bare handguards, particularly in high-volume fire scenarios. Variations in grip angle and palm swell address ergonomic preferences, with steeper angles aiding in pulling the into the for better retention under dynamic movement. However, improper height or insufficient clearance can induce cramping, underscoring the need for user-specific adjustments to avoid compromising trigger access or sight alignment.

Materials and Manufacturing Variations

High-strength polymers dominate the for vertical forward grips due to their properties and adequate impact resistance, with common compositions including fiberglass-reinforced and glass-infused blends that provide tensile strengths exceeding 100 MPa while maintaining densities around 1.4 g/cm³. Aluminum alloys, such as 6061-T6, are favored for applications requiring enhanced rigidity and resistance, offering yield strengths up to 276 MPa but adding 2-3 times the weight of equivalent polymer variants. These material choices reflect trade-offs in ballistic impact tolerance and stability, where polymers excel in cost-effective volume production and aluminum in sustained high-stress scenarios. Manufacturing variations stem from material demands: grips are predominantly produced through injection molding, a process involving molten injection into precision molds at pressures of 100-150 MPa, followed by rapid cooling to form ergonomic shapes with integrated texturing or storage voids in under 30 seconds per cycle. This method enables scalable output with tolerances of ±0.1 mm and minimal post-processing, though it requires careful mold design to avoid warping from uneven shrinkage rates of 0.5-1.5%. Aluminum grips, conversely, rely on from stock, utilizing multi-axis mills to carve complex contours and mounting interfaces with surface finishes below 3.2 µm , a labor-intensive approach that supports customization like reversible serrations but elevates per-unit costs by factors of 3-5 over molded polymers. Hybrid manufacturing techniques appear in specialized variants, such as overmolding rubber pads onto or aluminum cores for improved wet-weather traction via durometer ratings of 50-70 Shore A, or two-piece assemblies that disassemble for battery storage without compromising structural integrity under 500 N loads. These adaptations address ergonomic variations, with military-grade grips prioritizing compliance for drop and vibration testing, while civilian models emphasize modularity for rail systems like or Picatinny.

Types and Variants

Stubby Vertical Grips

Stubby vertical grips, also known as stubby foregrips, are compact variants of vertical forward grips measuring approximately 3 to 3.5 inches in length, designed to provide a secure hand placement on shorter rail systems without extending excessively beyond the handguard. Unlike full-length vertical grips, which offer greater downward leverage for mitigation on longer barrels, stubby models prioritize minimalism to suit personal defense weapons (PDWs), short-barreled rifles, and modern configurations where rail space is limited. This design facilitates techniques such as the thumb-over-bore or hold, positioning the support hand closer to the for enhanced muzzle control during rapid fire. Key features of stubby vertical grips include lightweight construction—often under 3 ounces—using materials like reinforced polymers or aluminum, and compatibility with mounting systems such as Picatinny, , or KeyMod rails. For instance, the TangoDown Stubby Vertical Foregrip (model BGV) weighs 2.56 ounces, measures 3.5 inches, and incorporates a secure Picatinny attachment without internal storage compartments to reduce bulk and potential snag points. Similarly, (KAC) stubby grips emphasize durability for high-stress environments, while Magpul's Rail Vertical Grip (RVG) offers an ergonomic palm swell for consistent hand indexing at a lower cost. Advantages of stubby grips over full vertical foregrips include reduced overall length and weight, which improve maneuverability in confined spaces, and decreased interference with suppressors or extended magazines. They also mitigate wrist strain in aggressive stances by allowing a more neutral angle, though they provide less vertical leverage for managing heavy compared to longer grips. Adoption has grown with the prevalence of modular rail systems since the early , particularly in and tactical applications emulating U.S. configurations, where TangoDown and KAC models replicate issue equipment for Block 1-era rifles.
ManufacturerModelLength (inches)Weight (oz)Key Features
TangoDownBGV Stubby3.52.56Polymer construction, Picatinny mount, no storage
Knights ArmamentStubby VFG~3.25~2.5Aluminum-reinforced, tactical durability
MagpulRVG3.253.0Ergonomic swell, compatible variants
RailScalesRSB~3.0Ultralight (<2)Machined aluminum, PDW-optimized

