atlas bipod...which one?

Discussion in 'Long Range Hunting & Shooting' started by fisherman983, Jun 4, 2015.

  1. fisherman983

    fisherman983 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    388
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2009
    picking up my first custom rifle here in a couple weeks and when I ordered my mcmilly stock I had an atlas bipod rail installed. ive never really used a bipod but figured id get one for my new rifle and after some research came across the atlas and decided it was the one I should get. my question is what model should I get? the original model or the newer one? also, should I go with the shorter version or the taller one?
     
  2. SnakeRiverEric

    SnakeRiverEric Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    65
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    I have same questions?? which one, new or old, shorter or taller.

     
  3. bill123

    bill123 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    568
    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Have both old and new. New is much stiffer. I like it better. As far as height, I use the short and have never needed any taller.
     
  4. Rick Richard

    Rick Richard Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,606
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2014
    I have just received a custom with the rail and pondering the same question. I think at this point I am leaning towards the short with the optional leg extensions.

    I have a Harris with the short leg version and had occasions where the legs were too short like when attempting to shoot uphill from a prone position.

    Going to watch this thread and see what most post.
     
  5. Andy Backus

    Andy Backus Field Editor Staff Member

    Messages:
    846
    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2009
    Here's an interesting video by Aaron Davidson where he says that the slack in the older version is a good thing. I was surprised when I first saw this but it seems to make sense.

    [ame]https://youtu.be/4cg0KxIzgS4[/ame]
     
  6. bill123

    bill123 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    568
    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    I understand what he's saying here but his bipod during recoil tells a different story. It does not move rearward anywhere near the amount that he says it needs to. As I recall Harris bipeds don't have that much flex either. They work fine. If this was a real issue, then apparently Atlas doesn't know about it because their new model is really stiff.
     
  7. Andy Backus

    Andy Backus Field Editor Staff Member

    Messages:
    846
    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2009
    I think that Atlas continues to sell both versions because it's a personal preference thing.
     
  8. bill123

    bill123 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    568
    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    I agree. It's been a while since I watched the video but I seem to remember that it suggest that you need the travel in order for a bipod to operate properly.
     
  9. rooster721

    rooster721 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    196
    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2012
    I have an original Atlas and one of the new PSR ones as well.. having roughly 1000 rounds over my original and probably 200 or so over my PSR, I'll honestly say they both work excellent, but both have drawbacks...

    Original's advantage (to me) is the fact that it DOES cant forward & rearward (like mentioned in Aarons clip) I like this more-so because it eliminates any possibility of flex in a "hunting-rifles" fore-end and obviously eliminates risk of the barrel ever touching and causing a flyer under a stress-shot in a situations a guy may be excited and overlook such a thing out on a hunt.. free-floated or not, fore-ends have some degree of flex, just the way it is-- if a guy lays on the rifle fast and isn't careful, it's easy to induce stress into the platform... the fore-aft cant helps ease that and soaks up oddball set-ups nicer than the PSR ( I find )

    Dis-advantage to it... when folded and being carried, it can sometimes "pan" off parallel from where it starts off. This is a very minor thing, but a hinderance still the same.

    For the PSR... advantage might be said that it does-not "pan" when folded up easily like the original does, and that's because of the fore/aft bosses that tighten things up... that said though, (MINE) quickly became a DIS-advantage at the same time because of a loud screech the BOSSES made as they turn while deployed. I don't like the noise in it at all (major huge disadvantage)

    The one very big plus about the PSR model is that it is offered in a "tall" version with one-piece tall legs (vs) having to add the extensions to the shorter original version.. my case, with the extensions on during a couple backpack-hunts, I have had them come loose and fall off... lucky enough I found it. So as I said, the one-piece taller legs are really nice on that PSR because of (that) plus it allows a little more adjustment on uphill/downhill positions, like in mountains for example...

