F/TR Joy-stick Bi-pod - WHY??

[Kings X]

WHY?
Why use a joy-stick bi-pod?
Simple – it is a mechanical device to position the crosshairs at a desired point on the target. Move away from the gun and watch for the preferred wind condition and trip the hair trigger with your finger tip. Score an “X”. Repeat 20-40-60-etc times and win the match.
What you DID NOT DO:
1. Squeeze the rear bag .
2. Grip the stock.
3. Apply cheek pressure.
4. Apply shoulder pressure.
5. Apply breath control.
6. Squeeze the trigger.
The gun is shot “free recoil”. Get away from it and just lightly touch the trigger. Let your equipment do the rest.
Will it work? It does for Bench Rest shooters every day. They shoot 5 or 10 shoots in seconds. They never look at the target. Just unload, load, close the bolt, pull trigger, - repeat-repeat-repeat-repeat. Some F-Open shooters use this same technique.
Real F/TR World – it ani’t that easy to do.
Bench and F-Open guns don’t recoil like 308 F/TR guns. The stocks are even deigned different. The guns “slide” in the front rest. A bi-pod goes where the gun goes – backwards. It has to be re-positioned each shot.
A benchrest joy-stick front rest weighs 10-30 pounds. This mass weight does resist the movement of the handle. This is a good thing. The movement of the stick need to be smooth but also must “hold” the position when released. Holding the handle can cause fliers.
A bi-pod that weighs only 1 or even 3 pounds has the tendency to shift when the pressure is apply to it. That is a fact of mechanical nature = for every action – there is an opposite action. Getting the gun pointed where you want it AND getting it to stay there, is a learning process. Then after the shot – you get to start all over again.
The answer would be to start from scratch when designing a new F/TR gun. Pick components that allow for a heavy joy-stick bi-pod. Light action, light stock, light scope, light rings and base, light barrel – etc.
Final Point – Is this the “intent of the game”?

 

[Jay Christopherson]

Simple – it is a mechanical device to position the crosshairs at a desired point on the target. Move away from the gun and watch for the preferred wind condition and trip the hair trigger with your finger tip. Score an “X”. Repeat 20-40-60-etc times and win the match.

WRONG. There is nothing mechanical at all about the return to zero here- a mechanical return to zero means that your rifle returns to battery/zero without assistance (or, very little) from you. A joystick rest (bipod or otherwise), still requires you to adjust. It's no different than squeezing the rear bag to achieve the same result. Might be easier (for some people), but end result is no different.

As for "Repeat 20-40-60-etc times and win the match.", that's just entirely bull. I shoot a joystick rest in F-Open and let me tell you, there's nothing about using a joystick rest that gives you a mechanical advantage over someone else using a different rest. As for repeated X's- it will work itself out just like any other rest. Top shooters will rise to the top, regardless of their use of a joystick bipod or not. Average shooters, using a joystick bipod or not, will remain average. Basic shooting skills are not improved by the use of different equipment. It might make you *feel* better about what you are doing, but it's not going to make you a better shooter. IMO.

Will it work? It does for Bench Rest shooters every day. They shoot 5 or 10 shoots in seconds. They never look at the target. Just unload, load, close the bolt, pull trigger, - repeat-repeat-repeat-repeat. Some F-Open shooters use this same technique.

Wrong again. It is literally *impossible* for an F-Class shooter to employ this technique. The string of fire is slow fire- the target is pulled after every shot. If you are lucky, you get good service and it takes 5 - 10 seconds *per shot* to get your target back.

 

[FergusBailey]

Move away from the gun and watch for the preferred wind condition and trip the hair trigger with your finger tip. The gun is shot “free recoil”. Get away from it and just lightly touch the trigger. Let your equipment do the rest.
Will it work? It does for Bench Rest shooters every day. They shoot 5 or 10 shoots in seconds. They never look at the target. Just unload, load, close the bolt, pull trigger, - repeat-repeat-repeat-repeat.