Comparison with Angled Foregrips

Vertical foregrips position the support hand to the rail, enabling a push-pull technique that enhances muzzle control and mitigation by distributing force along the weapon's axis. This configuration provides superior leverage for countering , particularly in full-automatic fire or with high-recoil calibers, as the vertical orientation allows direct downward pressure to stabilize the barrel during rapid shots. In contrast, angled foregrips tilt the hand at approximately 15-45 degrees relative to the rail, promoting a thumb-over-fingers "" hold that aligns more closely with natural wrist , reducing strain during extended sessions. However, this angle offers less vertical authority over the muzzle, potentially allowing greater climb under sustained fire compared to vertical grips. Ergonomically, angled foregrips excel in precision-oriented tasks, such as target transitions and supported shooting positions, where the slimmer profile minimizes interference with gear or and facilitates quicker horizontal pivots without . Vertical foregrips, while bulkier and more prone to , deliver enhanced stability for close-quarters maneuvers and barricade shooting by locking the support hand into a rigid frame that resists . User reports from tactical indicate vertical grips reduce follow-up shot times in dynamic scenarios by 10-20% for trained operators accustomed to the grip, though they may induce fatigue in prolonged holds due to the non-neutral angle. In terms of weight and modularity, angled foregrips typically weigh 1-2 ounces less than comparable vertical models, preserving rifle balance on shorter handguards, and often serve dual roles as handstops to prevent forward slip without qualifying as stabilizing braces under ATF guidelines. Vertical foregrips, requiring more material for structural integrity, add marginal forward weight that can aid in countering rearward recoil impulse but may degrade point-of-aim retention on lighter platforms. Empirical tests by firearms reviewers show vertical grips outperforming angled ones in recoil energy absorption by up to 15% on 5.56mm platforms during 30-round bursts, attributable to the perpendicular force vector. Selection ultimately hinges on operational context: vertical for high-intensity suppression or suppressive fire roles, angled for mobility-focused applications like urban patrol or competitive stages.

Practical Applications

Military and Law Enforcement Use

Vertical foregrips entered widespread U.S. military service via the Special Operations Peculiar Modification (SOPMOD) Block I kit for the M4A1 carbine, developed in the mid-1990s and fielded to special operations forces starting in 2001. This modular accessory package, designed to adapt carbines for mission-specific needs, incorporated vertical foregrips to enhance shooter control during close-quarters battle by providing a stable forward hand position perpendicular to the bore. The grips complemented the MIL-STD-1913 Picatinny rail system, standardized in 1995, which enabled secure attachment of such ergonomics aids alongside optics and lights. In practice, U.S. Army and Marine Corps units employed vertical foregrips on M4 and M16 variants to mitigate and improve point-of-aim retention under full-auto fire, particularly in urban combat environments like those encountered post-2001 in and . Manufacturers like supplied polymer and aluminum models compatible with these platforms, emphasizing durability for sustained operations. Earlier precedents existed, such as vertical foregrips on Thompson submachine guns issued to U.S. Marines during for hip-fired suppressive roles, though these were integral rather than modular. Law enforcement agencies adopted vertical foregrips for patrol rifles, predominantly AR-15 derivatives, to mirror in tactical response scenarios. teams and special weapons units integrate them to reduce impulse and support aggressive stances during building entries or vehicle stops, often pairing grips with lights for low-light engagements. Studies and training protocols highlight their role in minimizing shooter fatigue over extended holds, though some departments have shifted toward hand stops or angled variants for versatility in modern techniques. Grip-integrated bipods, like those from Grip Pod Systems, have seen limited procurement by select agencies for prone stability in perimeter defense.

