New style Sinclair F-Class Bipod
- Thread starter RallyFan
- Start date
RallyFan:
Haven't heard of a new style bipod. Do you have any more information that you can share? Thanks!
Haven't heard of a new style bipod. Do you have any more information that you can share? Thanks!
RallyFan:
Thank you for posting the links. I remember reading them and thinking the height adjustment was a wonderful idea. I was unaware that they were actually going into production. This should improve an already great (in my opinion) bipod. Hope the current model can be upgraded.
Thanks Again!
Thank you for posting the links. I remember reading them and thinking the height adjustment was a wonderful idea. I was unaware that they were actually going into production. This should improve an already great (in my opinion) bipod. Hope the current model can be upgraded.
Thanks Again!
I've heard rumors that they may make these illegal since it is taking the rules to the max and isn't in the spirit of the rules regarding bipods. Anyone in the know who can tell us if this is true?
I know the rule is very vague, however I think they will need to address the width between the bipods feet otherwise we'll have three foot wide bipods showing up. F-TR class should be for tactical type rifles and attachments of which the Sinclair bipod sure dosen't fit.
I know the rule is very vague, however I think they will need to address the width between the bipods feet otherwise we'll have three foot wide bipods showing up. F-TR class should be for tactical type rifles and attachments of which the Sinclair bipod sure dosen't fit.
dreever:
Whom do you feel should be in charge of determining what the spirit of the rules are? Why regulate the sport? We face enough regulation in our lives!
I don't see the rules being vague at all. From the NRA rule book:
"(b) F-Class Target Rifle (F-TR) - A rifle restricted to the chambers of unmodified .308 Winchester/7.62mm
NATO or unmodified .223 Remington/5.56mm X 45 NATO cartridge cases. The rifle must be fired off a
bipod, rigidly attached to the rifle’s for-end, and/or a sling. Any bipod, meeting the definition of a bipod,
may be used but its weight must be included in the rifle’s overall weight. Any safe, manually operated
trigger is permitted. Any sighting system is permitted, but it must be included in the rifle’s overall weight."
Also the definition of a bipod:
"(3) A bipod is a device with no more than two legs that touch the firing point. It must be rigidly attached to
the forend of the rifle. The bipod may have rigid or folding legs, and may be adjustable to compensate
for the uneven surface of the firing point."
It seems clear to me that ANY bipod can be used as long as it is attatched to the rifle and the combination of the two makes weight. Perhaps this is the true spirit of the rule. If you prefer to shoot a 6 pound rifle with a 12 pound bipod .... have at it!
Whom do you feel should be in charge of determining what the spirit of the rules are? Why regulate the sport? We face enough regulation in our lives!
I don't see the rules being vague at all. From the NRA rule book:
"(b) F-Class Target Rifle (F-TR) - A rifle restricted to the chambers of unmodified .308 Winchester/7.62mm
NATO or unmodified .223 Remington/5.56mm X 45 NATO cartridge cases. The rifle must be fired off a
bipod, rigidly attached to the rifle’s for-end, and/or a sling. Any bipod, meeting the definition of a bipod,
may be used but its weight must be included in the rifle’s overall weight. Any safe, manually operated
trigger is permitted. Any sighting system is permitted, but it must be included in the rifle’s overall weight."
Also the definition of a bipod:
"(3) A bipod is a device with no more than two legs that touch the firing point. It must be rigidly attached to
the forend of the rifle. The bipod may have rigid or folding legs, and may be adjustable to compensate
for the uneven surface of the firing point."
It seems clear to me that ANY bipod can be used as long as it is attatched to the rifle and the combination of the two makes weight. Perhaps this is the true spirit of the rule. If you prefer to shoot a 6 pound rifle with a 12 pound bipod .... have at it!
memilanuk
Gold $$ Contributor
Danny,
I haven't heard any such rumors... doesn't mean they might not be out there.
Part of the problem is you seem to be laboring under the idea that 'F/TR' implies or in some way means 'tactical rifle' - it doesn't. It means 'Target Rifle' which is essentially a Palma Rifle in US terms. The bipods may get more extreme... but they still have to live within the weight limit which hasn't changed. More fancy add-ons means less weight in the barrel and other places - its always a balancing act. The carbon fiber struts on the Center-Shot bipod attempts to bypass this (the Remple bipod it was modeled on weighs quite a bit more, even in its lightened form) but there is something given up in sturdiness and stiffness.
I think we're a ways away from having to regulate the design of the bipods in use in F/TR. There has been some work on an F-PR aka 'Precision Rifle' class at a few larger clubs that essentially takes F/TR and re-works it to be more 'tactical/practical' oriented - maximum barrel lengths, bipods must fold up like traditional ones, mag length rounds, etc. It'll be interesting to see if it takes off or not, but it may be an idea whose time has come. We'll see.
Monte
I haven't heard any such rumors... doesn't mean they might not be out there.
