PDA

View Full Version : Monsterman Grip vs. U-15 Stock


mxpatriot51
02-26-2007, 5:21 AM
Hey guys, I'm going to be building a gripless build OLL and was curious to hear opinion from those who have used these gripping options:

1. The Monsterman Grip

2. The U-15 Stock

To me, the U-15 looks more comfortable, but more expensive. It's hard to tell from not holding it, but what is the cheek weld like--comfort and function?

On the monsterman grip, you get to have a nice A2 stock to get a good check weld, but not being able to put your thumb over it seems to compromise your ability to grip. It looks pretty comfortable, though. Plus it's much cheaper.

This is not intended to become a "bash company A" thread. I just want some input from shooters who have actually used these two products.

tenpercentfirearms
02-26-2007, 5:36 AM
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=42697&highlight=u-15+monsterman

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=45136&highlight=monsterman

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/search.php?searchid=458055

mxpatriot51
02-26-2007, 7:21 AM
Thanks 10%, I'll actually be driving up today to your guys and ordering an OLL. I called yesterday to make sure you'd be open.

tenpercentfirearms
02-26-2007, 7:41 AM
There is a U15 and a MonsterMan build ready for your comparison. Also the only lowers I have left are Spike's Tacticals and the LAR skeleton receivers should be here soon.

MonsterMan
02-26-2007, 7:54 AM
If you are going to compare, you should wait and try the new MMG when it comes out. It is far more comfortable than the older grip.

Thanks. :)
MM

WokMaster1
02-26-2007, 8:36 AM
If you are going to compare, you should wait and try the new MMG when it comes out. It is far more comfortable than the older grip.

Thanks. :)
MM

Are the ones on CWS the new generation for both AR & AK?

MonsterMan
02-26-2007, 8:46 AM
Are the ones on CWS the new generation for both AR & AK?

No. The ones that CWS are selling is:

AR- New version. Pre-sales only. The grip should be out this week sometime.

AK- Pre-sales of the redesigned grip. The new version of that is going to be better than the previous version. It most likely wont be injection molded like the AR grip. I don't think the numbers are there for me to spend the money on the process of injection molding. So it will be garage made, but much better than before.


I think everyone will be surprised at how much better the new AR grip will be. The AK grip too for that matter. Both are just way more comfortable than the previous versions. The AR grip is super strong, lightweight, comfortable, and nice looking. If you want to go to AZ or another state, all you have to do is swap grips to the standard grip and you are back to original configuration.

E Pluribus Unum
02-26-2007, 8:50 AM
If you are going to compare, you should wait and try the new MMG when it comes out. It is far more comfortable than the older grip.

Thanks. :)
MM

You just killed a possible sale of your old MM grip by 10%.... if I can teach you anything about business, do not undercut your retailers... :)

Let them sell your old stuff before you advocate waiting for your new stuff... :)

leelaw
02-26-2007, 8:53 AM
I have both and like both very much.

U-15 - feels like holding a garand, but with a higher, grippy cheek weld.

Monster Man - The normal feel of an AR15 with a slightly hunting rifle feeling grasp. You really want an ambi-selector if you get this, unless you're one of those weirdo left-handers. :p

tenpercentfirearms
02-26-2007, 8:56 AM
You just killed a possible sale of your old MM grip by 10%.... if I can teach you anything about business, do not undercut your retailers... :)

Let them sell your old stuff before you advocate waiting for your new stuff... :)
He didn't kill anything. The only thing at my shop is a broken MMG that I use for display purposes. I am all sold out. I sold out of MMGs months ago.

threadcrapper
02-26-2007, 9:04 AM
I like the U-15 stock but have read post where some have considered it to maybe be a thumbhole violation? I don't know if this is true or not. I like the look of the Monsterman (new model) better. I didn't know MMG made an Ak grip, that's cool, where would I get one of those in the future?

E Pluribus Unum
02-26-2007, 9:06 AM
He didn't kill anything. The only thing at my shop is a broken MMG that I use for display purposes. I am all sold out. I sold out of MMGs months ago.

Et tu brute?

;)

I like the U-15 stock but have read post where some have considered it to maybe be a thumbhole violation? I don't know if this is true or not. I like the look of the Monsterman (new model) better. I didn't know MMG made an Ak grip, that's cool, where would I get one of those in the future?