Civilian Self-Defense and Competitive Shooting

Vertical foregrips enhance weapon handling in civilian self-defense applications, particularly on semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15 used for home protection, by promoting a stable support-hand position that counters muzzle rise and supports rapid follow-up shots in confined spaces. This configuration permits a neutral wrist angle, minimizing fatigue during extended holds and aiding retention against grabs in close-range confrontations. Experts note its utility in non-standard shooting postures, such as barricade use or low-light scenarios common in residential defense, where precise control exceeds that of handguard-only grips. Despite these advantages, controlled evaluations reveal negligible gains in practical performance metrics; a study comparing equipped and unequipped rifles in close-quarters and distance firing reported average hit times of 2.39 seconds with a vertical foregrip versus 2.42 seconds without, indicating no meaningful boost to speed or accuracy for trained civilian users. Such findings underscore that while vertical grips facilitate ergonomic consistency, their impact diminishes with proficiency, and drawbacks like added bulk may hinder maneuverability in tight home environments. In competitive shooting events such as 3-Gun and USPSA rifle divisions, vertical foregrips support aggressive stances for absorption during high-volume strings and stage transitions, enabling faster target realignment on varied distances. Participants often select them for improved drive and stability in dynamic courses, though adoption varies; rules permit their use absent bipod integration, but modern trends favor lighter handstops or angled variants to prioritize transition speed over vertical leverage. Manufacturers target competitors with lightweight models emphasizing modularity for rail systems, reflecting ongoing refinement for score optimization.

Performance Benefits and Limitations

Advantages in Weapon Control and Recoil Management

Vertical forward grips improve weapon control by offering a hand position that maximizes leverage for countering the rotational forces from , particularly in semi-automatic or automatic fire. This grip allows the support hand to apply direct downward force along the , stabilizing the against upward generated by the rearward impulse acting above the shooter's pivot. In practical testing, shooters using vertical grips reported enhanced mitigation, with the grip providing a consistent index point for hand placement that reduces variability in control during rapid engagements. Evaluations by trained participants favored vertical grips over bare handguards for comfort, ease of manipulation, and perceived reduction in muzzle climb, attributing these benefits to the grip's ability to distribute evenly and prevent hand slippage on heated surfaces. For rifles like the AR-15 platform, the vertical grip facilitates a "thumb-break" or technique, where the support thumb braces against the receiver, further aiding in pulling the weapon into the body to absorb linear while minimizing vertical deviation. This method proves effective in close-quarters scenarios, where quick target transitions demand precise muzzle tracking, as the grip's design aligns the arm with the barrel for optimal biomechanical efficiency. Military applications, such as on the , leverage vertical grips to maintain sight picture during sustained fire, with the perpendicular hold enabling operators to drive the rifle forward aggressively against barriers or during transitions, thereby enhancing overall stability without compromising mobility.

Criticisms and Practical Drawbacks

Vertical forward grips introduce practical challenges related to snag hazards, as their downward protrusion readily catches on tactical gear such as plate carriers, doorways, or environmental obstacles during dynamic movement. This issue is exacerbated in confined spaces or when navigating barriers, potentially disrupting weapon handling or transitions. In prone firing positions, vertical grips elevate the rifle's forend above the ground, compromising stability and complicating integration with or other support devices, which has contributed to the preference for shorter stubby variants or alternatives in such scenarios. The added bulk and weight—typically 2-4 ounces depending on material—further reduce maneuverability on modern railed platforms, where longer handguards already provide ample contact surface without appendages. Ergonomically, vertical grips can limit versatility in grip techniques, particularly those emphasizing direct rail contact like the hold, which applies thumb-over-bore pressure for enhanced torque, muzzle control, and recoil mitigation without intermediary attachments. Former Navy SEAL instructor Chris Sajnog has described the vertical foregrip as one of the least beneficial additions to rifles, arguing it hinders optimal marksmanship by altering natural hand positioning and reducing overall stability compared to handguard-only grasps. In retention fights, the grip offers an opponent a convenient leverage point to manipulate or strip the weapon. These drawbacks have led some tactical practitioners to favor minimalist configurations, viewing vertical grips as remnants of earlier designs less suited to contemporary use, where empirical handling tests prioritize unencumbered rail interfaces for precision and speed.

