- Thread starter Centuriator
- Start date
Harris is the lowest common denominator
They are often out of square, and not very forgiving.
We routinely take students who arrive in class with a Harris who feel they should be shooting better groups and swap out the bipod to show them why. It's eye-opening.
Just because a Harris has been around forever, doesn't make it good, it has not changed one bit since the original version, and it's still made on the same machines since day one. It's stamped metal and not a machined product like the better bipods
You guys will invest $1000s of dollars on a rifle, another $2000 on a scope and then put an $89 dollar bipod on a $6000 rig and think you are on to something. Wrong, a Harris sucks.
We watched a shooter this weekend with a Harris knock off, Caldwell version, constantly wonder why he was canting, why he was moving off target, why things were not working better and it was clear, the bipod was out of square. You could the triangle was off square just looking it at, and the left leg jumped off the deck pushing the rifle over to the right. It was not a straight recoil pattern, it was not aligned.
If you want to be a serious tactical marksman, upgrade, if you want to do the same thing they did 40 years follow the crowd down the wrong path. Because we always used one is not an answer
They are often out of square, and not very forgiving.
We routinely take students who arrive in class with a Harris who feel they should be shooting better groups and swap out the bipod to show them why. It's eye-opening.
Just because a Harris has been around forever, doesn't make it good, it has not changed one bit since the original version, and it's still made on the same machines since day one. It's stamped metal and not a machined product like the better bipods
You guys will invest $1000s of dollars on a rifle, another $2000 on a scope and then put an $89 dollar bipod on a $6000 rig and think you are on to something. Wrong, a Harris sucks.
We watched a shooter this weekend with a Harris knock off, Caldwell version, constantly wonder why he was canting, why he was moving off target, why things were not working better and it was clear, the bipod was out of square. You could the triangle was off square just looking it at, and the left leg jumped off the deck pushing the rifle over to the right. It was not a straight recoil pattern, it was not aligned.
If you want to be a serious tactical marksman, upgrade, if you want to do the same thing they did 40 years follow the crowd down the wrong path. Because we always used one is not an answer
That is heresy.Have both and no, I am not wrong. Think its like the NF users who say NF scopes never break and then someone posts that their NF internals took a shit and NF repaired it. Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean the other person is wrong.
NFs never fail. They are the most dependable Precison rifle optics ever manufactured.
And lol @ Harris knockoffs. They are complete dog ****. I like a Harris for quick close ish shots and a atlas for the long stuff n
By "long stuff" ... what ranges do you have in view. After watching Frank's video explaining the benefit of an apex point over the bore of the rifle, I'm looking more closely now at options that offer that. Unfortunately, my LMT MWS's rail does not let me get as close to the muzzle as I'd prefer.
Close ish is 3-400 long is 500 +.
I'm on the east coast I only have 600 yards at my steel range but have successfully connected with nuisance animals to 800+
I'm on the east coast I only have 600 yards at my steel range but have successfully connected with nuisance animals to 800+
I've been a Atlas user for many years. I'm waiting *patiently* for my TBAC now and eager to see what all the fuss is about.
I'm looking at Atlas Bipods now and am considering which of these would offer the best "Apex" point over my bore. I know the 5H definitely would, but I don't like the idea of not being able to fold up the legs. I think this one might do the trick.
Atlas BT65 CAL Gen 2 Bipod 1913 Picatinny Rail Mount 4.75" to 9" Aluminum Black
Atlas BT65 CAL Gen 2 Bipod 1913 Picatinny Rail Mount 4.75" to 9" Aluminum Black
we make do with so much. we are adaptable to the Nth degree.
I qualified in the USMC with a rifle that had a fixed 10x using a P3 type mil-dot reticle, that could not even accept any form of a bipod.
We shot off a ruck or our shelter half poles tied with 550 cord to make a tiny tripod. Our qual is to 1000 yards and includes movers. yes, we did it, but it was not optimal. today that same qualification with modern equipment would be a cakewalk, instead of 8 out of 20 guys failing like we often saw.
