fclass guys, what if?

[dnellans]

Question for the competitors in the house who spend as much time measuring groups as shooting them (not the guys who shoot one good three shot group and are sure their rigs shoot .1 like clockwork out the window of their truck)

if you took your competition setup and started using a plan jane harris bipod and a low end (by fclass standards) cordura squeeze bag, how much bigger do you think your 5,10, or 20 shot strings would get?

how much consistency does a sweet $500+ seb rest and tuned protektor rear bag buy you (all else considered equal)?

 

[Scott Harris]

Hmm, if you are discussing using a Harris bipod, then F-TR is the division and a SEB rest is not an option. So, I'll redirect your question to compare a fancy Phoenix bipod or SEB bipod & nice Edgewood bag to a Harris bipod and a squeeze bag. My answer is top shooters would quickly adapt and be able to shoot just about the same...very small difference. The main difference is in speed: won't be able reset as fast with the Harris. This would degrade your scores in certain wind conditions where shooting fast is an advantage. A Harris bipod would definitely slow things down.

 

[dnellans]

Thanks for response, I didn’t mean to split hairs on the exact equipment. I was trying to imply something “substantially better” than the most common bipod and bag setup everyone has probably used at some point in their shooting career.

Interesting to hear you think absolute group size might be be about the same, just slower for top guys. I hadn’t really considered that given how many discussions i see going towards things like what lube to use on your dedicated bag rider, some sand working better than others, or the that certain stitching on a rear bag is going to cause excess vertical at distance.

It can be hard to tell fact from fiction on the web but for many of us there aren’t guys at the local range laying down consistent .25 moa 10+ shot strings (regardless of distance) that you can check with for credible advise.

 

[swd]

Hmm, if you are discussing using a Harris bipod, then F-TR is the division and a SEB rest is not an option. So, I'll redirect your question to compare a fancy Phoenix bipod or SEB bipod & nice Edgewood bag to a Harris bipod and a squeeze bag. My answer is top shooters would quickly adapt and be able to shoot just about the same...very small difference. The main difference is in speed: won't be able reset as fast with the Harris. This would degrade your scores in certain wind conditions where shooting fast is an advantage. A Harris bipod would definitely slow things down.

I have shot a lot of Open off a bi pod and I completely agree with Scott

 

[Ned Ludd]

The ski-type bipods generally have a much wider footprint when compared to a Harris or Atlas V8. With the heavier bullets commonly used nowadays in F-TR (i.e. 200+ gr), the narrow footprint of a "traditional" style Harris/Atlas bipod makes the setup much more sensitive to the torque generated by those heavy bullets, and therefore more difficult to consistently manage the recoil. If you want to use a traditional bipod, one having a much wider footprint such as the Long Range Accuracy bipod or Atlas 5H bipod is a much better choice with heavy bullets. Unfortunately, these bipods are really not much less expensive than the better ski-type bipods, running in the $400-$500 range.

I use the LRA bipod and an oversized rear bean bag. I have no problems tuning loads with my .223 or .308 F-TR setups to the 0.25 to 0.3 MOA range for 5-shot groups at 100 yd. The ability to shoot groups much smaller than that simply isn't going to help your scores much if you shoot where there's any wind at all, because your wind reading skills quickly become the limiting factor in the long (20+) shot strings we typically fire in F-Class.

My recommendation would always be to shoot the style with which you're most comfortable, whether that is a loaded traditional bipod and squeezable rear bag, or a ski-type bipod, eared rear bag, and the so-called "free recoil" style. Both will work and being comfortable behind the rifle is half the battle, IMO. If you choose the traditional bipod, spend the extra money and get a wide footprint version if you plan to use heavy bullets.

 

[dnellans]

The ski-type bipods generally have a much wider footprint when compared to a Harris or Atlas V8. With the heavier bullets commonly used nowadays in F-TR (i.e. 200+ gr), the narrow footprint of a "traditional" style Harris/Atlas bipod makes the setup much more sensitive to the torque generated by those heavy bullets, and therefore more difficult to consistently manage the recoil. If you want to use a traditional bipod, one having a much wider footprint such as the Long Range Accuracy bipod or Atlas 5H bipod is a much better choice with heavy bullets. Unfortunately, these bipods are really not much less expensive than the better ski-type bipods, running in the $400-$500 range.

I use the LRA bipod and an oversized rear bean bag. I have no problems tuning loads with my .223 or .308 F-TR setups to the 0.25 to 0.3 MOA range for 5-shot groups at 100 yd. The ability to shoot groups much smaller than that simply isn't going to help your scores much if you shoot where there's any wind at all, because your wind reading skills quickly become the limiting factor in the long (20+) shot strings we typically fire in F-Class.

My recommendation would always be to shoot the style with which you're most comfortable, whether that is a loaded traditional bipod and squeezable rear bag, or a ski-type bipod, eared rear bag, and the so-called "free recoil" style. Both will work and being comfortable behind the rifle is half the battle, IMO. If you choose the traditional bipod, spend the extra money and get a wide footprint version if you plan to use heavy bullets.