I am sorry, but you are delusional if you believe that benchrest shooters do not look at the target while shooting off a joystick rest. I would contend that a coaxial rest introduces a greater variable into the mix (than say a fixed pedestal rest), and requires more effort on behalf of the shooter to maintain a precise aiming point through the process of executing the shot.

A joystick bipod will not achieve the outcome you are alleging that it will.

 

[woolenmammoth]

I would contend that a coaxial rest introduces a greater variable into the mix (than say a fixed pedestal rest), and requires more effort on behalf of the shooter to maintain a precise aiming point through the process of executing the shot

No truer words spoken.

Very likely that the OP has never shot benchrest with a coax rest or at least not with one I have ever tried, the whole point of it is that it moves...

 

[Kings X]

Guess I did make myself very clear.
The benchrest guys shoot free recoil and it works for them. I don't think you will find too many using a joy-stick rest. BUT I have not shot BR in years.
Yes, I have only used my JS Bi-pod with a 223. I DID say that they move because the gun moves. You are not in a "speed shoot". And have time to re-adjust. And that is not as easy as it is with a Open rest.
As far as shooting "Xs" everytime. Your equipment is capaible of it - the rest is up to you. Taking away gun handeling reduces the number of things that can go wrong.
We have come a long way from the Harris bi-pod. Maybe this is the next generation.

 

[Forum Boss]

The benchrest guys shoot free recoil and it works for them. I don't think you will find too many using a joy-stick rest. BUT I have not shot BR in years.

I think Kings X provided some good points about stock design differences, and I think some of his comments were included for "dramatic effect" and he understands that a joystick rest does not eliminate the need to dope the wind, have good gun-handling etc.

But as for joystick rests in short-range benchrest, there are plenty of top shooters using them, including a certain Hall of Famer named Tony:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TuyQaVi4mrc[/youtube]

 

[Killshot]

We have come a long way from the Harris bi-pod. Maybe this is the next generation.

The Harris's became obsolete the day Sinclair released their F-class bipod several years ago.

SEB's prototype of his coaxial bipod is another step away from using hunting gear for match competition.

 

[boltman13]

I thought F-Class required the shooter to shoulder the rifle and specifacly prohibited shooting free recoil. Am I wrong?

 

[Erik Cortina]

I thought F-Class required the shooter to shoulder the rifle and specifacly prohibited shooting free recoil. Am I wrong?

Yes.

 

[fdshuster]

"I don't think you will find too many using a joy stick rest". Wrong. Based on what I've watched happen over the last 8 years, while actually competing in BR match's, there are more and more being brought to the firing line. During this past Summer season alone while competing in a total of 23 local match's, I've watched a steady increase. My Sinclair Gen 2 w/ windage top is becomming obsolete.

"They never look at the target". Gee, guess I've been doing it all wrong for the last 8 years. At one of our local Varmint for score benchrest match's, the 10 ring at 2 & 300 yards is 1/2" in diameter. To score an X the entire shot hole must be inside the black 10 ring, and these match's are sometimes won (and lost) on X count. If you're not looking at the target how are you making corrections for wind, based on what you see with your wind flags?

"BUT I have not shot BR in years". This statement/ admission says it all.

 

[Laurie]

Having seen and handled the prototype, I think it's a very clever and well executed design. In other words, what you'd expect from Seb Lambang. It does have unnecessary features and it does lack some essential ones, again what you'd expect for a Version 1.0 prototype, and also considering that Seb had never even seen an F Class match never mind competed in one until he arrived in the UK 10 days ago. The main shortcoming is that the joystick handle is too short - its rear end needs to be brought back to be within an easy and comfortable weak-hand grip so that it is continuously grasped throughout the aiming process and while the shot is taken.