Some FFLs will tell you that building an OLL is a felony.... both are wrong.. :)

leelaw
02-26-2007, 9:10 AM
I like the U-15 stock but have read post where some have considered it to maybe be a thumbhole violation? I don't know if this is true or not. I like the look of the Monsterman (new model) better. I didn't know MMG made an Ak grip, that's cool, where would I get one of those in the future?
Whoever told you that the U-15 is a thumbhole stock just did you a favor. You now know not to trust them as a source for legal information pertaining to assault weapon features.

gose
02-26-2007, 9:20 AM
Whoever told you that the U-15 is a thumbhole stock just did you a favor. You now know not to trust them as a source for legal information pertaining to assault weapon features.

Yes and no. I really like the U15, but since a prototype was sent to DOJ and a letter saying that it was a thumbhole stock was returned, I'm staying away from it. Yes, the final product is different from the submitted prototype, but until I've seen the differences myself, I'm sticking to the MM grip.

The U15 is, by most people, not considered to be a thumbhole stock, but I do not want to explain to a police officer, or a court, why I think that the DOJ letter is wrong and I am right (even if that's the case). If I end up in court with an OLL with a U15 stock and that letter shows up, I doubt it will help my case...

If you feel comfortable with the U15, by all means, buy it. I don't, so Im sticking to monsterman.

Richard
02-26-2007, 9:22 AM
Whoever told you that the U-15 is a thumbhole stock just did you a favor. You now know not to trust them as a source for legal information pertaining to assault weapon features.

I think he's refering to the post that Iggy was at a gunshow and stated that he considered the U-15 a thumbhole stock.

Steyr_223
02-26-2007, 10:42 AM
"Iggy was at a gunshow and stated that he considered the U-15 a thumbhole stock."

I have a U-15 on my build..

IF I ever get to court, I would say "Your honor, where is the hole in this socalled thumbhole stock?"

If it does not fit, you must acquit.

AJAX22
02-26-2007, 10:46 AM
I've always thought that the U15 stock would work best with an OA93 carbine upper, but thats a project for another day.

leelaw
02-26-2007, 10:51 AM
Yes and no. I really like the U15, but since a prototype was sent to DOJ and a letter saying that it was a thumbhole stock was returned

Got a copy of that letter? First I've ever heard of it.

Clodbuster
02-26-2007, 11:22 AM
Well, if DOJ makes you put the rifle in a firing position in front of the jury, the stock does actually fit...

What you should say is that "If there is no hole for your thumb, then this felony case is dumb" :D

Clod

"Iggy was at a gunshow and stated that he considered the U-15 a thumbhole stock."

I have a U-15 on my build..

IF I ever get to court, I would say "Your honor, where is the hole in this socalled thumbhole stock?"

If it does not fit, you must acquit.

gose
02-26-2007, 11:49 AM
Got a copy of that letter? First I've ever heard of it.

Nope, the fact that there even was a letter was posted by one of the U15 guys, so I never doubted it's existence. I have asked for both the letter and pics of the prototype, but so far haven't seen anything.

On a side note... I'm NOT trying to bash the U15, I like it and I think they did a wonderful job. If this gets cleared out, I'll probably buy one, but I'm holding off until my paranoia is satisfied. YMMV.

jgaffney
02-26-2007, 11:50 AM
Sunday, I was at North Bay Firearms in Cotati, blowing holes in targets. I talked to the guy who runs the store about OLLs because he had a Bushmaster Carbon 15 toploader ($$$) on the wall. I mentioned all the discussion here about MMGs and how I could still have a detachable magazine. He said that there was a letter from a high mucky muck at DOJ that says that the MMGs are still a pistol grip. My turn was coming up on a lane so I didn't get a chance to ask him for a copy of the letter.

But, I dug around on the DOJ website and came across the latest revision of the proposed rule. It looks to me like any removable magazine will be verboten. The magazine has to be cast, welded or epoxyed in place.

As an AR noob, I'm curious: how much hassle is a toploader? If DOJ is going to drub us to death, should I just pick a toploader as my first?

MonsterMan
02-26-2007, 12:01 PM
He said that there was a letter from a high mucky muck at DOJ that says that the MMGs are still a pistol grip.

The MMG is not a pistol grip. They can write memo's all they want. The DOJ has defined very precisly as to what a pistol grip is and the MMG does not even come close to fitting it.

