I don't know about the technical stuff but at a glance the Davies FT/R bipod looks a little sturdier so I would expect it to be a little heavier. While they don't give dimensions on that other one it looks quite small in the photo, I think I would prefer stability and lose a bit of weight elsewhere.
Plus if you consider price, the Davies product is a bargain, that 175 pounds equates to $276.50 before freight.
Just my thought on it but I prefer to support our own where it is possible as well.
Barry Davies wrote:You got it right M12. Don't take too much notice of Robert, he is always trying to take the mickey out of Davies products -- can't imagine why!!
Barry
Gentlemen,
I am not an adept of anouncement wars, nor in personnla agressions. We were on question of weight possible reduction.
It was said weight could not be saved unles using titanium. This is a false statement and quoted an example of the contrary. I do not have to go on Wikipedia to know the specifics of metals, and I usually not go further than what I know and what I know is that the one property mentionned is by far not the only one in the equatio.....vn zxcluding feasibility and costs.
On price, I wonder if the price includes or not VAT (20% in UK) It could well be, as it is indicated as a retail price.
End of the matter for me as fair discussion seem to be impossibel
Your reply was as predictable as the sun rising tomorrow morning.
Typical hit and run.
Nobody really cares about other Bipods or the metallurgical characteristics of Ti or Aluminium.
And if the said bipod does not include VAT then add another 20% to the price otherwise as Lynn said it costs A$ 276.50 plus freight.
Robert, Our goals for our bipods have been met, twice now actually. Our original is without question one of biggest sellers in Australia, its a solid and stable platform and our customers love it, I dont think I could ask for more. As for the newy, we achieved our goal weight of 1.1 kg,its as stable as the original and we smashed the competition for price, I will admit, there are only 7 in circulation in Australia and a couple in the U.S.A, but with the good reports we anticipate more satisfied customers to come and this is what we are most proud of!
As for the Metallurgical characteristics, in laymans terms... who cares. They work and the results speak for themselves.
Your reply was as predictable as the sun rising tomorrow morning. Typical hit and run. Nobody really cares about other Bipods or the metallurgical characteristics of Ti or Aluminium. And if the said bipod does not include VAT then add another 20% to the price otherwise as Lynn said it costs A$ 276.50 plus freight.
Barry
Same was yours expected same.
I am not sure shooters does not care metal qualities... but if manufacturers states that and does not care themselves, there is problems!!!
Mr administrator, please, log me out of this forum members list.
R.
Lynn Otto wrote:Just my thought on it but I prefer to support our own where it is possible as well.
That's what is great about Aussies, when a quality home grown item is offer at a better/ same rate than overseas, of course they will shop local!
When you buy from the "little"guy it is his bread and butter you are buying. Or course he is going to make sure you have the best product your money can buy.
The fact Davies have an international market, for their products is a credit to their quality, and customer service.
Both the Australian and British bipods mentioned here could be made lighter without losing strength. To get any substantial reduction however could increase the price because of more expensive materials, or increased manufacturing complexity. Most equipment components e.g. stocks, actions, rings, barrels are built with weight in mind, and this would usually add cost. In a class like F/TR where weight is fairly tight, I'm sure some will be prepared to pay more for a strong lightweight bipod.
When putting our two bipods side by side and having a look at what was required to save 600 grams you will probably appreciate that reducing weight even further with aluminium is going to be a struggle without a compromise on strength and function. Our aim was 1.1kg, keeping it strong and fully functional without making it look cheap and nasty.
Menu
Newest members