We have tons of examples of Harris bipods doing well, but today we also have a 1/2 dozen or so examples of IMPROVED bipods that help promote precision. The idea to support your PRECISION RIFLE, not compromise that precision with a sub=par part of the system. The bipod is an important component, if I asked you to accept an Okay barrel, vs a proven one, most would opt for the better barrel. But when it comes to bipods, everyone defaults to the cheapest thing they can get, which is usually not an Afford thing, it's a choice.
There is reason guys in Benchrest and F Class gravitate towards wider stance bipods, it's the triangle of stability.
In order to keep the bipods small and light, like an Atlas or TBAC, the triangle is a bit wider than a Harris, but the entire platform is much more stable. If you follow the triangle of stability, you see the goal is to hang the barrel inside the triangle versus teetering it on top.
Think of a suspension bridge, hang the road inside or balance on top, which is more stable?
Guys repeat what they see, they see more Harris online vs any other brand, so they default to a Harris or a similar-looking knockoff because what is the difference. However, if you educate yourself on the role a bipod plays in both precision and position (canting) you find out quickly the Harris is lacking.
I qualified in the USMC with a rifle that had a fixed 10x using a P3 type mil-dot reticle, that could not even accept any form of a bipod.
We shot off a ruck or our shelter half poles tied with 550 cord to make a tiny tripod. Our qual is to 1000 yards and includes movers. yes, we did it, but it was not optimal. today that same qualification with modern equipment would be a cakewalk, instead of 8 out of 20 guys failing like we often saw.
We have tons of examples of Harris bipods doing well, but today we also have a 1/2 dozen or so examples of IMPROVED bipods that help promote precision. The idea to support your PRECISION RIFLE, not compromise that precision with a sub=par part of the system. The bipod is an important component, if I asked you to accept an Okay barrel, vs a proven one, most would opt for the better barrel. But when it comes to bipods, everyone defaults to the cheapest thing they can get, which is usually not an Afford thing, it's a choice.
There is reason guys in Benchrest and F Class gravitate towards wider stance bipods, it's the triangle of stability.
In order to keep the bipods small and light, like an Atlas or TBAC, the triangle is a bit wider than a Harris, but the entire platform is much more stable. If you follow the triangle of stability, you see the goal is to hang the barrel inside the triangle versus teetering it on top.
Think of a suspension bridge, hang the road inside or balance on top, which is more stable?
Guys repeat what they see, they see more Harris online vs any other brand, so they default to a Harris or a similar-looking knockoff because what is the difference. However, if you educate yourself on the role a bipod plays in both precision and position (canting) you find out quickly the Harris is lacking.
get the NC or ADM pic mount, not the 2 screw
The CAL above is pretty stable, but to your question, the apex point is not so much the issue as the pivot point. The pivot point is right below the rail clamp on the CAL. That’s very different from the 5H where it actually slides left and right on a curved rail, so the pivot point is effectively above the mount. But you can still get a lot of stability from a CAL.
The 5H does not have foldable legs, right?
It does, the frame is just wider.
edit: this video goes into a good bit of detail.
A quick screenshot
from our class presentation on bipods
Since you mentioned accuracy being your main focus, now it comes down to ultimate stability vs mobility. The standard Atlas (not the 5H) tends to "perch" or balance the rifle on top of the triangle as mentioned before. However it is still a very good option due to its stability and compactness. If ultimate precision is the goal, an F class bipod is even better but very bulky. And then are you shooting off a bench, prone, other? If prone then bigger heavier bipods give you the edge, if from a bench the 5H, Elite Iron, etc could be a good option, if it is every position then a compact bipod could be the best option.
Basically, you need one of each to decide which is best! No matter what you choose there more than likely is a scenario that a different bipod excels at, which leads to the whole tripod subject....
Basically, you need one of each to decide which is best! No matter what you choose there more than likely is a scenario that a different bipod excels at, which leads to the whole tripod subject....
the new Elite Iron Aluminum model is really nice for weight vs precision, but the mounting options are limited.
