BipodeXt now shipping. And some thoughts about shooting with a bipod

I love products that let me shoot faster and more accurate. And the lighter and the more flexible that help is the better. I use bipods quite a lot in all kinds of shooting. When shooting long range I use a bipod all the time, unless there’s some reason (usually a rule) why not to.

Shooting kneeling with a high bipod is one of my favorite shooting positions, where I get a good compromise between speed and precision for shots out to about 200 – 250 meters.

Within 100 meters I try to shoot standing, free hand, in practical shooting. Practice makes perfect.

When shooting prone, I used to like to have the bipod (normally a Harris or an Atlas) rather high. With time and practice (and perhaps a smaller belly) I realized that the lower I go the more stable and accurate my shooting gets. So as long as the barrel and the scope clears any objects on the ground (like vegetation) that’s as low as I’ll go.

Pete wrote about the new BipodeXt Bipod Extention System in April this year. To understand the idea behind the product please check his article.

Below: “BXT 40X3 fully extended for the ultimate in stability and accuracy.

According to their website they are now ready to start shipping (August 21 2017).

I would agree with BipodeXt that the best position for the bipod is as far out as possible. But that goes for  the handguard (if it’s free floating), not extended on a tube past the end of the barrel.

If you are making a lot of transitions (more likely in practical shooting) side to side, or up and down, I prefer the bipod closer to the middle of the rifle, to turn and work the rifle around the bipod.

Traditional bipod position vs. BipodeXt.

However I’m not so sure that BipodeXt’s solution to extend the bipod that far out, and at the same time adding height and Picatinny joints it the right way to go.

Also, if you add pressure on the vertical grip there will be some interesting force vectors, not necessarily working in your favor.

If I understand the construction correct, there should also be some flex in the joints when you apply any force.

Please note: I have not tried the BipodeXt, but based on my experience it would not add any balance to the system but rather the opposite.

Am I right, am I wrong? Please let us know what you think in the comments section below.

 

Below: This year’s most awkward shooting position?

Some pictures of the BipodeXt in work.

Pictures from Accuracy Solutions Facebook.

The price range from 399 to 599 USD depending on model.

You can check their webpage for more details: https://bipodext.com/





Eric B

Ex-Arctic Ranger. Competitive practical shooter and hunter with an European focus. Always ready to increase my collection of modern semi-automatic firearms, optics and sound suppressors. Owning the night would be nice too.


Advertisement

  • R. Kenneth Thorstenson

    In this case, you are incorrect about the increase to stability. Ideally speaking, the farther the bipod or pivot point of the rifle is from the shooter, the more stable the platform. This is due to the movement of the shooter having a smaller impact on the POA/POI having a smaller impact.

    The trade off associated with this design versus a conventional system is additional weight, height off the ground, and most importantly speed of target transition. If the bipod/pivot point is twice as far from the shooter, the shooter has to move twice as far to make the same shift in POA/POI.

    In effect, this design trades mobility for stability, with an additional weight and height penalty. For extremely precise shots from a fixed position, it’s a godsend. For multiple targets or rapid transitions, the additional precision may not be necessary.

  • R. Kenneth Thorstenson

    In this case, you are incorrect about the increase to stability. Ideally speaking, the farther the bipod or pivot point of the rifle is from the shooter, the more stable the platform. This is due to the movement of the shooter having a smaller impact on the POA/POI.

    The trade off associated with this design versus a conventional system is additional weight, height off the ground, and most importantly speed of target transition. If the bipod/pivot point is twice as far from the shooter, the shooter has to move twice as far to make the same shift in POA/POI.

    In effect, this design trades mobility for stability, with an additional weight and height penalty. For extremely precise shots from a fixed position, it’s a godsend. For multiple targets or rapid transitions, the additional precision may not be necessary or beneficial.

    • Stewart Hickey

      You are forgetting shear and bending moments. Though you are reducing your ability to impact on the POA trhough movement, you are INCREASING your leverage at the point where this device attaches to the rifle, increasing the chance of you bending having slop at the attachment point or barely bending the device, which could definitely cause POI shift.

      • BeGe1

        I think the general assumption is that everyone using fore-end mounted bipods for extreme precision shooting has a free floated barrel.

        • Stewart Hickey

          I’m not referencing the barrel. I’m looking at the point on the stock where this attaches. Even miniscule slack in that area is overly exagerated by the length, and any amount of bend in that device would cause the entire weapon to shift its POA

          • BeGe1

            That’s actually why I’m talking about free-floated barrels.

            The general idea behind them is that since the barrel is free of the stock, pressures on the stock don’t change the POI.

    • ostiariusalpha

      “For extremely precise shots from a fixed position, it’s a godsend.”
      Right, this kind of bipod is really intended for the prone, static shooting of traditional European Schützenfest and Stangskyting competitions. It’s a niche application.

      • iksnilol

        I dunno, bipods ain’t allowed for stangskyting.

        Arm and a sling is more than a good enough bipod… damn youngins!