Thanks for the insight Ned. Knowing you're tuning to the .25-.3 range and calling it good for F-TR is interesting. The LRA bipods are an interesting functional in-between from the full on ski-style or full front rest in F-Open, but if the cost is approx same, thats still a chunk of change to bite off to not -really- know if it will help me move from .4-.5 range down to .25-.3 range or if my skills are just not there yet.

What I really need is to find someone with a gun+setup that shoots .2's in their hands and "borrow it" to see if I can make it shoot after a week of practice =p

 

[rardoin]

I have shot a lot of Open off a bi pod and I completely agree with Scott

Same here. My first 'cleans' were with a Harris 6-9" but with a Edgewood bag. If I had the skill a cheaper bag would have sufficed. I'll interject here to bring the 'haters' out from slumber that this was done with a 6.5 Creedmoor...gasp!

 

[rardoin]

dnellans...keep in mind that for F-class you don't need, and rarely would one have, a rifle that will shoot .25 MOA over the 15-20 shot required. If I can get 0.5 MOA over 20 shots at the requisite distance I am happy as a pig in manure. Sometimes I have a load/rifle/conditions/'me' that shoots better than that but a .5 MOA set-up wins matches. Just like I have had my arse handed to me with a rifle shooting under .5 MOA on match day.

 

[BP1]

Hmm, if you are discussing using a Harris bipod, then F-TR is the division and a SEB rest is not an option. So, I'll redirect your question to compare a fancy Phoenix bipod or SEB bipod & nice Edgewood bag to a Harris bipod and a squeeze bag. My answer is top shooters would quickly adapt and be able to shoot just about the same...very small difference. The main difference is in speed: won't be able reset as fast with the Harris. This would degrade your scores in certain wind conditions where shooting fast is an advantage. A Harris bipod would definitely slow things down.

I agree with Scott on this except the part about being able to get back on target faster,a shooter that knows how to load a bipod and get behind the gun will do great.My recoil management with a Harris or atlas is a lot better than with my Joypod.Can I Shoot better I don’t know,the only time I tried it was last summer at Bayou Rifles I shot my 26” tactical rifle chambered in 6.5 creedmoor and shot a 191&194 if memory serves me right using a bean bag and my atlas.

 

[dnellans]

dnellans...keep in mind that for F-class you don't need, and rarely would one have, a rifle that will shoot .25 MOA over the 15-20 shot required. If I can get 0.5 MOA over 20 shots at the requisite distance I am happy as a pig in manure. Sometimes I have a load/rifle/conditions/'me' that shoots better than that but a .5 MOA set-up wins matches. Just like I have had my arse handed to me with a rifle shooting under .5 MOA on match day.

I've never owned a rifle that will shoot .25 moa over 15-20 shots - so thats fortunate 1/2 MOA for anything more than 3 shots at 600 yards in even no wind is still no joke!

Maybe a better way to put the question (and to some extent its been answered) - if you're shooting .5 MOA under ideal conditions, is the addition of a "great" front bipod/rest/rear bag going to noticeably improve your groups to (for example) .3's. Sounds like the consensus is actually no.

 

[Ned Ludd]

Thanks for the insight Ned. Knowing you're tuning to the .25-.3 range and calling it good for F-TR is interesting. The LRA bipods are an interesting functional in-between from the full on ski-style or full front rest in F-Open, but if the cost is approx same, thats still a chunk of change to bite off to not -really- know if it will help me move from .4-.5 range down to .25-.3 range or if my skills are just not there yet.

What I really need is to find someone with a gun+setup that shoots .2's in their hands and "borrow it" to see if I can make it shoot after a week of practice =p

Good luck with that. Tuning a typical F-TR setup to truly shoot in the .2s is not something you're going to find very often. Most claims of precision at that level are just that, claims. When you start checking more carefully, you may find that some of those kind of precision claims just don't hold up.

What you're really getting at here is exactly what are limiting factors for yourself, or by extension, any other shooters that may be interested in this thread topic. With the exception of the 300 yd reduced F-Class target and 800/900 yd Palma shooting, our targets have scoring rings that are approximately 0.5 MOA (X-ring), 1.0 MOA (10-ring), and 2.0 MOA (9-ring). Even in challenging conditions, the majority of shots will usually fall within these 3 scoring rings. In my hands, a rifle that can shoot 5-shot groups at 100 yd in the 0.25 to 0.3 MOA range is easily capable of shooting 20-shot cleans with X-counts of at least 50% at 600 yd under calm to fairly mild wind conditions. As the wind picks up to fair, medium, strong, and challenging, this is no longer true and I will start dropping points, as well as have noticeably lower X-counts. With a half MOA X-ring and 1 MOA 10-ring that pretty much tells you everything you need to know about what is limiting. The wind will cause groups at 600 and 1000 yd to open up to 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 3.0 MOA (or sometimes even more), if there's much wind at all. The teeny difference between a 0.2 MOA load and a 0.3 MOA load at 100 yd is totally lost due to the significance of the effect of the wind.

