which monopod for rear support?

Discussion in 'Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics' started by rufous, Mar 12, 2004.

  1. rufous

    rufous Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    174
    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2001
    I am considering buying a monopod to attach to my rear sling swivel stud for added support while shooting prone. So far I know of only two products available. One is the Accu-shot monopod and the other is the Muley Pod. Are there any other monopods to consider? Which is best? Thanks, Rufous.
     
  2. Len Backus

    Len Backus Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    6,360
    Joined:
    May 2, 2001
    I have both and I prefer the Accu-shot.

    Nonetheless, STL feels the Accu-shot produes about a 1/4 moa increase in vertical for him over that of using a rear bag with a bipod.

    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><HR>
    posted Thu March 11 2004 10:29
    In my case, Len, the day I tested this phenomenon I shot 3 or 4 groups at 100 yards and the same at 300.

    I used the same technique on the bench that I'd use prone. Specifically, I put light (but positive) downward pressure on the rear of the rifle. I do this with my shoulders, really it's the posture of my whole upper body concentrated on the upper 1/4 of the recoil pad. Also, the standard "extreme" straight-line shoulder pressure from the rifle grip.

    When I used the monopod, it seemed that the behavior of the buttstock was "different". Now that's not necessarily a bad thing, but on the target, I couldn't shoot under 3/4 MOA.

    So all I can truthfully draw from my testing is that my current physical approach to shooting is incompatible with the monopod.

    I suppose that someone else's technique, perhaps specifically tuned to the device, coupled with a rifle that behaves differently than the Wolf, may experience better results.

    I was not inclined to continue experimenting because I'd have had to change my form to get the monopod to work.

    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
     

  3. *WyoWhisper*

    *WyoWhisper* Guest

    I'm gonna have to go with STL on this I have the 2 pod on the market and both seem to affect performance. In my experience the pod is very stiff and if not able to "slide" or react with the recoil my groups go to hell. In my experience the rear "bean bag" approch seems to produce more consistent accuracy...

    just my .02
     
  4. rufous

    rufous Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    174
    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2001
    WyoWhisper, I remember reading some of your posts about your use of the Muley Pod shooting at rocks at 1000 yards with great success. Apparently with more use you are not so happy with it? Rufous.
     
  5. nottoofar

    nottoofar Active Member

    Messages:
    40
    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2004
    rufous,
    Haven't tried the monopods but sort of along the same line....
    Have you seen the Stoney Point Quadrapod.
    I came across it in my search for a steadier field rest than just using a bipod.
    It is basically two sets of shooting sticks joined in the middle.
    It supports both the front and back of your rifle stock.
    They say you can assemble it in 30 seconds and it weighs about 3 lbs.
    I have inquired on other sites but have not found anybody who has actually used the product yet.
    It sure looks like an interesting option for a steady field rest or using as a steady rest for range work.
     
  6. rufous

    rufous Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    174
    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2001
    If I do get one what height should I get? I would probably use it while at the bench and while hunting. When hunting I use the Kramer Snipepod attached to the front stud. With it attached the distance from the ground to the buttstock at the rear stud is about 7". When at the bench my short Harris bipod would put the distance from the bench to the stock at about 3.5". Rufous.
     
  7. rufous

    rufous Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    174
    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2001
    Len, I am curious what you like better about the Accu-shot monopod over the Muleypod? Are you able to shoot as accurately with the monopod as with a rear bag? Thanks, Rufous.
     
  8. Len Backus

    Len Backus Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    6,360
    Joined:
    May 2, 2001
    I have the short Accupod. Tried the Muleypod for dry-fire only off my bench and thought it was to unstable so i never shot targets with it.
     
  9. *WyoWhisper*

    *WyoWhisper* Guest

    rufus,

    Yup I did some very successful shooting to 1K... but then the more I shot the more I noticed that if there was any resistance or "hard" contact with the materials in the ground it greatly affected the accuracy. If you are on soft dirt there seemed to be little problem but harder non "slick" or "slidable" surfaces seemed to pose problems....
     
  10. Kasey

    Kasey Member

    Messages:
    10
    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    And what service indeed! Thank you.

    I was just wondering if the shooting was done with a bipod and what is the "Wolf" you refer to?

    We all have our own way of getting "on" a rifle, and if I understand it right, you basically put the top corner of the buttstock into your shoulder somehow and apply downward pressure, right?
     
  11. STL_Shooter

    STL_Shooter Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    189
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2002
    The .30 Wolf is a 30/338 Lapua running a 210 grain bullet at 3300 fps. The rifle is approximately 18 pounds with a 32" barrel, brake and HS Precision stock. It is always shot with a short Harris bipod.

    I have found that controlling vertical dispersion is quite a task with these monster calibers. To do so, I use extremely firm shoulder pressure and a slight downward pressure into the rear bag. This "pressure" is related to the posture of my upper body and the position of my elbows on the bench or ground.

    This technique has netted me many groups with zero or almost zero vertical dispersion at 600 yards.
     
  12. Kasey

    Kasey Member

    Messages:
    10
    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    That's interesting and I must agree in that it's a lot of Horsepower!! I have a few more questions if you don't mind, When you say "zero or almost zero vertical dispersion" what do you contribute this vertical dispersion to? I've heard people say they see this dispersion from a bipod but not from a sandbag or benchrest type front rest. Any thoughts or observations on this?

    And I, never seeing this rifle, wonder why "It is always shot with a short Harris bipod.". Can the bipod be removed so as to use a benchrest type support?

    Sorry for my display of ignorance but I do appreciate your patience and time educating me.
     
  13. STL_Shooter

    STL_Shooter Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    189
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2002
    No problem. My pleasure...

    I attribute control of vertical dispersion to control and consistent response in the rear of the rifle. Vibration needs to be damped IMO. For me, that happens with a pliable material under the butt of the rifle, with a pliable material (me) behind and on top of it - holding on with a "controlled death grip", of course.

    The bipod can of course be removed. I only fire the rifle from a bipod because I am interested in developing consistent shooting systems that work wherever I take them. For me, that includes my rifle club with concrete benches and the field with dirt and rocks. The whole system must be developed for both environments, and I won't carry a benchrest into the field.
     
  14. Kasey

    Kasey Member

    Messages:
    10
    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    See that makes sense to me, having a rifle "system" that's good to go, wherever that might be. I like that!

    Regarding the rear rest, if using a beanbag, does it not become somewhat solid due to hand pressure during the shot? I wonder if placing a layer of, say a mouse pad, between the rifle and bag would be a benefit?