Federal Regulations

Under federal law, vertical forward grips on rifles that meet the Gun Control Act (GCA) definitions—barrels of at least 16 inches and overall length exceeding 26 inches—are permissible without additional registration or taxation, as they do not alter the firearm's classification under the (NFA). The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) does not impose specific prohibitions on such attachments for compliant rifles, viewing them as standard accessories for improved control rather than features triggering NFA oversight. Attachment of a vertical forward grip to a , however, reclassifies the as an "Any Other Weapon" (AOW) under 26 U.S.C. § 5845(e) of the NFA, because it is deemed designed or redesigned to be fired with two hands while concealable. To legally add such a grip, an individual must file ATF Form 1 ("Application to Make and Register a "), submit fingerprints and photographs, pay a $5 transfer tax (or $200 making tax in some interpretations), and await approval, which can take several months. Failure to register results in the being treated as an unregistered NFA item, subject to penalties including up to 10 years imprisonment and $250,000 fines per 18 U.S.C. § 924. The ATF defines a vertical forward grip as one oriented (90 degrees) to the , distinguishing it from angled foregrips, which may not trigger AOW if sufficiently non-vertical. This interpretation stems from ATF rulings emphasizing for two-handed firing, though enforcement discretion has led to variability; grips approaching but not exactly 90 degrees have occasionally faced scrutiny. No broader federal bans exist on vertical grips for non-NFA firearms, but importation of certain foreign-made grips may require compliance with 18 U.S.C. § 925(d) sporting purposes tests, though domestic production faces no such hurdle.

State-Level Restrictions and ATF Interpretations

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) classifies the addition of a vertical foregrip to a or as the manufacture of an Any Other Weapon (AOW) under the (NFA), requiring registration via ATF Form 1, payment of a $200 tax stamp, fingerprint submission, and approval prior to attachment. This interpretation, articulated in ATF rulings dating to at least 2006, stems from the foregrip enabling a two-handed hold on a concealable (overall length under 26 inches), which meets the NFA definition of an AOW. In contrast, angled foregrips on pistols are generally permissible without NFA classification, as they do not provide a fully vertical hold to the bore. ATF guidance specifies that vertical foregrips must be strictly to qualify as prohibited on unregistered ; grips deviating slightly (e.g., under 89 or over 91 degrees) may avoid reclassification, though this remains subject to case-by-case enforcement and lacks formal ATF endorsement. For firearms exceeding 26 inches in overall length, a vertical foregrip does not trigger AOW status federally, provided the configuration otherwise qualifies as a or . These federal interpretations apply uniformly but interact with state laws, where unregistered AOWs remain illegal regardless of ATF compliance. At the state level, vertical foregrips on rifles face restrictions primarily in jurisdictions with assault weapons bans that prohibit "protruding grips" or additional handgrips held by the non-trigger hand. New York's SAFE Act, enacted in 2013, bans semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines featuring a "second handgrip or protruding grip that can be held by the non-shooting hand," encompassing vertical foregrips on platforms like the AR-15. California's assault weapons laws, updated through 2025, similarly restrict features including pistol grips and protruding foregrips on banned semi-automatics, often requiring fixed-magazine compliance or featureless builds to legally attach a vertical foregrip. Illinois's 2023 assault weapons ban extends to rifles with vertical foregrips when combined with other prohibited features like pistol grips. In states without such bans (e.g., Texas, Florida), vertical foregrips remain legal on rifles meeting federal length requirements, subject only to ATF pistol rules. Compliance varies by local enforcement, with no uniform national state-level prohibition isolated to vertical foregrips alone. In , vertical foregrips are permissible on non-prohibited firearms, including those used by law enforcement, as demonstrated by their inclusion in specifications for 5.56 x 45mm carbines equipped with models such as the Tango Down BGV-MK46. No federal regulations under or associated prohibitions explicitly restrict their attachment to restricted or non-restricted rifles and shotguns, provided the host firearm complies with classification rules. In , vertical foregrips are not federally prohibited under customs import schedules, but state and territory laws, such as "appearance" regulations, may deem them contributory to a military-style configuration, potentially categorizing the modified as prohibited if it resembles an assault weapon. Post-1996 reforms emphasize bans on self-loading centerfire rifles, rendering vertical foregrips irrelevant for such platforms in civilian hands, though allowable on permitted bolt-action or lever-action firearms absent interpretive restrictions. European Union member states operate under Directive (EU) 2021/555, which categorizes firearms (A-D) based on semi-automatic capability, barrel length, and magazine capacity but imposes no specific bans on foregrips or similar accessories. National variations apply; for instance, permitted on category C sporting rifles in permissive states like Czechia, while stricter implementations in Germany or France limit them to licensed hunting or sport use aligned with overall weapon approval. Switzerland, outside the EU but with liberal acquisition standards under the Federal Weapons Act, allows vertical foregrips on permit-approved long arms without accessory-specific curbs, consistent with high civilian ownership rates. In the , post-1987 and 1997 Firearms Acts, vertical foregrips face no explicit but are constrained by bans on self-loading rifles over .22 caliber, limiting their practical application to Section 1 shotguns or .22 rimfire rifles where added control features do not violate pistol conversion rules. Jurisdictions like these prioritize host firearm lethality over modular attachments, contrasting U.S. device-focused scrutiny.