If you can find a true 0.2 MOA load and compare it under very benign wind conditions to one that is slightly less precise, you might be able to observe a statistically significant difference. Once the wind picks up, you're fooling yourself if you think it will make a difference. Here's why this is important: it takes a HUGE amount of effort to wring that last teeny little bit of precision from an F-TR load. It can be done if you really want to put forth the effort, but it's not easy or cheap. So why attempt do it if it doesn't bring some noticeable advantage and/or lower your scores? You'll end up spending much more time at the reloading bench or testing loads than out shooting and improving your wind reading skills. Anyone is certainly welcome to try and do some testing themselves if they're so inclined. Wanting to check and compare and determine something for yourself is not a bad trait to have in precision shooting, I get that. But this is one case where the law of diminishing returns is in full force.

 

[dcali]

Chasing a .2 load is counter-productive. What you need is a *consistent* ("all day long", as they say) 1/2 minute load. That will include 5 shot groups that dip into the .2s occasionally, but your 20 shot groups would look more like 1/2"-5/8" at 100. If you can pull that off, you have a rifle that can do well at T/R. It's possible to do a little better with some fine tuning and practice, but until you've got a high master card, that's plenty good. A .2 MOA 20-shot group is unrealistic at any range by anyone with a T/R rifle.

There is no magic equipment button. I've seen guys with various pieces of gear shoot well with it. *Most* people go with a ski bipod and a heavy rear bag, but that's not the only way to skin a cat. Don't buy equipment because it's "better", buy it because you have a concrete, specific reason.

 

[JBT47]

dnellans, I’m glad you started this thread. Very informative.

 

[rardoin]

To answer your question D....if the rifle/load is capable of .3 MOA it may be easier for someone to shoot it to its potential off a F-TR type rest versus a 'tactical' folding bipod. However, if someone is an excellent shot and can break 'perfect' shots with a folder, they will not likely better their groups with a fancier bipod or even a rest without other factors considered. My scores off a SEB rest at 600yds are better than my scores, in general, off a bipod because it is easier to shoot off the SEB and can hide some bad habits. When I have been really focused and comfortable shooting my PR class rifle (Harris bipod) I have shot some very good scores....but when I am off my game a little, the scores nose dive. Also, I can run a condition over 3-6 shots or so off a full rest much easier than off a bipod than torques more so that contributes to better scores also. This is in my hands....a relatively novice shooter in F-class.

 

[people]

Question for the competitors in the house who spend as much time measuring groups as shooting them (not the guys who shoot one good three shot group and are sure their rigs shoot .1 like clockwork out the window of their truck)

if you took your competition setup and started using a plan jane harris bipod and a low end (by fclass standards) cordura squeeze bag, how much bigger do you think your 5,10, or 20 shot strings would get?

how much consistency does a sweet $500+ seb rest and tuned protektor rear bag buy you (all else considered equal)?

Oh come one that would be fun. It is really an art to shoot out of the window especially if you are on the "wrong side".

 

[swd]

To answer your question D....if the rifle/load is capable of .3 MOA it may be easier for someone to shoot it to its potential off a F-TR type rest versus a 'tactical' folding bipod. However, if someone is an excellent shot and can break 'perfect' shots with a folder, they will not likely better their groups with a fancier bipod or even a rest without other factors considered. My scores off a SEB rest at 600yds are better than my scores, in general, off a bipod because it is easier to shoot off the SEB and can hide some bad habits. When I have been really focused and comfortable shooting my PR class rifle (Harris bipod) I have shot some very good scores....but when I am off my game a little, the scores nose dive. Also, I can run a condition over 3-6 shots or so off a full rest much easier than off a bipod than torques more so that contributes to better scores also. This is in my hands....a relatively novice shooter in F-class.

This ^^^ Wide ski bi pods and nice front rests definately can/do hide bad gun handling. I shot my first year and a half off a Harris and my next year and a half off an F Class ski bi pod. I have just in the last two matchs gone to a nice front rest. It definately eases the work load. Personally I think every beginning F Open shooter should should shoot a Harris type bi pod for a while. It will force you to have and understand good gun handeling and make you a better shooter overall, even after you go to a rest.

 

[dnellans]

Thanks for all the thoughts guys - interesting to hear what most of you guys think realistic expectations really are!

 

[Capt. Oblivious]

If I had to shoot of a Harris I would rather take up golf again, strange with a Atlas I have no problems but just can manage a "spring loaded" Harris.

 

[dnellans]

If I had to shoot of a Harris I would rather take up golf again, strange with a Atlas I have no problems but just can manage a "spring loaded" Harris.

So how much bigger are your groups on a harris?

 

[Capt. Oblivious]

So how much bigger are your groups on a harris?

Its not really the groups as much as the flyers off a Harris (which I can only contribute to the rifle hoping of the bipod when i do "something") , as the caliber/bullet increases so does the "size" of the flyer. Im sure as has been said its something to do with my shooting position but I could really not be bothered to work on it as the problem disappears with a Atlas and/or Ski type FTR bipod. How I shoot the 2 is completely different but I spend more time working on my shooting with the FTR bipod as thats the piece of equipment that I was planning on using.