I expect that he was pulling your leg. If it was true, we would have heard about it by now. In fact, there have been reports of doj actually recommending my grip to people over the fixed mag route on telephone calls. They did not mention my grip by name, but they did describe it. At that time, my grip was the only grip for sale.

The other thing you mentioned about the mags being welded to the receiver only applies to "fixed mag" builds. If you are going with no features, than you can go with a detachable mag. Basically the rifle is no different than a mini-14 at that point.

Added: I just called North Bay Firearms and they said they had no clue about any "letter" from any mucky mucks.

leelaw
02-26-2007, 12:07 PM
But, I dug around on the DOJ website and came across the latest revision of the proposed rule. It looks to me like any removable magazine will be verboten. The magazine has to be cast, welded or epoxyed in place.

It's a wet dream for a certain lady at CA DOJ FD who love Brady Campgain and hates CalGunners. It also holds no water or legal standing. Published law and definitions stand on our side. A bullet point counts as a tool, and a fixed magazine is one that requires the use of a tool to remove.

PuffyP
02-26-2007, 12:27 PM
I work at Northbay Firearms and just got off the phone with Monster Man. Another employee and I worked Sunday and neither of us spoke with anyone about a Monster Man Grip. When seeking legal advice regarding firearms and firearms components in California, please contact California Department of Justice at 916-263-4887.

PLINK
02-26-2007, 1:06 PM
I will not speak for Toolbox X but there are some facts that most of us here know.

1. The prototype that was sent to the DOJ looks nothing like the one being sold today.

2. They have Toolbox X's address along with several vendors who sell the item and none have them have gone to jail.

3. The DOJ will not approve anything related the OLL's. Most of the OLL products don't even get sent to the DOJ because it is a waste of time.

4. If vendors and Toolbox X did not feel that the product did not follow the letter of the law, then I do not believe anyone would be selling it.


As which is better, "The MMG or the U15"?

Both items have their place.
Both fit different budgets.
Both have somewhat different uses.
Both can co-exsist.

I personally like them both over a fixed mag, evil features build.

If you don't feel comfortable buying either product then don't. You probably should not be buying an OLL either.

gose
02-26-2007, 1:34 PM
I will not speak for Toolbox X but there are some facts that most of us here know.
1. The prototype that was sent to the DOJ looks nothing like the one being sold today.
<snip>


I do not know that, since I haven't seen the prototype and I haven't heard of anyone that has either. ;)

I don't think that the U15 is a thumbhole stock, but the mere existence of that letter makes me nervous.

Please, please Toolbox, post a pic of the prototype and/or letter, so we can put this to rest :)

tenpercentfirearms
02-26-2007, 2:03 PM
Don't you guys know that there are 58 DAs out there and any of them can disagree with the DOJ? A letter for or against means nothing. You just have to make your own decision and go with it.

If you don't want to run the risk of getting busted, don't play this game. If you do get busted, let someone here know so we can help on the legal front if we have to.

As many have said, "Show me the hole! If not I am free to go."

MonsterMan
02-26-2007, 2:10 PM
The U-15 is not a "thumbhole stock". If it was, we would have heard about it by now. The doj would not just sit back and let stores sell them, and if they saw rifles at gun shows with them on and did nothing, than that right there gives you an idea as to their standing.

It is a fine product. I think that doj is just trying to intimidate people from buying them.

shooterx10
02-26-2007, 2:10 PM
If any of you shoot a 3-gun match (or any match where you are under the clock), it's best to get the ambi-dextrous safety with the Monsterman grip.

http://www.practicaltactical.net/catalog/RRAmbiSS.jpg

I have Monsterman's sample grip and if you run an OLL AR with a Delta Cheekpiece, it's not going to work with it unless you shave/Dremel off some of the back. However, I have his 2nd generation grip and it works fine. The back end (or shark fin portion) doesn't go back as far on the 2nd generation compared to his new grip.

chiefcrash
02-26-2007, 2:27 PM
AK- Pre-sales of the redesigned grip. The new version of that is going to be better than the previous version. It most likely wont be injection molded like the AR grip. I don't think the numbers are there for me to spend the money on the process of injection molding. So it will be garage made, but much better than before.

one way or another, there had better be a AK MMG when i need one in a month or so. Don't make me come down there...

