Australian bipod

[BATattack]

After not being overly impressed with the bipods currently on the market I've been in the process of drawing up a design that resolves some of the current issues.

There has been a big focus on reducing weight and i think its basicslly got us to a point of having bipod's which are very A) flimsy /flexible B) fragile C) difficult to set up and adjust.

What has driven us to seek out such a light bipod? I think it is poor tracking / hop / twist and probably to a big extent "well my bipod is lighter than yours so i can have a bigger barrel". I think people are steering towards heavier barrels to counteract poor tracking / hop because they haven't resolved the root cause . . . . . . The bipod. People have one eye on the profile of an FO rifle and see they are running parallel barrels and tracking stocks but arent considering that those features are only useful when its sitting in a tripod weighing nearly as much as the rifle and having perfect bag fit and lube.

With that in mind im hoping to design and produce a bipod that is in order:

1) Quality smooth operating joystick mechanism which has a positive "direct" feel. With the same or more travel than a joypod.
2) Aids tracking and reduces the sensitivity of gun handling to increase flag observation time and rate of fire.
3) Is easy, quick and comfortable to set up and adjust during a shoot.
4) Is robust in design and doesnt feel like you going to break it every time you use it.
5) Is easy to dissasemble and maintain.
6) Is as light weight as practically possible with minimal impact on the above.

To meet all these requirements there will be some sacrifices being weight and possibly cost. There is a lot of "stuff" needed to make design work but im aiming to keep it under 1kg which sounds like a lot but really its 1 step down in barrel profile. The "stuff" that makes it heavier it also makes it more difficult to make but again once prototypes are done i will hopefully be able to find some areas to trim both weight and cost.

What are your thoughts?

[Tim L]

Hat off to your initiative but not sure you covered everything.
FTR has adopted heavy pills (let's not rehash that discussion it is what it is)
Heavy pills bring recoil, certainly more than 155s.
The bipod must move under recoil, I know of a few shooters who tried to use sticky-ish mat under the joypod to manage the recoil. They subsequently had problems with the joystick mechanism. I deduce from that that the bipod needs to be free to move itself.
A 1 kg bipod might be ok, but it must be substantial enough to be able to transmit that force, and accelerate it's own mass, as must the connection point. I have pulled my rail screws out using an m pod and a joypod but araldite solved that.
Would I sacrifice anything on my rig for a heavy bipod? I don't know.
I'm going to be dusting off the old M Pod. It's a shit to set up, but I think the geometry is right. Fit a joystick that transmits torque straight down the leg and I think you have a winner.

[UL1700]

Whilst I like the idea, to shed ~400 grams off my current setup which would require a scope and barrel change and to then pay more than I would for a Joypod (I still hate the name), I would need some convincing.

[BATattack]

Hat off to your initiative but not sure you covered everything.
FTR has adopted heavy pills (let's not rehash that discussion it is what it is)
Heavy pills bring recoil, certainly more than 155s.
The bipod must move under recoil, I know of a few shooters who tried to use sticky-ish mat under the joypod to manage the recoil. They subsequently had problems with the joystick mechanism. I deduce from that that the bipod needs to be free to move itself.
A 1 kg bipod might be ok, but it must be substantial enough to be able to transmit that force, and accelerate it's own mass, as must the connection point. I have pulled my rail screws out using an m pod and a joypod but araldite solved that.
Would I sacrifice anything on my rig for a heavy bipod? I don't know.
I'm going to be dusting off the old M Pod. It's a shit to set up, but I think the geometry is right. Fit a joystick that transmits torque straight down the leg and I think you have a winner.

No definitely have the recoil / torque factored in. Ive been shooting 208 and 215s pretty juicy out a 9 twist.

Yes agree that the gun, bipod and front mat or plate need to work together and also agree that the mount needs to be sturdy enough to manage the additional intertia of the heavier bipod. Id reccomend guled and screwed anschutz rail as a minimum.

Whilst I like the idea, to shed ~400 grams off my current setup which would require a scope and barrel change and to then pay more than I would for a Joypod (I still hate the name), I would need some convincing.

It may not be for everyone but as with everything in competition things constantly evolve and people start new builds around particular components. Hopefully its good enought for people to consider it a worthy component.

[UL1700]

It may not be for everyone but as with everything in competition things constantly evolve and people start new builds around particular components. Hopefully its good enought for people to consider it a worthy component.