So far as the concept goes, I and most others who've examined it have open minds. We really will have to see how it works out in practice in a range of circumstances and various different firing point and elevation profiles. As with any joystick rest, the main plus is its ability to easily, smoothly and quickly change the point of aim (POA) just before the shot is taken. Depending on one's 'wind adjustment style', it'll easily allow one to aim-off a half ring (quarter-MOA), full ring (half-MOA) and so on. Most UK 'Effers' shoot this way using a basic or average wind setting put on in the first few shots. I, and I'm in a minority here, prefer to click-adjust on the windage turret and aim centrally, at most only 'shade the aim' marginally. The European F Class conditions at Bisley last weekend were such that 8 or 9 out of 10 shots required a half-MOA or larger change, in all but the first and last details of the day when the winds were light and fairly consistent. A joystick set up facilitates aim-off and involve no leaning on the butt, adjusting rear bag position etc - we saw some big changes needed, over 2-MOA between some shots.

In the UK we normally shoot off turf firing points and ski-feet bi-pods track two to four inches on them under recoil and the return to battery plus a gradual shooter and rig movement over 20 shots - we can usually see the tracks in the turf quite clearly after the shoot. This also affects elevation slightly as the shoot progresses and the ski feet wear their twin paths into the ground. Easy and instant elevation fine-tuning through the joystick is therefore another plus, likewise the ability to 'shade the aim' vertically to counter the elevation effects of some wind conditions we encounter on many of our ranges. All without rear-bag squeezing too.

So far, extra weight and complexity aside, it's all pluses for a joystick design - as it is in F Open where joystick front-rests are used by over three-quarters of our (GB) national league shooters. BUT ... there is one crucial difference between the F Open and F/TR set-up. The rifle is not attached to the front rest, but it is to a bi-pod and the latter moves on the firing point. A primary objective with the former is that it is both 100% stable and completely static, but that obviously cannot apply in F/TR. As a joystick bi-pod recoils, the competitor's hand still holding the handle, will the bullet invariably leave the muzzle before that recoil allied to the hand on the stick inevitably change the POA? It probably will as the same issue applies to a conventional bi-pod which changes the muzzle position / direction as the whole rifle + bi-pod assembly moves after the shot is taken.

A minor, but potentially important side-effect may be how much the POA changes under recoil too. With current wide-set and very stable bi-pod set ups, the competitor should see little disturbance in the post-shot aim after pushing the rifle forward with the shoulder. If you're pointing at a neighbouring target, you have a problem with set-up and handling, on the turf we shoot on here anyway. I suspect you might be pointing well away from the target with a joystick assembly and may have to reacquire the target. If there is a lot of movement, the scope is on a high power setting and in our (non-string) shooting, your partner may take a shot and have the target pulled before you've reacquired the view thereby missing seeing the shot position. Again, we'll have to see how the device works out in practice. Maybe a problem, maybe not!

In any event, full marks to Seb for yet another piece of innovative thinking and design, and I hope it works well.

 

[Kings X]

All these commets just back up what I was trying to say. The joy-stick bi-pod is the wave of the future. BR shooters and F-Open know that they work.
Let Seb build it to work without worrying about the weight - then build your gun around it.

 

[Laurie]

All these commets just back up what I was trying to say. The joy-stick bi-pod is the wave of the future. BR shooters and F-Open know that they work.
Let Seb build it to work without worrying about the weight - then build your gun around it.

No - that's not what I said. What I said was that there are many advantages in the concept - BUT ONLY IF IT WORKS IN ITS BASIC FUNCTION OF SUPPORTING THE RIFLE CONSISTENTLY UNDER RECOIL MOVEMENT. We'll only know that by trying the rest exhaustively under match conditions on a variety of firing point surfaces and range of weather conditions, different target/muzzle elevations and so on and so forth.

