Bipod height for a gas gun

[Eustice]

I built an SPR about a year ago and have really enjoyed shooting it. It’s my rifle for when I’m secondary in a team match as well as the one I grab if there are any unwanted issues with stuff around the house. I always feel like I should’ve built a .308 until I shoot it again and I’m glad I went with 5.56.

Here’s my question. I have a Harris 6-9” on there and while I’m not fully extended on the bipod I easily could be. I rarely find a time when I’m using the bipod fully collapsed at 6” and I leave it at about 8” so the legs aren’t forward of the muzzle when folded.

For those of you who have used both 6-9” and 9-13” on your gas guns, do you feel the 9-13” is too tall? Does it depend on whether you’re using 20 round or 30 round mags? Give my your opinions on one versus the other.

Thanks.

 

[CJS-6.5]

9-13 is more versatile. Better for shooting down hill. You can usually get higher but it's hard to get lower.

 

[hlee]

I find a tall bipod makes it difficult to get a good position using a rear bag. I feel tippy with those 9" legs. But, bipod height is heavily dependent upon body type. I'm pretty thin and can get really low to the ground and be comfortable. And, if you are using a long magazine, there is that. For a precision match or hunting rifle, where high round counts are not necessary, a 10-20 round mag works well with a short bipod. You may have interference issues with a 30 and almost surely will with a 40.

I have both and found I always used the 9-13" fully collapsed and with a rear bag that felt too tall to be stable. I use the 6-9" on the 2nd or 3rd stop and am more comfortable all around.

My experience has been that Targets above the elevation of the shooting line are easier to hit with a taller bipod. Targets below the elevation of the shooting line are easier to hit with a shorter bipod.

 

[CJS-6.5]

I should clarify that I meant the taller bipod is better when the shooter and rifle are at a downward angle. Not necessarily shooting downhill.

 

[Eustice]

I see what you’re saying

I do wish Harris made some overlap to their sizes. Right now you have 6-9” and 9-13” then the really long ones for sitting/kneeling.

A 7-12” would be an ideal height. Just one more thing that doesn’t exist just because I think it should.

 

[srt-4_uk]

A 7-12” would be an ideal height. Just one more thing that doesn’t exist just because I think it should.

http://precisionrifleblog.com/2015/01/05/bipod/

You arent the only one that thinks that.

 

[Mike_Honcho]

I see what you’re saying


A 7-12” would be an ideal height. Just one more thing that doesn’t exist just because I think it should.

https://www.accu-shot.com/catalog_n...sr-atlas-bipod-tall-with-adm-170-s-lever.html

 

[Eustice]

https://www.accu-shot.com/catalog_n...sr-atlas-bipod-tall-with-adm-170-s-lever.html

Well would you look at that. That would do it.

I do wish Atlas were a bit closer in price to Harris. I’ve never had an issue with my Harris bioids that make me want to spend over $300 on one.

I guess I’ll be cruising the PX a bit more frequently now.

 

[deersniper]

i like a 9-13 but I only do field shooting. Never off a bench. The 12-25 is real nice for hunting also.

 

[Eustice]

i like a 9-13 but I only do field shooting. Never off a bench. The 12-25 is real nice for hunting also.

I had a 9-13” for a couple years but realized it was too high on my bolt guns. I carried it to matches religiously in case i ever needed it. After about 7 matches having used it once (and immediately regretting it) I decided I would never need it and sold it.

Now I realize that wasn’t too bright. I guess I need to fully extend the 6-9” and see how it is and realize that’s a minimum height should I choose to go with one of those.

Thanks for all the points of view so far.

 

[r.tenorio671]

...try adjusting the bipod further back on your rail, changing the "pivot point" for your vertical range...