References

  1. https://magpul.com/rvg-rail-vertical-grip.html
  2. https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/the-viability-of-the-vertical-foregrip/
  3. https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/am-i-required-register-my-pistol-if-i-want-put-vertical-fore-grip-it
  4. https://badmoonarmory.com/vertical-foregrip-do-you-need-one/
  5. https://www.machinegunboards.com/forums/index.php?/topic/24548-did-us-soldiers-ever-use-foregrips-on-their-tsmgs/
  6. https://www.everydaymarksman.co/equipment/vertical-foregrip/
  7. https://www.swatmag.com/article/history-of-sopmod-part-i/
  8. https://railscales.us/blog/the-evolution-of-the-ar15-foregrip/
  9. https://www.breachbangclear.com/vertical-grip-benefits/
  10. https://grippod.com/about-us/
  11. https://www.military.com/kitup/2011/11/afg-vertical-grip-or-no-grip.html
  12. https://patents.google.com/patent/US20140182182A1/en
  13. https://daytonatactical.com/vertical-foregrip-complete-guide/
  14. https://www.at3tactical.com/collections/l1category-upper-receiver-components/front-grips/detailtype-vertical-grips
  15. https://www.wingtactical.com/blog/how-to-properly-use-a-fore-grip/
  16. https://railscales.us/blog/should-you-use-a-vertical-grip-on-your-ar15/
  17. https://gatdaily.com/articles/to-vertical-grip-or-not-pros-and-cons/
  18. https://dirtybirdusa.com/angled-foregrip-vs-vertical-foregrips-for-the-ar-15/
  19. https://www.quora.com/How-effective-are-vertical-foregrips-on-AR-15s
  20. https://kolba.pl/en/product/47256%2Cmagpul-ris-rvg-fde-grip
  21. https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1021535380
  22. https://a3industries.com/search-by-product/vertical-foregrips/
  23. https://arisakadefense.com/vertical-grip-m-lok/
  24. https://hera-usa.com/product/hera-hfg-hera-front-grip-black/
  25. https://www.samson-mfg.com/evolution-vertical-grips.html
  26. https://railscales.us/anchor-ar-15-foregrip/
  27. https://www.samson-mfg.com/vertical-grip-polymer-medium-grenade-m-lok.html
  28. https://blackstoneshooting.com/knights-armament-vertical-forward-grip-black/
  29. https://www.knightarmco.com/2009/shop/accessories/mil-std-1913/forward-pistol-grip-k
  30. https://gunmagwarehouse.com/blog/review-tango-down-stubby-foregrip/
  31. https://railscales.us/blog/rsb-an-indepth-look-at-railscales-stubby-vertical-grip/
  32. https://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_118/682986_Favored_Vertical_Forgrip.html
  33. https://tangodown.com/tangodown-vertical-fore-grip-stubby/
  34. https://www.reddit.com/r/MilitaryARClones/comments/17oolwa/best_block_1_vfg_td_stubby_not_pictured/
  35. https://railscales.us/blog/angled-long-grip-vs-short-grip-for-ars-which-foregrip-is-right-for-you/
  36. https://www.quora.com/Why-are-vertical-foregrips-on-assault-rifles-much-smaller-than-they-used-to-be
  37. https://tangodown.com/tangodown-m-lok-stubby-vertical-grip-bgv-ml1/
  38. https://www.recoilweb.com/best-ar-15-foregrips-177776.html
  39. https://www.quora.com/Which-is-better-angled-foregrip-or-vertical-foregrip
  40. https://www.classicfirearms.com/news/general/angled-vs-vertical-foregrip-which-is-better/
  41. https://railscales.us/blog/vertical-grip-versus-angle-grips-which-is-superior/
  42. https://www.wingtactical.com/blog/vertical-vs-angled-ar15-foregrips/
  43. https://www.pewpewtactical.com/best-ar-15-foregrips/
  44. https://www.dirtybirdusa.com/angled-foregrip-vs-vertical-foregrips-for-the-ar-15/
