Bipod Height for Hilly Range [Archive]

View Full Version : Bipod Height for Hilly Range

dog guy

12-26-16, 16:33

I need to select a bipod for shooting my 308. Our local range is flat out to 200 yards. They have steel targets out to 1000 yards, but they go up the hill. The 400 yard gong is about 50' higher, the 600 yard is 115' higher, the 800 yard is 190' higher, and the 1000 yard is 374' higher. The hill starts behind the 200 yard line, so you're body is lying horizontal while the rifle needs to point upwards. I don't see myself building the skill to make anything over 600 yards worthwhile for a long time to come, and I'll be spending the bulk of my time at 200 or less. But, ringing the steel farther out is just plain fun some times, so I'd like to get the gear right on the first try if possible. I'm leaning towards the Atlas bipod, since they have the 3" extensions available. Should I go with the 6"-9" or the 9"-13"? I'm 6'2" tall, 175 pounds with a long neck if that matters. Thanks for any advice.

bfk4lyfe

12-26-16, 18:24

First, shooting past 600 isn't anything terribly challenging. Get the dope for your rifle, figure out the wind and press the trigger.

Anyway, your range sounds like mine, I have a harris 9-13 and frequently have to raise it up for one reason or another, the 6-9 would be no good for that.

P2000

12-26-16, 18:47

Yup, go 9-13.

dog guy

12-28-16, 11:35

bfk4lyfe

12-28-16, 19:45

I don't know how these extentions work in real life, but I will say there are times on the flat range where the 9" is too tall for me. I try to compensate with a taller rear bag but I really would like to get my hands on a 6" Harris for those times.

hypno02

12-28-16, 23:47

9-13 for sure. I actually find the 6-9 bipods to be almost utterly useless unless shooting off a bench or a well manicured range.

P2000

12-29-16, 20:33

Thanks for the feedback. Just to be clear, the thinking is that the 9"-13" will be fine on the flat portion of the range with enough adjustment to get up the hill when needed, right? Would I accomplish the same thing using the 6"-9" with the 3" extensions available as needed, or would the taller bipod maybe need the extensions for the hilly shooting? Is the 6"-9" more of a bench tool?
I'd still go 9-13. The Atlas gives you the ability to have the legs at a forward angle, effectively lowering the height, if you needed to do that. 9-13 gives you 4" of adjustment vs only 3" with the 6-9 plus extenders.
When shooting uphill, or when shooting downhill with a downhill shooting position (which is the same shooting position as shooting uphill) I have found it much more comfortable to raise the bipod and rear support.

Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk

Shrillar67

01-10-17, 15:13

Just curious but have you thought of just using sandbags? I've always felt more comfortable and more accurate shooting off of bags. The only downsize is carrying them.

dog guy

01-10-17, 23:24

Just curious but have you thought of just using sandbags? I've always felt more comfortable and more accurate shooting off of bags. The only downsize is carrying them.
Yes, I've thought about that. I'm also thinking that shooting off bags might be a good way to try out various height options before I invest in the bipod.

Shrillar67

01-19-17, 18:04

It is a good way. I enjoy shooting off of them I've always felt more comfortable with them. But bipods aren't bad just not for me.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

HMM

01-26-17, 11:53

I'd still go 9-13. The Atlas gives you the ability to have the legs at a forward angle, effectively lowering the height, if you needed to do that. 9-13 gives you 4" of adjustment vs only 3" with the 6-9 plus extenders.
When shooting uphill, or when shooting downhill with a downhill shooting position (which is the same shooting position as shooting uphill) I have found it much more comfortable to raise the bipod and rear support.

Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk

I like my atlas for that reason too. It has more adjustment options for the position you are in.