The mobility discussion is a good one as most gamer types like the smaller faster bipods. They use the Harris because they can tie a string between the legs and deploy them super fast.
The Atlas is nice and light but I like the new improved CAL It's tits, with great stability in a small package with a bit wider stance over the old models. Also I think the CAL has the best options for Extension stability if you add the Leg extensions to a CAL it's much better than extensions on other bipods. There is no reverse flex with a CAL.
The mobility discussion is a good one as most gamer types like the smaller faster bipods. They use the Harris because they can tie a string between the legs and deploy them super fast.
The Atlas is nice and light but I like the new improved CAL It's tits, with great stability in a small package with a bit wider stance over the old models. Also I think the CAL has the best options for Extension stability if you add the Leg extensions to a CAL it's much better than extensions on other bipods. There is no reverse flex with a CAL.
I'm also in the market for a .308 gas gun bipod
I use Larue/Harris on my MK12's and its light and simple, but they are pretty rigid so you don't have any real slack to load the bipod with, not a big deal with a 5.56 but they are more prone to hop under some circumstances with larger calibers.
I've also used Atlas and they have quite a bit of slack to load with, more position options but slower to manipulate than Harris. Also very light weight.
I've been looking at TBAC, Warne Skyline, and Ckye as possible new options to try. I'm going to have to consider the CAL now too as I wasn't aware of that model until Lowlight posted above.
I use Larue/Harris on my MK12's and its light and simple, but they are pretty rigid so you don't have any real slack to load the bipod with, not a big deal with a 5.56 but they are more prone to hop under some circumstances with larger calibers.
I've also used Atlas and they have quite a bit of slack to load with, more position options but slower to manipulate than Harris. Also very light weight.
I've been looking at TBAC, Warne Skyline, and Ckye as possible new options to try. I'm going to have to consider the CAL now too as I wasn't aware of that model until Lowlight posted above.
Last edited:
People have no clue how to "Load" a bipod and think that pushing into it is loading it.
The reason a bipod like an Atlas is better, especially for a gas gun is that when they push into a Harris with the handguard it will flex and pull the shot off target. Taking the Slack out you are not putting extra force on the rifle, it's taken up in the slack.
As well the Extra pieces needed to mount the Harris as LaRue uses is a terrible way of stacking errors under the rifle. That system is a band-aid and not a solution. You want fewer connections, not more.
The reason a bipod like an Atlas is better, especially for a gas gun is that when they push into a Harris with the handguard it will flex and pull the shot off target. Taking the Slack out you are not putting extra force on the rifle, it's taken up in the slack.
As well the Extra pieces needed to mount the Harris as LaRue uses is a terrible way of stacking errors under the rifle. That system is a band-aid and not a solution. You want fewer connections, not more.
i recently went with a ACCU-TAC SR-5 G2 Bipod for my 7.62x51mm Scar 20S.
been using harris bipods for years, but not for anything needing long range precision.
it is much more stable and solid. maybe not a great choice if size or weight is a priority.
i'd be interested to hear feedback on this bipod if lowlight or any of the other experts have used one.
been using harris bipods for years, but not for anything needing long range precision.
it is much more stable and solid. maybe not a great choice if size or weight is a priority.
i'd be interested to hear feedback on this bipod if lowlight or any of the other experts have used one.
Last edited:
Are you talking about the Larue modified Harris or just their stud adapter? The modified one replaces the stud attachment and is tight. No slop
my newer accu-tac is much bigger and more stable (but heavier).
i also like that the feet aren't "spongy" like the harris (because of the harris leg extension design).
the beefy legs on the SR-5 G2 pull out easily (no release needed), and they retract automatically with the lever.
this makes both extending and retracting the legs much easier and faster with one hand.
feet are easy to replace with spike or whatever.
cant lock is a large lever, which i find much better than a knob. lever can be rotated out of the way.