The current crop of wide-foot F/TR Bi-pods undertake two functions: (1) provide support before taking the shot to allow an accurate aim to be taken off a stable platform; (2) allow the combined rifle and 'pod to recoil consistently on the firing point. The advent of joystick designs allows the addition of a third function - to facilitate the shooter to make changes to the point of aim immediately before taking a shot, primarily aiming off to suit his/her reading of wind conditions; While doing this, a joystick should remain neutral compared to a traditional rigid 'pod in task (1), but we simply don't know yet how it'll perform in task (2). It has to perform well and consistently in all three of these functions otherwise it's worse than useless.

There is a huge difference between a rifle+specialised F/TR bi-pod rig recoiling together on the firing point where the 'pod is locked up solid (as in EVERY case now), and one where the bi-pod may see its settings change in the process.

As I said in my previous post, there is also a huge difference between the BR and F-Open shooter using a joystick front-rest where the rest is heavy and static and the F/TR competitor. It doesn't move as the shot is taken and in the immediate aftermath, while the bi-pod is locked to the F/TR rifle and certainly does move on the ground, except as in sniper practice where the feet are jammed into position and the legs 'loaded' (put under tension) by pushing the rifle hard forward.

There is a danger of drawing false conclusions by assuming that because a concept works brilliantly in scenario (a) it therefore must do so in scenario (b).

F/TR shooters and rifle designers have gone to considerable lengths to design out the dreaded 'bi-pod hop' often seen in the early days of the discipline or amongst tyros which usually produces 'fliers'. Tactical shooters / snipers brace their Harris type bi-pods hard to stop the same phenomenon. A joystick bi-pod MAY reintroduce a random vertical component into the rig's handling at a crucial time. We simply don't know yet - we cannot say it will or won't work until a lot of shooting takes place over prototypes.

There is another and different set-up that may be what will work best with a joystick design. A minority of F/TR bi-pod users don't allow the whole shooting kit and caboodle to recoil on the point, rather take the benefit of the stable wide design, but otherwise treat the rig as per the traditional Harris / tactical arrangement through putting spikes through the feet and pushing their points into the ground. This is legal under ICFRA's F/TR regulations. It may be that a combination of the joystick pre-shot adjustment facility and non-moving 'pod feet will be a good option. Again, we don't know any of these things until we try them out.

 

[seb]

I think Laurie is correct with his posts / his point of views.

- A bipod must provide an accurate aim & must support the rifle consistently under recoil
- Wide foot & ability to make changes to the point of aim immediately before taking a shot
- Differences between the F-O & F-TR
- It must be tough enough & consistent under various kind of circumstances such as weather, slope, uneven ground etc

First of all the joystick bipod's concept still needs to be extensively tested in the field & match condition.

Shooting off of the bipod for a few rounds at Bisley didn't give me "exact finding(?)", honestly. I'm not so sure that the joystick feature work, or performs as expected. I only had/have a feel, or prediction, that joystick concept on a bipod would work. And I think that I can trust the Spanish shooters that tried the bipod, although I did not see the bullet impacts through a spotting scope.
Time will tell though.

We need to know if the bipod must be shot by holding (lightly) the joystick, or should it be shot by not holding the joystick. Also to know the impact difference on the targets, between those two methods. Also how light/how tight the tension must be set.

Vince Bottomley told me that he will test the prototype in the next couple weeks and will let us know his finding. Vince owns/keeps the prototype now.

The tension on the bipod can be set easily by two set screws, by the way. Also that the internal built-in uplift holds the weight of F-TR rifle without problem. That way Vince would only need to shoot the bipod by holding the joystick, or not holding, and 'to play' a bit with the tension setting.
It will be great to know which is the best method/combination.

The other thing such as the legs, the feet, weight, cant etc are easy/not difficult to solve, it's more about the coaxial unit & the joystick feature/concept.

I'll make another prototype(s), soon when I have time.

seb.

 

[Laurie]

Thanks for the update / clarification, Seb. I'm shooting in a 900 yard competition with Vince tomorrow, so will likely see the bi-pod in action and look forward to hearing his views on its range-performance.