I would also say that I have both a Dolphin Trakker and an SEB and I'm not totally taken with either. The Dolphin I find is simply not ridged enough and can twist the SEB I have tracking well but the joystick feels terrible which i think is in part due to how light they have made it. Both bipods have me sitting right on the weight limit but I'm currently using a Nightforce benchrest which is a damn heavy lump of a scope. I want to upgrade it to the new March 10 to 60 x 56 which will save nearly 200 grams! but I don't think it will open up a huge new world of bipods...

[BATattack]

Yeah I have a Joypod and even after some mods im not happy with it. I was going to continue with the mods but might as well throw it in the bin and start again. I have a duplin and have played with a few others and i havent seen anything that ticks the boxes. Is there much point of trying to build an amazingly accurate rifle and then sitting it on top of a piece of alfoil ?

The one below seems to be pretty popular in the US and is supposed to be very sturdy. But again heavy, expensive, no joystick, difficuly to install/ remove and very high mount.

https://www.phoenixprec.com/index.php?m ... s4ultcs9k1

The BR is a very heavy scope . . . . A good scope but a heavy one

[!Peter!]

BATattack,
The phoenix precision is another copy of the Remple bipod which is considered the first ski type bipod. I use a Remple bipod and like it a lot but it is heavy. However, I'm sure it's strong enough for the Gman to stand on.

[UL1700]

BATattack,
The phoenix precision is another copy of the Remple bipod which is considered the first ski type bipod. I use a Remple bipod and like it a lot but it is heavy. However, I'm sure it's strong enough for the Gman to stand on.

The Remple has been copied many times, I have been tempted by the Tier One version, available in ali or carbon...

https://tier-one.eu/collections/ftr-bipod

[Pommy Chris]

After not being overly impressed with the bipods currently on the market I've been in the process of drawing up a design that resolves some of the current issues.

There has been a big focus on reducing weight and i think its basicslly got us to a point of having bipod's which are very A) flimsy /flexible B) fragile C) difficult to set up and adjust.

What has driven us to seek out such a light bipod? I think it is poor tracking / hop / twist and probably to a big extent "well my bipod is lighter than yours so i can have a bigger barrel". I think people are steering towards heavier barrels to counteract poor tracking / hop because they haven't resolved the root cause . . . . . . The bipod. People have one eye on the profile of an FO rifle and see they are running parallel barrels and tracking stocks but arent considering that those features are only useful when its sitting in a tripod weighing nearly as much as the rifle and having perfect bag fit and lube.

With that in mind im hoping to design and produce a bipod that is in order:

1) Quality smooth operating joystick mechanism which has a positive "direct" feel. With the same or more travel than a joypod.
2) Aids tracking and reduces the sensitivity of gun handling to increase flag observation time and rate of fire.
3) Is easy, quick and comfortable to set up and adjust during a shoot.
4) Is robust in design and doesnt feel like you going to break it every time you use it.
5) Is easy to dissasemble and maintain.
6) Is as light weight as practically possible with minimal impact on the above.

To meet all these requirements there will be some sacrifices being weight and possibly cost. There is a lot of "stuff" needed to make design work but im aiming to keep it under 1kg which sounds like a lot but really its 1 step down in barrel profile. The "stuff" that makes it heavier it also makes it more difficult to make but again once prototypes are done i will hopefully be able to find some areas to trim both weight and cost.

What are your thoughts?

Mine, the one myself and a friend have designed and made has started production, it is LIGHTER than a Joypod much more stable and stiffer than the Joypod and much much cheaper too. It has a rear facing wand for elevation but side to side is more traditional, but there is an option for that coming soon only adding a few grams . They are made from carbon fiber and aluminium, I shot the first sample the other day and drawing rifle back and forward the cross hairs dont move with play and slop like they do in the Joypod and I was drilling the shots into a small dot at 200 yards without worring too much about the fact that it was a bipod I was using. I have shot the mk1 and it was great but it had a few issues and it was heavier, this is the mk6 which was the delay, we wanted to get it perfect. The Joypod is an amazing design, but it has many problems. Anyway first batch of the "Auspods" are being made, exciting to finally see boxes of parts, all made by the way in Australia
Cheers
Chris

[Quick]

Gents,

What are the issues with the joypods that you all see?

[jasmay]

Bipod design is one part of the overall rifle.

Too many people focus only on one element.

Would I sacrifice weight elsewhere for a heavier bipod, nope, not when the whole rifle has been designed to work together.

The amount of people I have helped with “gear problems” with slight tweaks to their technique solving the majority of their issues is more then uojbwoudk think.

