The CZ806 Bren drops weight by 1.1 lbs... It appears to be mainly from the receiver. Remember that the 805 bren was originally designed for a polymer upper receiver, so the 805 has a lot of extra aluminum in the upper that just adds weight:
http://www.sadefensejournal.com/wp/?p=1083&page=3That extra, unnecessary weight was stripped w/ the 806 upgrade. Worth noting that the weight difference between the m4a1 and the bren is pretty much nothing after the upgrade to the 806, which is interesting considering piston guns always have that excess weight for the piston vs the DI ones w/ just tubes...
All w/ 16" barrels.
Colt AR6720 carbine w/ lightweight barrel is listed at 6.2 lbs.
Colt LE6920 carbine w/ m4 profile barrel is listed at 6.9 lbs.
Colt AR6721 carbine w/ heavy barrel is listed at 7.3 lbs.
CZ805 bren pistol is listed at 6.7 lbs (no stock and short barrel) per CZUSA.
CZ805 bren carbine is listed at 8.02 lbs per CZUSA.
So taking 1.1 lbs off of the carbine, puts the CZ806 in at 6.92 lbs.
Do note that the CZ806 does appear to have a shorter barrel than the 805 carbine, and barrel appears to be heavier profile from visuals, so probably not much, a few ounces, change in weight of the 16" lightweight vs 12" heavy.
Slightly longer (~1" so, ~12" barrel which is great for suppressor use/balance not so w/o) the 805 pistol:
I have a grip pod on one of my galils and posted this previously -- in brief, they're a good compromise (thinking about adding a front hand stop between grip pod and end of rail actually; otherwise evaluation hasn't changed...) BUT holding onto like the dude in the marcoc's picture above isn't exactly the best mode of use insofar as ergos go... W/ pressure switches, it might be an okay compromise but not ideal.... Also, don't forget that monopoding on a mag should not cause feed issues (if it does, symptom of something else wrong IMO) and will allow you get a lower prone than grip pod will -- for instance, still plenty of clearance between mag bottom and ground w/ grippod w/ galil 35 round OE mags; probably the same would apply here with 40 round magpuls too (someone w/ those 40s want to check and post back?)...:
I use Magpul VFG stubbies on a number of my guns. They are good as hand stops too. Never bought into the AFG hype.
Unsure what's "hype" about the AFG? If you want to bash the exaggerated C clamp grip, go ahead but the AFG's utility isn't just w/ that grip...
On my Troy/NEA railed VZ, I run the AFG with a Gas Pedal thumb rest. Basically it equates to a standard rifle grip with a firmer, more ergonomic hold on the rifle, and you can do elbow out or down, but I prefer down and think it meshes better with angles and force, etc. W/ Bonesteel, I'd probably just use the AFG due to wider railed lower and solid upper edge of side rail for similar thumb placement...
I look at the AFG as basically being the same hold across all weapons even if not AFG configured -- palm up and thumb forward vs knuckles and thumb forward. For me, this is important.
Magpul did a good slideshow when they released the AFG on the whys: http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/12/02/new-magpul-afg-angled-foregrip/
I agree w/ pretty much everything here regarding the C clamp grip: http://www.gunnuts.net/2013/07/02/curing-the-tactical-turtle/
And here as well -- and agree that there are portions of this technique like the AFG and mounting stock on your pec rather than shoulder that help w/ weapon control (and slightly rolling your shoulders forward helps too): http://loadoutroom.com/5695/the-over-exaggerated-c-clamp-grip-hype-or-not/
Another good read: http://kitup.military.com/2011/11/afg-vertical-grip-or-no-grip.html
And using the vertical grip optimally is a lot like an AFG anyways: http://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/how-to-hold-an-ar15-foregrip/
And here's a great read on the whys of a grip pod: http://www.defensereview.com/the-grip-pod-system-vertical-foregripbipodweapon-stabilizer-is-it-a-viable-option-for-your-tactical-carbine/
Ultimately everyone has preferences and like any choice your foregrip is a compromise.
