Ergonomic “Upgrades”for your Precision Rifle

[ChrisWay]

Level up your comfort and performance with these suggestions

Tailoring your equipment is all about making sure that every piece of equipment you use fits your body right. When your body and your equipment are aligned and in the optimal position to do what they were designed to do you both perform at your best. When things are ergonomically fit, you’re less likely to get tired or hurt, which means you can work or play better and longer. Think of it like this: if your equipment feels just right in your hands and doesn’t make you strain, you’re going to do a much better job with it. Plus, you’ll feel more comfortable and avoid those nagging injuries that can slow you down.



Think of this as rifle ergonomics, your personal performance enhancer. When your gear is customized to suit you perfectly, you’re more comfortable, you can go longer without feeling tired, and you’re less...

Continue reading...

 

[Baron23]

Hey, @GBMaryland - you're famous now! Check out the pic of you at Mifflin with the wood bipod steps I made for us. Told you that you should have painted it Marine red! haha

@ChrisWay - high Chris, thanks for this article. One thing that occurs to me about higher ring height is that the height a person needs is very dependent on the relative position of their cheekbone to their eye (assuming we all want a cheek weld and not be floundering around somewhere near our jaw bone) and the degree of rise you have with an adjustable comb or a stock pad.

I've been told many times that I need to get 1.5" rings. But IMO there is no "one size fits all".

If I do go 1.5", I will run out of riser adjustment in my JAE comb and I might have to break my old neck to bend it back that far. This is me with ARC 1.26" high rings at Mifflin where some of your pics came from. I really don't think my neck/back will bend any further! haha Any how, just random thoughts I had after reading this article. Thanks again.

 

[Lowlight]

Go 1.375" if 1.5" is too high

 

[GBMaryland]

Nope, went in the blue direction…

One of the more important ideas I got from the courses was the idea of color coding the leg extensions on the bipod, so that it was much easier to extend them evenly on the fly.

 

[kthomas]

Nope, went in the blue direction…

One of the more important ideas I got from the courses was the idea of color coding the leg extensions on the bipod, so that it was much easier to extend them evenly on the fly.

View attachment 8381111

Color coding leg extensions is an interesting idea, I like that tip.

 

[Baron23]

Nope, went in the blue direction…

One of the more important ideas I got from the courses was the idea of color coding the leg extensions on the bipod, so that it was much easier to extend them evenly on the fly.

View attachment 8381111

No, you bozo (haha), I was talking about the wooden bipod steps that you threatened to paint Marine red. LOL And I'm glad you liked your AI blue Vision so that I could buy the Cobalt blue one from you. Mine is prettier! hahaha

Color coding leg extensions is an interesting idea, I like that tip.

This is on the EI bipods where we both found it time consuming and perhaps a bit error prone to get both legs the same height.

Paint pens from Amazon and Robert is your Mother's Brother.

 

[kthomas]

This is on the EI bipods where we both found it time consuming and perhaps a bit error prone to get both legs the same height.

Paint pens from Amazon and Robert is your Mother's Brother.

I could see this working well for my LRA bipod, appreciate the tip!

 

[Baron23]

I could see this working well for my LRA bipod, appreciate the tip!

LOL...I'm sure you are quite able to shop for paint pens, but I feeling overly helpful today....haha....these are the ones I bought

Amazon Paint Pens

 

[GBMaryland]

And now @Sparky has some true blue competition…

(look what came in the mail today)

Nice color coded Thorium-L from Able…

Now I just need to figure out how to get that bipod to match!

 

[Nik H]

Continue reading...

That is my AXMC!

 

[Lowlight]

It is yours,

I like using Student photos cause it brings us all together like one big happy family

 

[Lowlight]

Sparky switched Covers recently,

 

[GBMaryland]

I like that version a lot… dammit, always causing me to spend money!!

 

[Baron23]

That is my AXMC!

We could tell....the bolt being on the wrong side! haha

 

[Baron23]

Sparky switched Covers recently,

View attachment 8381183

Can Chap? Both @GBMaryland and I have one. I rather like it a lot.

 

[Nik H]

We could tell....the bolt being on the wrong side! haha

Wrong side? GOD's Side

 

[TheOE800]

Hey, @GBMaryland - you're famous now! Check out the pic of you at Mifflin with the wood bipod steps I made for us. Told you that you should have painted it Marine red! haha

Looks like the back of my head is famous too!

 

[ChrisWay]

Can you be more specific about the content of your article? After reading it, I still have some doubts. Hope you can help me.

What doubts do you have specifically

 

[hlee]

What doubts do you have specifically

I’ll start. The article postulates that a taller bipod is better, as are taller scope rings. I’m a relatively skinny guy with high cheek bones. Unless I have some additional support under my torso, a taller bipod induced unnecessary strain into my back. Likewise, taller rings move the scope further away from my eye; or require additional height in the adjustable cheek piece.

It might be more charitable to say that; shooters have been misled into thinking that the lowest possible bipod and the lowest possible rings are ALWAYS the correct approach, when they should feel the freedom to explore other options, as their comfort and equipment allow. Here are some of the potential benefits of moving away from that old paradigm.

 

[ChrisWay]

I’ll start. The article postulates that a taller bipod is better, as are taller scope rings. I’m a relatively skinny guy with high cheek bones. Unless I have some additional support under my torso, a taller bipod induced unnecessary strain into my back. Likewise, taller rings move the scope further away from my eye; or require additional height in the adjustable cheek piece.

It might be more charitable to say that; shooters have been misled into thinking that the lowest possible bipod and the lowest possible rings are ALWAYS the correct approach, when they should feel the freedom to explore other options, as their comfort and equipment allow. Here are some of the potential benefits of moving away from that old paradigm.

I appreciate your questions and comments, I cant really argue with your experience, but I would also be surprised if taller bipods would induce strain into your back and if taller rings would take the scope further from your eyes. I guess we would have to see it in person to see if we are talking about different things and labeling them as similar. I believe that what youre saying makes sense to you and that there are probably some folks who dont fit the mold so to speak, but more often than not these two items when lengthened have improved shooters ability to be neutral, comfortable, less strained, and acquire targets faster in my direct experience. SO next time we run into each other lets take a look!

Try doing what frank does and lay down wiht your hands holding your head up looking forward and see if thats lower than your bipod height when shooting. Another thing that would be interesting is to see a profile of your head on the rifle in prone, kneeling, etc and how it is positioned. shoot me an email if you'd like and we can carry it forward a little; maybe we are just misaligned in how we are thinking about these [email protected]