Stupid question about the Atlas Bipod

[Saluki2003]

Is there anything else I would need to buy to mount this Atlas Bipod to my AR15? Atlas BT10 Bipod 1913 Picatinny Rail Mount 4.75 to 9 Aluminum Black

My AR has a rail section at the end of the freefloat foreend.

Sorry for the newb question but I just want to make sure.

 

[Tack425]

You should be good to go

 

[Nuke Man]

That will work just fine. My only recommendation is to order from Mile High. Give them your hide call name and get it at a discount. You will like your Atlas!

 

[sib1948]

Atlas kinda overkill for AR 15. Save about $100 and get the Harris from LaRue with incorporated QD low profile mount. Will work well and weigh a lot less as well as less cost.

 

[bogeybrown]

Atlas kinda overkill for AR 15. Save about $100 and get the Harris from LaRue with incorporated QD low profile mount. Will work well and weigh a lot less as well as less cost.

I agree that for most ARs, the Atlas may be a little overkill, but on a recent review I watched the Atlas was actually a little lighter than the Harris. I was surprised to see them both on the scale.

Saluki, if you want the Atlas, go for it brother. In fact, the owner of the company is about to make the newest model available to Hide members at a special price. The thread is in the "Equipment" forum.

 

[Regalkismet]

Atlas kinda overkill for AR 15. Save about $100 and get the Harris from LaRue with incorporated QD low profile mount. Will work well and weigh a lot less as well as less cost.

I have to completely disagree.... Once you use an Atlas you will be glad you spent the money op....I think the Atlas shines especially on an AR platform. Plus there is only $60 difference between the Larue QD model and the Atlas, and I've gotten the QD Atlas at Midwayusa using a coupon code for $250 in the past..... also believe the Larue model with QD may weigh more... I'd have to double check that though. Either way the Atlas is well worth it.

 

[Nuke Man]

Overkill? Please explain. ......And don't say $ we've all heard that shit!

 

[Painless300]

IMO Atlas is way better quality, the QD Mount works great, and it won't fold up on you if you throw it on a 7.62 gun.
Go with the Atlas and don't loo back.

 

[NevadaZielmeister]

Atlas kinda overkill for AR 15. Save about $100 and get the Harris from LaRue with incorporated QD low profile mount. Will work well and weigh a lot less as well as less cost.

I also disagree. The Harris bi-pod is decades old technology and the Atlas is by no means overkill. The AR-15 platform is very versatile. Why would you then stick something like an old Harris on it with all of the inherent problems with the Harris bi-pod? And please explain what you mean by overkill in the first place.

I used a Harris bipod for years and years. Then I tried out the Atlas and I never looked back. I still wonder what I was thinking when I thought the Harris was as good as an Atlas.

Meanwhile the Atlas version the original poster discusses will work on the AR-15 picatinny rail system. My only recommended change would be to get the ADM lever mount instead. That one, you only need one bipod for ALL of your rifles.

 

[dddoo7]

Atlas kinda overkill for AR 15. Save about $100 and get the Harris from LaRue with incorporated QD low profile mount. Will work well and weigh a lot less as well as less cost.

You are actually wrong on weight. Harris is 13 oz and requires a rail adapter. The atlas with qd is only 12.5 oz and requires no adapter. The screw model is even lighter than that.

Also, the Harris will not save you $100. The Harris is $100 or so cheaper than the screw model atlas, but Moa everyone agrees that the kwm podlock is almost necessary. It cost me $27 to get the podlock to my door. Then you will also need a rail adapter. You can buy a cheap one and get by, but a decent one will cost around $50 and is one more piece to have issues with. So, all in all total, the Harris is about $25 cheaper, and quite a bit heavier.

Go with the atlas and be done!


--Daniel

 

[wigwamitus]

I have both Atlas and Harris. I like both, hard to say which I like "better".

My Atlas is 6 inch to 9 inch, but I got extra 3 inch extenders for it, so that put it into the 9 inch to 12 inch space.

My Harris is 13 inch to 27 inch, so it is in a different space. I can shoot prone at 13 inches, sitting at 20 inches and kneeing at 27 inches. In rougher terrain I need this elevation up off the ground.

So for me, the Atlas is my "low" bipod and the Harris is my "high bipod" but that makes them difficult to compare directly.

The Atlas can get lower, because you can flair forward (or rearward) the bipod legs, the Harris cannot do that. The intial cost of getting them usable was about the same, $220 for the Atlas and $110 for the Harris + $66 for the rail mounting system. However, the 3 inch extenders added another $50 to the Atlas cost.

Probably the most significant difference between my Atlas and my Harris is that the Atlas will "pan" and the Harris will not. You can "twist" the Harris but you are putting pressure on the legs and have to hold it, whereas "pan" on the Atlas works the same as "cant" does on both. You "pan" the Atlas and it holds for you.

