OP
OP
It’s actually a hard bottom, 14A
Rear bag suggestions?
- Thread starter Spats McGee
- Start date
3% outdoorsman
Member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2020
- Messages
- 64
Yeah it's 2" shorter than mine I do believe.
2"×6" block of wood would get you there though
Varminterror
Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 15,123
I have to be missing something here. If the rear bag needed to be raised 2.5", that's the same as dropping the bipod by 2.5"...?
kmw1954
Member
Can't say for certain but maybe the bench top is so low that the rifle needs to be raised that far so as the shooter isn't laying on the bench.
Kinda seen the same thing with people using leadsleds and then nearly having to stand at the bench in order to mount the rifle.
Varminterror
Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 15,123
We can see the photo of the rifle on the bench in the thread, and the poster's claim was that he was shooting under the target if he lowered the bipod to meet the bag instead of raising the bag to meet the bipod. Changing the bipod height can't change the POI of the rifle.
kmw1954
Member
What I see from the picture is to shoot as-is at 100-200yds that would be shooting over the target. So lowering the bipod at the front or raising the bag at the rear to level it out seems would change the POI. no?
OP
OP
There is an old joke about going to law school because I don’t do math …
Varminterror
Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 15,123
No. Changing the bipod or rear bag height will not change the relationship between the scope and the bore… you don’t have to rezero your rifle every time you pick it up, right?
You realize in that photo, his scope is also pointing high, along with his barrel, right?
You’re stepping over dollars to pick up dimes here. Changing rear bag or bipod height does NOT change how the rifle prints relative to the scope. His scope is off target in that photo so his barrel is also off target. More importantly, if you can get a rifle to hit the point of aim, in any way at all, then does not and it cannot matter what it is setting on - a taller bag or a shorter bipod is achieving the same alignment to the target. Defending that loweri
Yes, we might want a taller or shorter rear bag and/or bipod for comfort on the bench, or might NEED a taller or shorter rear bag or bipod to accommodate target elevation relative to firing position (shooting uphill or downhill), but changing any of this cannot cause what was claimed. God doesn’t work like that - physics doesn’t change for rear bags vs. bipods. Raising that rear bag 2.5” with that bipod fully extended is the exact same physical alignment to target as lowering the bipod by 2.5” and leaving the bag low.
kmw1954
Member
Guessing my description was misleading.
The position of the rifle on the bench both the scope and barrel are angles in such a way that it shot from that exact position the target would have to be located extremely high. Then to level the rifle to a normal shooting position the but would need to be raised or the muzzle lowered. If the Butt is raised to level I do not understand how the butt could be in contact with any bag. So yes you are completely correct in that if the shooter wants to use a rear bag the muzzle would need to be lowered or the bag elevated to bring the barrel level. Unless of course they are shooting extremely uphill.
kmw1954
Member
Exactly.
Point I was trying to make from the picture was that I don't see how the gun could make contact with a rear bag once the rifle was leveled to shoot from that raised position..
Varminterror
Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 15,123
Lo-Profile
Member
I use some green ones.
Think I bought them at Walmart years ago. Don't remember who made them.
Think I bought them at Walmart years ago. Don't remember who made them.
