Quoted:
IL_Shooter...
For Bi-pod news standby. There will be released in the near future a bipod designed for rail attachment, not a bipod like many that currently exist that are simply retro fitted to rails w/ adapters and the like.
This bipod will not only elevate, but will also traverse. Like MG bipods, the bipod for precision rifles should have been designed to T&E from the getgo, but weren't. Relatively speaking, there's little military use of the bipod. However the advent and desire by the mil. for practically accurate arms like the USMCs SAMs and Army et al's SPRs, Navy's RECCE etc. etc. has brought about a whole new "need" for practical bipods...
How's light, rugged, slimlined when folded, and all w/ T&E ability sound? Good enough? Then standby, for the next best thing in bipods.
I am not currently at liberty to disclose its designer, as I gave my word I wouldn't, and in fact fear I may have gone too far as is. However I will say its a sound, reputable and so far 100% manufacturer, that 1, is highly regarded here at ARFCom, and 2, is a participating member of the board.
It's also being looked at by a major manufacturer of AR type weapon systems, as factory equipment. This should be the next great thing.
Hope it helps, though if you're anything like me, I probably just confused the situation even more, but hey, choices are an American thing...
/S2
|
Quoted:
The recommendations will have a lot to do w/ what the bipods intended uses will be. If their use is to be a range/varmint hunting type bipod then the above listed bipods will more than suffice, w/ Harris being the Cadillac of bipods. However, because bipods were inherently thought of as accessories for a target/precision weapon, they were designed that way... Intricate, if not delicate, and somewhat cumbersome. Designated marksmen/snipers may have the discipline/need to deal w/ their negatives as a trade off for their inherent benefits, but line infantrymen don't.
If the bipods role is intended as a stable shooting platform for a fighting weapon, then their is no bipod currently designed for or acceptible as a satisfactory answer to the problem.
While the current models aren't bad, they certainly aren't ideal.
Exposed springs, while not weak, aren't the best solution and bipods that elevate, but don't traverse, demostrate an inherent weakness in their design. DM/Snipers enjoy the luxury of finding a larger sphere of engagement and then fine tuning the movement of their POA/I to a severely smaller sphere before engagement. Line infatntrymen have no such luxury. The sphere of engagement for the latter is relatively huge, w/ the most common dimension of their sphere of engagement being "length", or left to righ/ right to left (T in T&E), not "depth" or "from to away/ away to from", or "Height" low to high/ high to low (E in T&E)...
For limited movement, the inherent benefit of a bipod; fixed position, fine movement, relatively little change in target position, go w/ a Harris, it's the best available, now. For a bipod that takes into acct. the realities of the std. fighter, wait. It will most certainly be worth your while.
MG bipods T&E why shouldn't yours? Your target most certainly will be.
/S2
|
Thread
|