I also like the Atlas ability to acheive intermediate positions with the legs. The Harris takes a bit longer as you have to use the pressure screws, but the Harris allows more variation/precision in adjustment.

The American Defense QD mounting for the Harris is so easy to use, it is truly "tool-less" to remove it and mount it on a different rifle. The Atlas requires a screw driver to move. Not a huge plus, but I am reaching for differences .

Another advantage is that I'd be more comfortable mounting the Harris on ANY other rifle because it has a solid sling mount system (the default for Harris). Any rifle without a rail, cannot take an Atlas without another part. P.S. Atlas makes a rail converter for the Savage 110BA, so I got one of those! They make the parts I need!

I like them both, if I had it to do over again I would get both. They both are great . If you mostly shoot prone or low to the ground, maybe I'd go with the Atlas as it might occupy less space overall in a minimal configuration. But if you ever need to shoot higher off the ground, the long legged Harris is the way to go.

If I had to get another bipod today, I would probably get a Harris. Newer Harris's have real "pan" and I think they are more flexible to mount on rifles without rails. And they are cheaper. If I was going to use the bipod primarily on a patrol/light precision rifle, I might get the Atlas, because I think has a smaller 3-D footprint.

If I bought an Altas I would buy it directly from BT in Kansas (I'm from Kansas) !!!

BTW, my rifles are:

Savage .338LM
Sig716 7.62 NATO
Mossberg 715T .22LR

And I use both bipods on all three rifles. I also have a UTG "training bipod" I got for $60, it usually sits on the third rifle, the one I am least likely to shoot this week, but is technically designated for the .22LR (my training rifle). It is similar to the Harris but has no "cant", so I have to adjust the legs with the pressure screws to get level. This is the biggest downside of the UTG.

 

[Nuke Man]

Getting the QD is sound advice! I wish I had gotten it with my first Atlas.

 

[Regalkismet]

I have both Atlas and Harris. I like both, hard to say which I like "better".

My Atlas is 6 inch to 9 inch, but I got extra 3 inch extenders for it, so that put it into the 9 inch to 12 inch space.

My Harris is 13 inch to 27 inch, so it is in a different space. I can shoot prone at 13 inches, sitting at 20 inches and kneeing at 27 inches. In rougher terrain I need this elevation up off the ground.

So for me, the Atlas is my "low" bipod and the Harris is my "high bipod" but that makes them difficult to compare directly.

The Atlas can get lower, because you can flair forward (or rearward) the bipod legs, the Harris cannot do that. The intial cost of getting them usable was about the same, $220 for the Atlas and $110 for the Harris + $66 for the rail mounting system. However, the 3 inch extenders added another $50 to the Atlas cost.

Probably the most significant difference between my Atlas and my Harris is that the Atlas will "pan" and the Harris will not. You can "twist" the Harris but you are putting pressure on the legs and have to hold it, whereas "pan" on the Atlas works the same as "cant" does on both. You "pan" the Atlas and it holds for you.

I also like the Atlas ability to acheive intermediate positions with the legs. The Harris takes a bit longer as you have to use the pressure screws, but the Harris allows more variation/precision in adjustment.

The American Defense QD mounting for the Harris is so easy to use, it is truly "tool-less" to remove it and mount it on a different rifle. The Atlas requires a screw driver to move. Not a huge plus, but I am reaching for differences .

Another advantage is that I'd be more comfortable mounting the Harris on ANY other rifle because it has a solid sling mount system (the default for Harris). Any rifle without a rail, cannot take an Atlas without another part. P.S. Atlas makes a rail converter for the Savage 110BA, so I got one of those! They make the parts I need!

I like them both, if I had it to do over again I would get both. They both are great . If you mostly shoot prone or low to the ground, maybe I'd go with the Atlas as it might occupy less space overall in a minimal configuration. But if you ever need to shoot higher off the ground, the long legged Harris is the way to go.

If I had to get another bipod today, I would probably get a Harris. Newer Harris's have real "pan" and I think they are more flexible to mount on rifles without rails. And they are cheaper. If I was going to use the bipod primarily on a patrol/light precision rifle, I might get the Atlas, because I think has a smaller 3-D footprint.

If I bought an Altas I would buy it directly from BT in Kansas (I'm from Kansas) !!!

BTW, my rifles are:

Savage .338LM
Sig716 7.62 NATO
Mossberg 715T .22LR

And I use both bipods on all three rifles. I also have a UTG "training bipod" I got for $60, it usually sits on the third rifle, the one I am least likely to shoot this week, but is technically designated for the .22LR (my training rifle). It is similar to the Harris but has no "cant", so I have to adjust the legs with the pressure screws to get level. This is the biggest downside of the UTG.

The Atlas can be purchased with a QD mount as well....