        • ostiariusalpha

          Right, I should have said Langholdsskyting.

        • Ragged Hole

          Agreed! I am still a youngin but have been baptized in the ways of GI sling through the almighty Project Appleseed . Now as an instructor I don’t even use my fancy one piece rest to zero my scopes and sight it. Just get slung up, get down in prone, and turn myself into a human bipod, it works.

    • gunsandrockets

      Right. The same principle applies to LMG fired from a bipod. Smaller cone of fire with a bipod located farther forward.

      But I thought that for rifle precision slow fire, the ideal was a bipod located rearward and close to the balance point of the rifle, so as to minimize the force needed to aim the rifle.

  • If you want to make your gun more unwieldy/heavy at least do it right and have the gun built with a free float tube around the barrel for mounting the bipod. At least then it works as a heat shield and reduces the height of the assembly.

    • Giolli Joker

      True, but this can work on any rifle with bottom rail, your solution would be more platform specific.

  • Sunshine_Shooter

    You know what? I like it.

    • Tuulos

      When talking about stability, the optimal bipod attachment point would actually be on top of the rifle, not under. The height difference between the bipod attachment point and the barrel (or the top) of the rifle is significantly larger with this than with a regular bipod mounted at the bottom of the stock. The length of the legs doesn’t matter all that much in this case.

  • NMhunter1371

    I see a lot of pictures of “tacticool” rifles. But this thing looks impractical for anything besides range work and competition.

    • ostiariusalpha

      It’s intended for the firearm equivalent of a Formula One race car. Purely for competition purposes, though you can play with it at the range if you wish.

      • iksnilol

        I dunno, a gun equivalent of F1 is more like the railguns.

        • ostiariusalpha

          Pfft, railguns are drag racers. Those things are barely steerable.

  • wtfmate

    I could just ratchet-strap my rifle to a GD lead-sled and get the same effect (and it’ll probably have a smaller footprint and be lighter). Maybe they can one-up the competition and stick a sun-setter retractable awning on that sucker….

    Sheesh.

  • m-dasher

    nothing i want more on a my rifle than a 3′ black dong………

    thing looks like more of a pain in the ass than it look helpful.

  • Ragged Hole

    Or for a grand total of $20 you can buy a USGI sling, make your loop sling and learn to shoot like a rifleman…

    • Blake

      What a stupid comment. You realize shooting from a standing position is never a suitable replacement for prone shooting at long range right? That’s like saying “god if you’re so thirsty, learn to cook hamburgers!”

      • Ragged Hole

        I am guessing you don’t have a lot of experience in 3P shooting or using a sling for shooting support. It can be used in all three positions and is most effective in prone. Using a solid position, bone structure, proper support, controlled breathing, establishing your NPOA, and shooting on your respiratory pause your can put easily put hits in the “5” on an full-sized Army D target.

        If that idea sounds obtuse, it is supposed to. The idea that everyone needs a bipod or whatever the heck this is, is ridiculous…

      • iksnilol

        Are you being obtuse on purpose? Nowhere he said to stand while shooting.

        But I guess tacticool kids nowadays don’t know how to use a sling from the prone. For shame.

    • MeaCulpa

      Yeah, that might be fine and dandy but competing in a long range/high precision discipline with a loop sling will not earn you the top spot. Horses for courses and what not.

      • Ragged Hole

        You are correct, obviously the “loop sling” would not for PRS type matches but on the other hand you won’t see this ridiculous setup on any PRS top 100 gear lists any time soon.

        I did point it out because using this technique and iron sights with a 25/200 battle zero, and knowing your holdover/unders you can be dangerous, with hits on target out to 600yds. Guys get so hard on the latest and greatest gear they take time to learn the proper technique.

      • m-dasher

        if youve ever shot with a sling…..you would know that a sling is actually A LOT more stable of a platform than a bipod is.

  • gunsandrockets

    Meh. Not for me. For that level of bulk and cost I’d rather have a tripod.

    But that gizmo certainly is imaginative. And I applaud out of the box thinking.

    And it got me thinking… What if you added a recoil dampening mechanism? There certainly is the space for it in that bipod.

  • MyFifteenthAccount

    ghey

  • iksnilol

    Looks awkard.

  • Tom

    It would be fun to try just to see how it works, I’d image the connections would be the biggest weak link. With that long of a lever you’d need everything to be ROCK solid in order not to introduce more high frequency vibrations than you are removing, especially if you are pre-loading the bipod. So it would be crucial the tube, tube connections and mount to the rifle were extremely stiff. In addition to the rifle forearm, any of these cheaper rifle stocks like come on most factory rifles would likely flex significantly when you preloaded the bipod with that long of a lever arm, that would certainly reduce accuracy, just like a forearm that flexes into the barrel will.

    It’s certainly no more bulky, heavy, or impactical than the current trend of guys that are packing up to 10-20lbs of full sized tripod gear for their rifles costing as much as a couple grand into the field to shoot from now.