Front Sight & Thumbs up Grip

[R.Mac]

Training at Front Sight they insist on both thumbs up as as opposed to thumbs forward grip position. I'm guessing this is to take all possibilities of thumb related problems out of the semi-auto pistol cycling process,
ie:slide lock failure, unexpected mag release, ect. I've also read that it actually gives a better purchase on gun because weak side hand can get in a little closer. Just wondering others thoughts on this style.

[scglock]

I usually use thumbs forward but every now am then I have problems with the slide locking back. I just need to train myself to be conscious of the slide release but I'm also going to try thumbs up some time and see how it works for me.

[pdude]

I noticed that it's hard to do thumbs forward on some handguns such as the XD so maybe that is why to have a single way to teach for all handgun types? Is there any risk putting thumbs up? I like the idea of keeping the thumbs tucked downwards along the sides of the weapon. Still with a revolver I wouldn't think a thumbs forward would work???

[9mmepiphany]

I've also read that it actually gives a better purchase on gun because weak side hand can get in a little closer. Just wondering others thoughts on this style.

It doesn't give more purchase and the weak hand doesn't get closer either.

What it does as keep you from pronating your support hand wrist as you should in a thumbs forward grip...which weakens your grip.

Went shooting with a fellow Calgunner this last weekend, who had just returned from Front Sight. He said they taught that not only should the thumbs be up, but the support thumb should push back while the strong thumb should push forward...much like the push/pull tension they teach on the gun. He said he found it slow to acquire.

I got him into a Isosceles thumbs forward grip and cut his groups in half...besides also centering them

[jlbflyboy172]

I went to Frontsight for the handgun course and tried my best to embrace the thumbs up technique after years of thumbs forwward. I jut wanted to be open minded. I have since been to other training classes and others teach differently. I have since returned to thumbs forward. I think the thumbs up approach works well with some guns like Glocks, for example. I believe thubs forward is critical for 1911 shooters, which I am.

One of the guys in my group that I took down there was using his 1911 and he refused to shoot thumbs up and stuck to his guns (pun intended) and kept with his thumbs forward grip. He shot better than everyone in our class of 31 people, won the one on one competition and also outshot a guy that was there candidating to be an instructor. The Frontsight people gave him some grief for the first day and then left him alone after that. If it works for you, great. It is certainly not the be all end all. It is there take on the correct grip. Other trainers will offer a different perspective. Take different classes, try all of the different techniques, pass them through your own filters and go with what works best for you. Your hands, grip angle and the gun you shoot should be the elements that dictate your best grip option. Enjoy the ride!

[locosway]

Training at Front Sight they insist on both thumbs up as as opposed to thumbs forward grip position. I'm guessing this is to take all possibilities of thumb related problems out of the semi-auto pistol cycling process,
ie:slide lock failure, unexpected mag release, ect. I've also read that it actually gives a better purchase on gun because weak side hand can get in a little closer. Just wondering others thoughts on this style.

They teach Weaver and thumbs up. It works for what they teach, but it's not something I would ever use, nor teach. This is my biggest complaint about their training, but they do allow you to shoot how you want after you try their way first.

If you're shooting a Weaver stance, then use their grip, it works. If you're shooting something more modern like Iso or a form there of, shoot thumbs forward.

[Bug Splat]

I only shoot thumbs forward and only buy guns that let me shoot thumbs forward. The worst gun for thumbs forward has to be a sig. Slide stop/release is so far back it get pushed at least for me. Anyone shoot a sig and shoot thumbs forward successfully?

[locosway]

I only shoot thumbs forward and only buy guns that let me shoot thumbs forward. The worst gun for thumbs forward has to be a sig. Slide stop/release is so far back it get pushed at least for me. Anyone shoot a sig and shoot thumbs forward successfully?

I sold my Sig because of this issue. XD doesn't like it either, with my support thumb resting on the takedown lever. It's not comfortable at all. Glock and 1911's work best for me so far.

[AAShooter]

They teach Weaver and thumbs up. It works for what they teach, but it's not something I would ever use, nor teach. This is my biggest complaint about their training, but they do allow you to shoot how you want after you try their way first.

If you're shooting a Weaver stance, then use their grip, it works. If you're shooting something more modern like Iso or a form there of, shoot thumbs forward.

+1 . . . Thumbs up is very difficult if you shoot and Iso.

[locosway]

+1 . . . Thumbs up is very difficult if you shoot and Iso.

Yes, it is..

Interestingly enough, I find a lot of people shooting a thumbs forward doing it improperly too. Not rotating their support hand enough to really fill the gap on the stock.

I really hate Weaver and thumbs up, but I'll be at Front Sight in September doing their 4 day class. Last time I was there I did their Instructor class. Some of the people trying out really scared me.

[R.Mac]

Thank you gentlemen. It's always good to hear other opinions.

[AAShooter]

It is interesting, I have observed many Iso shooters do the Handgun Combat Master Prep course (mastering a combat handgun, not mastering combat with a handgun). Even highly rated Iso shooters never seem to do well compared to the Weaver shooters. I never understand quite why; however, they never seem to do well.

That said, the folks pursuing the HCM rating are generally shooting a Weaver stance. My attitude is get good at one or, better yet, get good at both and you will be miles ahead.

[locosway]

It is interesting, I have observed many Iso shooters do the Handgun Combat Master Prep course (mastering a combat handgun, not mastering combat with a handgun). Even highly rated Iso shooters never seem to do well compared to the Weaver shooters. I never understand quite why; however, they never seem to do well.

That said, the folks pursuing the HCM rating are generally shooting a Weaver stance. My attitude is get good at one or, better yet, get good at both and you will be miles ahead.

Interestingly enough, The Chuck Taylor school says they're the ONLY school who offers the CM rating, and all other schools are not authorized to administer or issue the ratings.

From what I've read, FS issues the tests, so this means their CM ratings for people are bogus?

[AAShooter]

Call it what you want, both represent an impressive levels of performance. Personally, I believe that a person passing one could pass the other with a bit of work. Front Sight is a controversial school in the industry. Many dismiss it outright. However, if you review the HCM course of fire (regardless of your opinion of FS) it is a tough course of fire.

-just for clarity, the two tests do differ. Chuck Taylor's HCM course of fire differs from that of Front Sight's course of fire. Personally I don't think that matters much . . . both are quantitative tests of performance with a combat handgun. I will honor the accomplishment regardless of which test is used to certify performance.

[locosway]

Call it what you want, both represent an impressive levels of performance. Personally, I believe that a person passing one could pass the other with a bit of work. Front Sight is a controversial school in the industry. Many dismiss it outright. However, if you review the HCM course of fire (regardless of your opinion of FS) it is a tough course of fire.

-just for clarity, the two tests do differ. Chuck Taylor's HCM course of fire differs from that of Front Sights. Personally I don't think that matters much . . . both are quantitative tests of performance with a combat handgun.

I don't dismiss them, but I do think their teaching of Weaver is crappy.

They're fine for training the masses, but I like several other schools better for more refined training.