  45. https://www.modarmory.com/product/knights-armament-forward-pistol-grip-vertical-grips/
  46. https://www.acep.org/talem/newsroom/february-2023/accessorizing-the-long-gun
  47. https://aaapolicesupply.com/rvg-vertical-foregrip/
  48. https://www.tierthreetactical.com/do-you-need-a-vertical-fore-grip-on-your-rifle-researchers-have-an-answer/
  49. https://grippod.com/
  50. https://www.gunsandammo.com/editorial/ar-vertical-grips-or-not/248029
  51. https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/how-to-hold-an-ar15-foregrip/
  52. https://www.ar15.com/forums/t_9_5/235237_Basic-Question-About-Vertical-Grips.html
  53. https://forums.brianenos.com/topic/55610-vertical-foregrips/
  54. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3mgt6mCDt4
  55. https://forums.brianenos.com/topic/97090-vertical-foregrip-question/
  56. https://palmettostatearmory.com/blog/ar-15-foregrip-guide.html
  57. https://www.thearmorylife.com/forum/threads/just-what-is-the-use-of-the-vertical-foregrip.17474/
  58. https://blog.primaryarms.com/guide/what-is-the-c-clamp-grip-on-an-ar15/
  59. https://www.captainberz.com/single-post/2017/03/13/c-clamp-rifle-grip-tacticool-or-legit
  60. https://smart.dhgate.com/vertical-grips-on-ar-15s-when-are-they-illegal/
  61. https://www.quora.com/Is-a-vertical-fore-grip-legal-on-an-AR-15
  62. https://www.atf.gov/file/97256/download
  63. https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/what-is-the-punishment-for-adding-a-vertical-grip--5392264.html
  64. https://www.northwestfirearms.com/threads/foregrips-on-pistols-how-vertical-is-too-vertical.494232/
  65. https://www.reddit.com/r/Firearms/comments/1l8cwmn/atf_foregrip/
  66. https://ar15discounts.com/understanding-the-legality-of-vertical-foregrips-on-the-ar-15/
  67. https://johnpierceesq.com/understanding-the-implications-of-the-recent-atf-ruling-regarding-overall-length-measurements/
  68. https://thegunclub.quora.com/Are-foregrips-on-an-AR-15-rifle-illegal-or-is-it-just-on-AR-pistols
  69. https://smart.dhgate.com/are-foregrips-on-ar-15s-illegal-laws-regulations-explained/
  70. https://blog.princelaw.com/2019/07/05/atf-rescinds-prior-methods-to-measure-a-firearms-overall-length-when-equipped-with-a-stabilizing-brace/
  71. https://texasguntrust.com/can-i-add-a-vertical-fore-grip-to-my-ar-15-pistol.html
  72. https://gunsafety.ny.gov/system/files/documents/2020/02/rifles_banned_features.pdf
  73. https://www.tilemlawfirm.com/our-practice-areas/criminal-defense/new-york-gun-laws/new-york-safe-act/
  74. https://oag.ca.gov/ogvp/fed-assault-weapons-ban
  75. https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/blog/which-states-have-assault-weapons-bans/
  76. https://masscasualtycommission.ca/files/documents/roundtables/COMM0064684.pdf?t=1741183698
  77. https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/sor-98-462/fulltext.html
  78. https://www.ssaa.org.au/?ss_news=clarity-needed-on-confusing-appearance-laws
  79. https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_reg/cir1956432/sch6.html
  80. https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/internal-security/organised-crime/trafficking-firearms/eu-legislation-civilian-firearms_en
  81. https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/society/bearing-arms_how-gun-loving-switzerland-regulates-its-firearms/43573832
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.