RIFLE SETUP FOR LOAD DEVELOPMENT

[Mikecr]

I've never understood the bipod loading concerns.
I know surface hardness and friction affects results, but I shoot free recoil even off bipods(incl rear monopod), and this has always produced results for me just as good as benchrest.

I'm not disputing a loading method. Just don't understand the function of it, or detriment folks see without it.

 

[Dragoon300]

In my case, I started my long range shooting with the FCSA 50 caliber 1000 yard matches years ago. In later years (at 60) I took my first long range classes and instruction using a 338 Lapua, the instructor said that I would never make it thru 400 rounds in three days! I finished top of the class. I am not an expert, but I do know loading the bipod helps controls recoil and bounce and when shooting quantities of heavy loads it helps me make it through. Either way will work for accuracy, it is consistent application of the method that counts. Free recoiling a 50 caliber could get a bit exciting though.

 

[Mikecr]

Sounds like you mean heavy shouldering for large cartridges helps you make it through. And I can buy that.
But on function, as applied to a rest, benchrest bags are not loaded, so why would a bipod be?
What are you actually doing with a rest?

With a Harris(a std bipod), the last thing anyone should do IMO is change free state angles(with fore/aft pressure to legs). Doing so would set up a condition where variance of loading, which absolutely occurs on firing, would change rest angles through the shot.
You know what kind of a bench rest does something like that? I don't.

I'm wondering if a bipod resisting forward movement simply allows you to get more shouldering force than you could get otherwise.
If so, it's not a special thing that we must all do.

 

[Dragoon300]

Sounds like you mean heavy shouldering for large cartridges helps you make it through. And I can buy that.
But on function, as applied to a rest, benchrest bags are not loaded, so why would a bipod be?
What are you actually doing with a rest?

With a Harris(a std bipod), the last thing anyone should do IMO is change free state angles(with fore/aft pressure to legs). Doing so would set up a condition where variance of loading, which absolutely occurs on firing, would change rest angles through the shot.
You know what kind of a bench rest does something like that? I don't.

I'm wondering if a bipod resisting forward movement simply allows you to get more shouldering force than you could get otherwise.
If so, it's not a special thing that we must all do.

The loading of the bipod if consistent doesn't necessarily make accuracy any better than free recoiling. What it really does is help keep you on target, or get back on target quicker for spotting your splash or a follow-up shot. And it helps me manage recoil better. I come from a tactical shooting LE instructor background, but it applies to hunting as well. Bench rest and PRS competitions are great practice, but become a game where lower recoil rounds are preferred. That's ok for the games, but enough energy is needed for the intended target wether it's paper, steel or 1,500 lbs of whatever. Hope this helps, it's more personal preference than anything.

 

[Justice1327]

In the world of benchrest shooting, their rifles are configured with either a flat forearm or an attached flat plate and a rear horizontal bar to slide in the rear bag,,, all for stability and consistency. QUESTION: Is it an advantage to have a similiar setup for load development ? I realize that the point of impact will change once the attachments have been removed. Or put another way, should one try to reduce or almost eliminate the human factor during this process ? Once the recipe is achieved, remove the attachments, place the rifle in a more traditional rest, sight in the scope, and go hunting.

Remove as many variables as possible without disrupting the barrel harmonics. If you believe that you should load and shoot as you would using that round ... let's say for hunting… Then why would you load develop off of a rest?

 

[Rflamm250]

In the world of benchrest shooting, their rifles are configured with either a flat forearm or an attached flat plate and a rear horizontal bar to slide in the rear bag,,, all for stability and consistency. QUESTION: Is it an advantage to have a similiar setup for load development ? I realize that the point of impact will change once the attachments have been removed. Or put another way, should one try to reduce or almost eliminate the human factor during this process ? Once the recipe is achieved, remove the attachments, place the rifle in a more traditional rest, sight in the scope, and go hunting.

I understand your question and have thought about it myself. I was thinking of adding some weight to a stock via front pic rail attachment or something similar. Mainly on light weight rifles that may be harder to hold sub 1/4 minute. I have not tried it but I would asume you might see smaller groups but the opening and closing of groups should be the same as long as you are not changing barrel harmonics etc. I shoot free recoil so the rest I use are pretty much holding the rifle so a good fitting rest usually allows for sub 1/4 minute type groups and all one would need. JMO

 

[MagnumManiac]

I don't know or understand the mechanics of loading the bi-pod...I just know that that slight pressure on the leg springs dampens the bounce and ends up with tighter groups on LIGHTWEIGHT hunting rigs. I do not run Harris style bi-pods on my LR rigs, too imprecise for me, I run fixed bi-pods.
These lightweight rifles nearly always get better groups from a solid benchrest, but I don't hunt with one of those, and using the bi-pod in the field is totally unlike shooting off a concrete bench.
I only use Harris bi-pods, they are good enough for me and work.
I actually only use the bi-pod when I am undertaking long shots when I am deliberately set-up for it.
Otherwise, if a shot presents and I don't have the bi-pod attached, my daypack becomes my rest.
I have only ever experienced one rifle that would change POI shooting with/without the bi-pod that sent me batty. The only fix was a stock change, it worked, but I never had a lot of confidence with that rifle thereafter.

Cheers.