and a prototype from a euro manufacturer.)
Shame they didn't progress any further, do you have any more information?
I find them less manouverable and adaptable than a rear handle of the same overall size.
I find the opposite especially when trying to work in a confined space such as around weed.
I find the section behind the handle gets in the way, particularly it catches on my bicep when moving the gun under my body with a bent arm.
In some cases I'm sure this can happen, I'm not trying to say the mid handle design is perfect but that it is another option. The technique using of the two types of gun is different and you need to get used to it. That being said the design allows you to keep your arm further forward than with a rear handle making this less likely anyway. Two observations here, I suspect that if this was happening the position of the handle was too far forward for you. The other that there are times when I like to bring back the butt and rest it on my bicep, especially when hunting shallow water, it's a luxury I can't have with a rear handle.
It is also not practical to hold the handle with a reverse grip and pull the trigger with your thumb (which is very useful low viz and hole fishing technique)
Although I disagree this it a point of there being different techniques between the two styles. With there being a foot or so less gun out in front of you (length for length) and possibly therefore less need to bring the gun back so far. Realistically though it does happen and yes I do it but I don't have any problem using my thumb on the trigger.
I very rarely swing a gun round any distance. If a fish is more than a few feet from where the gun is pointing it is far better to bring the gun into your body, move it, then re-extend gun and arm. This is more awkward with a mid handle
I see where you are coming from, I too found this but like all things I quickly learnt to bring the butt in under my arm rather than into my body, it's just something you get used to like driving.
Mid handles are inherently more bulky than a rear handle, and need that extra mass to compensate for the handle pivot point being so far off the centre line.
True, this is the trade off for bringing the tip of your shaft a foot closer to you. There are advantages and disadvantages all round
This is not a problem if you are shooting a big thick shaft with multiple bands as you need the extra mass to control recoil anyway, but for the UK, there is never a need to use more than one rubber and a 6.5mm shaft, so you just dont need the bulk
There isn't actually a need for that much extra mass than a rear handled gun if you are talking about a single euroshaft and a single band. So agreed! Apart from my Wong my other three use a single 16mm band and a Rob Allen shaft and work very well.
I am not arguing that rear handle is better overall, just that there are reasons euro guns evolved the way they did. In my experience, shooting "small" fish is pretty similar all over the world, and Euroguns are perfectly adapted to do it
After 33 years of spearfishing and using a eurogun I would also say the same thing but here's the question: had there been a viable British gun manufacturer around back when the other European manufactures stopped making mid handles, would they have stopped too? After two seasons of using a Euro mid handle gun I think not, they have opened my eyes, not instantly admittedly, it took a bit of getting used to but I truly believe that it's a shame that we don't have the choice (unless we choose to build) and that if people gave then the time to learn how to use them there would be a demand for that choice.