anonymous
02-26-2007, 3:12 PM
You just killed a possible sale of your old MM grip by 10%.... if I can teach you anything about business, do not undercut your retailers... :)

Let them sell your old stuff before you advocate waiting for your new stuff... :)

He never said the old one was bad. Besides, the entire American economy is based on the yearly product cycle. The next model is always better, faster, smaller, cheaper...

anonymous
02-26-2007, 3:16 PM
It's a wet dream for a certain lady at CA DOJ FD who love Brady Campgain and hates CalGunners. It also holds no water or legal standing. Published law and definitions stand on our side. A bullet point counts as a tool, and a fixed magazine is one that requires the use of a tool to remove.

This lady having a wet dream is far more scary than her love for the Brady Center.

Toolbox X
02-26-2007, 3:30 PM
I doubt this will end any confusion or put to rest any paranoia, but for your viewing pleasure this is the legendary U-15 prototype picture that I physically mailed to Iggy Chinn March 9, 2006, as part of a printed out word document.

http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j97/Toolbox-X/California%20Rifles%20U-15%20Stock/U15prototypepicsenttoDOJ.jpg

As you can see, the space between the end of the receiver extension and the stock is very small. I used a 6-position CAR stock receiver extension which made things worse. I can almost see where it could be looked at as a thumbhole stock. The intention of my letter was to work with the DOJ to design something they would be happy with and consider legal.

My biggest mistake was thinking the DOJ had integrity. I foolishly assumed they would be impartial like their mission statement implies. I know now the DOJ is 100% politically controlled and they will not approve anything OLL related.

Furthermore, the DOJ will be the first to tell you they have no official authority. They are merely a respected opinion should a DA require an opinion in court. That is all.

The DOJ uses the only real tools they have in their arsenal: Harassment and Fear

Harassment works really well, until someone calls their bluff.
Then the only weapon they have left is the fear they cause by not officially giving items the coveted DOJ letter of approval. This keeps many people afraid and therefore away from the items the DOJ does not like but aren't illegal.

So I put on the indian make-up, jumped on the ship, and I threw the tea overboard.

It is not only our right, but it is out duty to read the laws, understand them, and obey them. The U-15 and MMG are 100% legal by the letter of the law.

-Grant

PLINK
02-26-2007, 3:35 PM
I do not know that, since I haven't seen the prototype and I haven't heard of anyone that has either. ;)<snip>

I have seen it and it is not the same as the one being sold today. I will not comment any further on the prototype. If anyone wants to know more about Toolbox X's product please send him an email. I am sure he can answer any questions one might have about his product.

http://www.californiarifles.com/

CARifles@gmail.com

EDIT: Nevermind the man has spoken

mxpatriot51
02-26-2007, 4:17 PM
Well, today I went out to 10% firearms and ordered the OLL. Great people there.

I held AR's with both Monsterman and U-15 stocks. The U-15 was comfortable, but felt too large in the palm section to me. I also didn't like how the charging handle scraped along the top of the foam buffer tube cover. But it's still a great stock and would be good for precision work; but I used a fixed magazine AR for that.

I really like the monsterman grip. I don't even think I want an ambi-selector. It was an old style Monsterman, and it was still pretty comfortable. I like being able to have an A2 stock for the cheekweld.

So, Mr.Monsterman, let me know when the new ones are ready!

gose
02-26-2007, 4:23 PM
Thanks for posting that pic :)

That made me feel better about the production version...

wilit
02-26-2007, 5:43 PM
Furthermore, the DOJ will be the first to tell you they have no official authority. They are merely a respected opinion should a DA require an opinion in court. That is all.

-Grant

Ever thought of getting the ATF's opinion on the stock?

MonsterMan
02-26-2007, 6:03 PM
The ATF approval would not have any weight in CA. There is a ATF approved grip made by the FAB-10 people (shoeless Ventures?) that is ATF approved, but it would not be ok for CA.

It is up to us to read and understand the law. Choose what you feel best serves your needs.

hoffmang
02-26-2007, 9:55 PM
MM,

That other grip is actually also CA DOJ approved btw.

If someone really wants the letter, I can dig it up.

-Gene

MonsterMan
02-26-2007, 9:59 PM
MM,

That other grip is actually also CA DOJ approved btw.

If someone really wants the letter, I can dig it up.