I hope it does work out well. Alright, I partly hope it works - speaking as the owner of three conventional wide-set F/TR bi-pods and another three or four Harris and Versa-Pod tactical folding models, all this progress can be hard on the pocket!

It was very good to meet you and your wife at Diggle, then again at Bisley. I have a few photos of you at the Europeans on and off the firing line which I'll email on shortly.

 

[seb]

Laurie, thanks you for yours!
It will be great (I will be very happy) if you also try the prototype!
(Talk with Vince about it, Vince owns/keeps the bipod now).

Re: testing the bipod.
I suspect that it wouldn't take much time & ammos to know if the bipod works, or not.
Under 'ideal' or calm condition & proven rifle-load-scope combinations, I guess that I would probably need no more than 40 rounds myself to know how the bipod performs, also to find what things need to be changed/improved with the bipod. I would try different grip with the the stock (i.e. firm grip, medium, or light grip), to 'pin' the rifle or not, to try different tension setting, to hold the joystick or not, also to try different/uneven ground...with the legs directly on the ground or on a mat etc.
And probably to try different bipod placement on the stock...at the very end tip of the stock, more to the rear etc.
And I would use a .308 rather the .223... you know the reason.
3 shots group for each methods would be just fine.
Another 20 rounds to (re)-confirm the finding, 2 x 10 shot groups, probably.
If it works it works, if it doesn't work it won't.
Things such as uneven ground, different slopes, longer & bend joystick, etc, would be no problem / easy to solve. Again, it's just/more about the joystick concept.

Thomas A. Edison tried thousand times for the light bulb & he was a great inventor. But I won't & I'm not at all! ;D .... If you both find that the prototype does not work or not performs well, or not better or not more comfort to use than conventional/non joystick bipods, not robust, not user friendly etc, I will not produce it & will cancel the patent!
Yes, I have mentioned somewhere in the forum that I will not make a sub standard equipment.

I can trust you both, for sure.

seb.

 

[Forum Boss]

Seb,

Remember that there are at least 100 recreational shooters and varmint shooters for every guy who competes in F-TR (maybe the ratio is higher). These guys are shooting lighter guns with shorter stocks. Even if it takes a while to evolve the "perfect" F-TR joystick bipod, a simpler first-generation design might still prove fantastic for the varmint hunter or tactical shooter.

 

[seb]

Thanks you Paul.

When all things settled & the bipod proven to work as expected, many people will like it..... from F-TR shooters to varmint shooters & tactical purpose, even with the military/police snipers.
Just like my NEO & MAX rest, it's just a matter of time, I can smell it. ;D
In other words, yes I have a strong believe that the joystick bipod WILL work.

seb.

 

[Laurie]

I did see Vince on Sunday, but he was shooting F-Open using the rifle he built for Fox Firearms and that was loaned to Seb for the European Championship F Class event the week before - so no bi-pod. We had a good natter and it'll be a case as stated before of seeing 'how things work out in real range conditions'. My spiked feet suggestion was taken positively as this may prove to be a good combination - joystick control + anchored bi-pod. (We'll see!)

The rifle Vince built and used last weekend is another piece of innovative firearms engineering - a True-Flite barrel clamp stock from New Zealand with the action (UK manufactured GBR in this example) floating. Maybe not new in the bench rest 'Heavy Gun' long-range world, but the first F Class suitable model I've heard of to date, and that runs well under the 10kg weight limit. This example was built in .284 Winchester, but with some relatively slight modifications we reckon an 8.25kg all-up i/c 'pod version could be built in .308 Win or .223 Rem for F/TR. It shot very well and gave Vince who was in good form a comfortable overall win in the (800-yards) match in tricky wind conditions.

Any British Forum members reading this and in the market for a superb, only slightly used (~200 rounds) .284W and at this stage unique F-Class rifle would do well to approach Fox Firearms fairly quickly while it's still available.