Part of the problem is you seem to be laboring under the idea that 'F/TR' implies or in some way means 'tactical rifle' - it doesn't. It means 'Target Rifle' which is essentially a Palma Rifle in US terms. The bipods may get more extreme... but they still have to live within the weight limit which hasn't changed. More fancy add-ons means less weight in the barrel and other places - its always a balancing act. The carbon fiber struts on the Center-Shot bipod attempts to bypass this (the Remple bipod it was modeled on weighs quite a bit more, even in its lightened form) but there is something given up in sturdiness and stiffness.
I think we're a ways away from having to regulate the design of the bipods in use in F/TR. There has been some work on an F-PR aka 'Precision Rifle' class at a few larger clubs that essentially takes F/TR and re-works it to be more 'tactical/practical' oriented - maximum barrel lengths, bipods must fold up like traditional ones, mag length rounds, etc. It'll be interesting to see if it takes off or not, but it may be an idea whose time has come. We'll see.
Monte
Monte,
You are correct it is "Target Rifle" my mistake, sorry.
I'd be interested in the modified class you mentioned for Tactical type rifles. Do they keep the .308/.223 caliber restriction or open it up to anything? I do like the .308/.223 restriction since it pretty much keeps a level playing field. Besides shooting beside a Sako TRG .338 Lapua isn't much fun. I'm speaking from experience on that score! Sucked the hat right off my head! LOL!
As to the bipod, dosen't matter to me personally since F-Class matches in my neck of the woods are few and far between. I was just commenting on the fact that they are getting kind of far out looking, and to the rumor I read online somewhere.
Danny
You are correct it is "Target Rifle" my mistake, sorry.
I'd be interested in the modified class you mentioned for Tactical type rifles. Do they keep the .308/.223 caliber restriction or open it up to anything? I do like the .308/.223 restriction since it pretty much keeps a level playing field. Besides shooting beside a Sako TRG .338 Lapua isn't much fun. I'm speaking from experience on that score! Sucked the hat right off my head! LOL!
As to the bipod, dosen't matter to me personally since F-Class matches in my neck of the woods are few and far between. I was just commenting on the fact that they are getting kind of far out looking, and to the rumor I read online somewhere.
Danny
memilanuk
Gold $$ Contributor
I believe they set things up for F/PR - Limited (.223 Rem / .308 Win) and Unlimited (anything goes). Brakes & cans were *allowed*, and they were trying to make feeding from the magazine mandatory i.e. no single-shot actions. How they're going to work that out with the NRA slow-fire match rules being traditionally single-load only, no muzzle brakes or suppressors allowed, could be interesting. The other part that was unusual - and that I didn't agree with - was that they were intending to limit the bullet weight for .308 Win to between 165-178gn or thereabouts to encourage competition with common 'tactical' factory fodder, but turning a .223 Rem loose with whatever bullet weight they wanted , including 90gn. They might have relented on that, but its still very much in the formative stages.
There is a fairly lengthy discussion over @ usrifleteams.com/lrforum... mostly done and over with, but it might be worth reviewing the points and counter-points that were raised. Around here where I'm at, it'd be just further diluting the already small F-class turnout, where there aren't usually enough people to split out F/TR and F/Open as it is. At larger clubs where they might have a large enough contingent of 'tactical' shooters who want a sandbox they can play in... it might work.
Monte
There is a fairly lengthy discussion over @ usrifleteams.com/lrforum... mostly done and over with, but it might be worth reviewing the points and counter-points that were raised. Around here where I'm at, it'd be just further diluting the already small F-class turnout, where there aren't usually enough people to split out F/TR and F/Open as it is. At larger clubs where they might have a large enough contingent of 'tactical' shooters who want a sandbox they can play in... it might work.
Monte
Monte,
I'd like to see the bullet weight go up to 190 grain.....mainly because my .308 absolutely loves the Berger 185 gr HPBT Long Range bullet. ;D ;D I'll have to investigate it a bit further. Brakes shooting off the bench are one thing, but shooting prone a lot of dirt and crap would be kicked up.
Danny
I'd like to see the bullet weight go up to 190 grain.....mainly because my .308 absolutely loves the Berger 185 gr HPBT Long Range bullet. ;D ;D I'll have to investigate it a bit further. Brakes shooting off the bench are one thing, but shooting prone a lot of dirt and crap would be kicked up.
Danny
Jeffvn said:
What is the total weight?
memilanuk
Gold $$ Contributor
MaxOwner said:
Are you sure you're not confusing the Sinclair bipod with the Center Shot 'pod? The Center Shot one is heavily based off the Remple, but uses aluminum & carbon fiber and weighs about 1.25 lbs vs. the Remple which is aluminum and steel and weighs closer to 4 lbs (I've been told he has newer lighter models out there, though).
The Sinclair is a completely different design from either of them.
Similar threads
Upgrades & Donations
This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.