    Those mentioned differences, to me, are what I base my opinion off of... and in my opinion, in a perfect world, a "quiet" PSR with those tall legs that has a softer fore/aft boss restriction with (some) cant built-in just might be the "perfect" bi-pod... til they make one like that tho, what I did was swap my tall legs off the PSR and installed them onto my old V-8 original Atlas and am more than content with that.. it's quiet, still allows me fore/aft, now has the tall one-piece legs, AND (not yet mentioned) the non-rotating legs PSR-style... it's about the closest to perfect bipod as I can make by mix & matching the two versions-- set-up that-way, I really am liking it alot. Will use the PSR with the now-swapped out shorter original legs on my target rifles where the added noise doesn't matter
     
  10. Andy Backus

    Andy Backus Field Editor Staff Member

    Messages:
    846
    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2009
    Rooster

    Can you talk about the types of situations where you've needed the taller length? I get asked about this alot. We sell way more of the regular height and we don't sell a ton of the leg extensions.
     
  11. rooster721

    rooster721 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    196
    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2012
    I've run into it in the moutains in-particular.. one specific instance was on an elk hunt where I was offered a shot on a bull up on a bench above me, angle was a hard-uphill angle and to line up the rifle (with the 3" extensions on) I had to fully extend the legs AND have them up in a rock-outcrop so I could rest the back-end on a portion of my pack for a proper rest... shot was 700 yards. If I didn't have extensions, I'da been pulling jackets or other stuff outta the pack to try prop up the rifle to make things line up. So that was one-scenario.

    In another, the place I set up on our pasture for targets in the winter-time requires an inch & a half or so more height than my short V-8 allows (fully extended) because of the shooting-spot. I shoot across an old lake-bed over a wide valley there, and the place we shoot from is on the fall-away side of a hill top... the bipods (there) end up slightly downhill from where (the shooter) lays behind the rifle-- extensions or taller legs are a must there as well. We'd otherwise be shimming up the shorter ones with blocks or gloves or something-else that would allow more elevation off the ground to line up to many of the targets across that valley.

    On flat-ground or off benches and such, hell-- even at times in hilly/mountainous terrain the extra length isn't necessary, but sometimes it is. Better to have the ability to extend them if you have-to than try get by on a shaky platform and make a poor shot. Like we all know, set-up is everything on those long shots.. to me, the taller version helps address more of what the terrain can throw at a guy than any other bipod does. That's why I set mine up as mentioned in my earlier post* Allows for greatest flexibility & eliminates variables in doing so.
     
  12. Clark

    Clark Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    695
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2006
    [​IMG]
    I have one Atlas and a whole lotta Harris swivel "S" bipods.

    The new Harris have a rotating feature and attach on a Weaver rail like the Atlas. That does nothing for me.
    Harris Bipods

    The rifles I am building for myself for 2015 will be with Harris "S" bipods.
     
  13. Greyfox

    Greyfox Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,471
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    I think the most important aspect of any of the bipods is that the barrel is able to move straight back 1/8-1/4 of an inch upon firing. This is how long the bullet is in the barrel and can be knocked off course. This means the legs either have to slide back smoothly on the shooting surface, or they have to be flexed with forward pressure sufficiently to allow the reaward movement in a straight line. For me, a 9-13" Harris will allow the legs to sufficiently flex for accurate shooting when prone on the ground and gives me sufficient height in the grassy terrsne or snow that I usually encounter. My Atlas, which is the first version with the more flexible legs, take up this slack quite easily and independent of the leg length. I do use the 3" extensions on the Atlas to accommodate the terrain. Both are good bipods but I find that I prefer the feel of the Harris and the speed of the spring loaded legs/tilt pod......probably just habit from long term use. I have not tried the rigid leg Atlas. Interestingly, watching Skips video, all of my LR rifles shoot .25-.5MOA lower when prone off a bipod compared to a bench, or any other more upright rest position. I think this may have more to do with the straight line body angle effect on recoil when prone.