-Gene

The FAB-10 grip? Bill is always telling people to stay away from that one.

I knew the Barrett hook grip was approved, and it was similar to the hook grip by shoeless ventures, but the shoeless grip is much longer and it gave you a place to wrap your fingers around and hold on to it while your "web" was below the line.

I would like to see the letter if you can find it. Like I said, the only approved alternative grip for AR's I have heard of is the Barrett grip. I know the "tumor grip" was only ATF approved and it was discontinued after a while.

leelaw
02-26-2007, 10:05 PM
MM,

That other grip is actually also CA DOJ approved btw.

If someone really wants the letter, I can dig it up.

-Gene

Fab-10 grip - never approved by CA DOJ

Barrett grip - approved by CA DOJ as "non pistol grip"

hoffmang
02-26-2007, 10:12 PM
What leelaw said :)

-Gene

kap
02-26-2007, 10:13 PM
Ah, the infamous U-15 prototype. All this talk about it and it finally makes an appearance. I thought it would look a whole lot more menacing with the tales of thumbholes surrounding it. It looks downright pretty compared to that scary black rifle to which it's connected. It looks like you are using the same stock mount as the current version of the U15. It is hard for me to believe that anyone would think that's a thumbhole stock. Even so, if a thumbhole is above the top of the rifle action it should be legal. Or is a thumbhole a thumbhole regardless of its placement even if it does not allow you to spray bullets randomly with one hand causing maximum carnage?

MonsterMan
02-26-2007, 10:19 PM
Or is a thumbhole a thumbhole regardless of its placement even if it does not allow you to spray bullets randomly with one hand causing maximum carnage?

A thumbhole stock does not have the "web below the top exposed portion of the trigger" in the definition. As long as there is a "hole" anywhere in the stock that you could put your thumb through and fire the rifle, it would most likely be considered a "thumbhole stock".

In the U-15's case, it isn't a "hole". The stock is its own entity. The buffer tube is it's own thing as well. They do not connect to create a "hole" either. The stock being really a large "pistol grip" that you can shoulder, makes it subject to the web rule. But Grant has made sure that the web must stay above the "line".

I believe that it is legal.

jgaffney
04-21-2007, 2:20 PM
I work at Northbay Firearms and just got off the phone with Monster Man. Another employee and I worked Sunday and neither of us spoke with anyone about a Monster Man Grip. When seeking legal advice regarding firearms and firearms components in California, please contact California Department of Justice at 916-263-4887.

I finally got a chance to go back to North Bay Firearms. The man who made the statement to me about the MMGs is named Vic Titoni. Yes, Puffy, he spoke to me about the grips, telling me that they weren't legal. My brother was standing there next to me. He was very interested because he has a pre-ban AR in his closet at home. Maybe you could post here the memo Vic said he had regarding these grips.

hoffmang
04-21-2007, 10:59 PM
"Vic" can't read the California Code or Regulations.


(d) "pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon" means a grip that allows for a pistol style grasp in which the web of the trigger hand (between the thumb and index finger) can be placed below the top of the exposed portion of the trigger while firing.

I dare "Vic" or you to get the web of your trigger hand (between the thumb and index finger) below the exposed portion of the trigger on an AR with a MMG on it and pull the trigger.

It is feasible if you are Lurch or Shaquille on the MMG 1.0. The new, sexy, modern MMG is completely and totally impossible to use as a pistol grip....

-Gene

chunger
04-22-2007, 12:29 AM
How have the sales been on the U-15 stocks so far? To a large extent it seems part of the appeal of the Monster Man grip is the number of them in use all over the state. If you're going to swim with sharks, better to swim in a big group of fish.

Just wondering if we're talking 100's of U-15's in use or 1000's to date.

Toolbox X
04-22-2007, 10:21 PM
I have sold around 500 U-15's so far. They are out there in numbers.

-Grant

bwiese
04-22-2007, 10:26 PM
I want to congratulate both MonsterMan (Clinton) and Toolbox_X (Grant) for their get-up & go on taking on these projects and seeing them to market.

You've made peoples' lives easier and p*ssed off a lot of folks in Sacramento :)

Steyr_223
04-22-2007, 11:36 PM
I second Bill, anything that helps p*ssoff the CA DOJ is golden..I have a U15 and love it! As soon as Irvington Arms gets MMG's in stock, I'll buy one..