Whilst I commend everyone for working on technical improvements to the sport, after all, it is what makes us grow, don’t get caught in a gear race. I also no more than a few shooters who have every new trinket ever brought to the sport, who still don’t shoot that great even after spending obscene amounts on kit.

1) Focus on technique.

2) Your gear is like a race car, good tyres won’t make up for bad suspension, build your rifle with a plan from the ground up.

3) If something doesn’t work, look at how you are using it before you look at redesigning it or throwing it away.

And, last but not least, keep em in the middle.

[Pommy Chris]

Gents,

What are the issues with the joypods that you all see?

The Joypods work which is why we all have one, but the problems which do affect accuracy are the fact that there is a lot of flex and play due to many parts. Moving rifle back and forward even with slippery bipod mat or plate with legs high you see cross hairs raise up and down, this is due to bipod legs having flex and play and play in headset. I heard the argument that it makes no difference but free recoil and do one shot with Joypod loaded legs forward and one back you will see elevation in the group. Not bagging the Joypod at all it is what it is and it does a good job and it i was revolutionary too. That said there is a reason F open shooters prefer a massive stand and almost no F open shooters use a Joypod as it will bring in inaccuracies unless the shooter is very good indeed at rifle control and doing the same exactly thing every time. A big solid rest (we cant use in FTR) fixes many things in this respect. Now a bipod that is much more solid and without flex at all heights is going to improve scores. Yes learning techniques can overcome a lot, but I believe often that (how did that go there?) shot in FTR is likely to be you doing something of having a slightly different position. Elimination as much of this possible error is what I am talking about. The want foe windage is amazing, but it could be the cause of errors we put down to other things, this is all linked to technique of course, but we are all not robots and not perfect hence why I started this bipod design.
Other point worth mentioning is Joypod must be checked every range for loose parts, I dont know if this has changed but mine comes loose all the time and it has cost me in competition.
Again not bagging any product, just pointing out differences that I dont enjoy and I wanted to change, doing so made me attack the same problem in a different way.
Chris

[Quick]

I hate to say it, but maybe technique needs to change? I shoot hard hold and have had NO issues at all that couldn't be fixed by technique or rifle tuning. I just shot the WARA queens series, used joypod everyday, just clamped on and shot. No problems. Did the same at Nationals and no issues. I leave it alone and it just works as long as I shoot the rifle the correct way.

I've come from FO and found F/TR is as much as rifle technique game as rifle setup and rifle tuning. Its all gotta be right. Its why its so hard to do well in F/TR. You have to drive it with the same consistancy in technique as a top level TR shooter, and it has to track and group like a top level FO rig.

[Pommy Chris]

I hate to say it, but maybe technique needs to change? I shoot hard hold and have had NO issues at all that couldn't be fixed by technique or rifle tuning. I just shot the WARA queens series, used joypod everyday, just clamped on and shot. No problems. Did the same at Nationals and no issues. I leave it alone and it just works as long as I shoot the rifle the correct way.

I've come from FO and found F/TR is as much as rifle technique game as rifle setup and rifle tuning. Its all gotta be right. Its why its so hard to do well in F/TR. You have to drive it with the same consistancy in technique as a top level TR shooter, and it has to track and group like a top level FO rig.

I won a Queens with a joypod, but I have also dropped shots due to something coming lose on mine and this happens too much. The Joyopd is good, but IMO it has too much flex and slop and to get over this involves a very particular technique or holding the rifle hard to shoulder which is another can of worms. I am very sure F opens shooters will not start shooting with Joypods not at top level ever.
We designed the Auspod to address the slop and flex that a lot of bopod designs have whilst maintaining a very light extremely stiff and strong bipod. Not saying the Joypod is no good, quite sure it will continue to sell, but mine at around half the price of a Joypod (exact price is being calculated) and being designed to address the weaknesses I dont like in most bipod designs, I think will sell too. The new Auspod is totally made in Australia which we are very proud of too.
Cheers
Chris

[jasmay]

I don’t think F-Open shooters will EVER shoot with a Bi-Pod.

Not sure why you would even compare the two, shooting off a rest vs bolting a bipod onto a gun has completely differet characteristics in design and also tuning.

Not even worth comparing IMO.

Also, all rests, including pedestal rests of all brands need servicing just like anything else with moving parts, service your gear, don’t wait for it to fail.

RTF = Run To Fail.

A classic issue that seems to plague a lot of shooters, people shoot a barrel without cleaning it and then wonder why at some point their group has opens up, because they chose to RTF.

Service your gear....