QD seems solid so far and hasn't come lose. there are 2 bars for mating with the rail, making it even more solid.
even though it is significantly larger, the 45deg option allows it to be only <1/2" taller than the harris when as low as it goes.
if you're not too worried about weight, and aren't stuck on using what everyone else is already using, i think it is a decent option, made entirely in the usa (small shop). you can also disassemble the legs for cleaning without voiding the warranty.
i'll probably keep the harris for times when size and weight might matter.
/not related in any way to the manufacturer
i also like that the feet aren't "spongy" like the harris (because of the harris leg extension design).
the beefy legs on the SR-5 G2 pull out easily (no release needed), and they retract automatically with the lever.
this makes both extending and retracting the legs much easier and faster with one hand.
feet are easy to replace with spike or whatever.
cant lock is a large lever, which i find much better than a knob. lever can be rotated out of the way.
QD seems solid so far and hasn't come lose. there are 2 bars for mating with the rail, making it even more solid.
even though it is significantly larger, the 45deg option allows it to be only <1/2" taller than the harris when as low as it goes.
if you're not too worried about weight, and aren't stuck on using what everyone else is already using, i think it is a decent option, made entirely in the usa (small shop). you can also disassemble the legs for cleaning without voiding the warranty.
i'll probably keep the harris for times when size and weight might matter.
/not related in any way to the manufacturer
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 10043
Guest
I'm using a Harris on my Yoakum BFD .344 AI with 18" barrel, Bad Motherfucker Brake and a NEFA 5-20x HD. Needless to say this is heavy on the Northern Hemi side, which pretty much means it has a tendency to bounce to the left. I pulled the trigger on an Atlas in a trade with a fellow hide member. By manipulating her legs I can get it to bounce dead center. What I refer to as getting the clit to squirt in the bottle. Recoil follow-through is as quick as John Force in the quarter. Now, the Harris is a darn confusing sturdy platform. Sort of like a quad in traction if you get into that sort of sick shit. I'm not judging. The Atlas moves around and enjoys different positions and takes advantage of gravity by design. I like the suction feet I paid more than the bipod from EGW/Badger. I had to call on those several times and Atlas had changed models two times during that period, added an auto-tensioner and a new serpentine lock nut but only women bleed and I cried alone too often. Hope this helps.
Just as an FYI (and to open another can-o-worms), MY experience is that semi-auto platforms will not be as accurate as a bolt action. So, again, MY experience, I would respectfully suggest keeping that in mind as you move forward with expectations of what your semi-auto build will deliver.
The idea of "accuracy" being
We appreciate the considerations! The Atlas bipods options have grown and we keep revising them to improve our product line. So in some instances an experience with an Atlas from the past would not accurately reflect the experience from today's Atlas. The CAL is a no pan Atlas that is pretty sweet.
We appreciate the considerations! The Atlas bipods options have grown and we keep revising them to improve our product line. So in some instances an experience with an Atlas from the past would not accurately reflect the experience from today's Atlas. The CAL is a no pan Atlas that is pretty sweet.
Indeed, that is a GREAT and necessary reminder. I've got enough time behind both platforms that my expectations are realistic. And you are right a well tuned and well fired bolt gun is a joy to behold it achieve ridiculous sub-MOA groups at 100 yards if you do your part.
Does anyone have experience with the KAC bipod vs the atlas or Accu-tac?
I don't get people that buy knockoff stuff. Its never going to be the same as the real thing. I like my Harris for what it is, and the Atlas CAL for more the intermediate to long range shots. I'm never going to get rid of my Atlas, and even told Kasey that I had a hard time sending it in for the upgrade. It wasn't until he convinced me it was a worthwhile one.
I just returned my new Accu-Tac after discovering my Arthritis infested hands/shoulders couldn't deal with the leg adjustments. I've been researching bipods for weeks and I knew I'd have to pull down on the legs for adjustment but too much force was needed(for me) Now, it's between the Atlas CAL BT- 65 and the Thunder Beast.
I think you would really like the stability and ease of use of the ThunderBeast
Yep, the TB is on the short list with the Atlas BT-65,they both have cranks/levers for cant adjustments, instead of knobs.
Last edited:
Similar threads
