|
Post by Smith on Feb 26, 2008 7:42:16 GMT -5
|
|
Seff
Private
.30-06 - Turning Cover into Concealment since 1906
Posts: 344
|
Post by Seff on Feb 26, 2008 9:45:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by migmadmavis on Feb 26, 2008 10:31:05 GMT -5
oh my god!! I was thinking about getting the B.A.R, and now I think i will!! I just need to sell some stuff first
|
|
TommyGunner
Staff Sgt.
Hackjob Mauro
1st Marine Division, 1942
Posts: 2,265
|
Post by TommyGunner on Feb 26, 2008 11:56:01 GMT -5
Hell yeah, Im so getting the carrying handle and Bi-pod for my BAR now.
TommyGunner
|
|
2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on Feb 26, 2008 12:30:56 GMT -5
In the field the carry handle was often left on the gun but the bipods were frequently removed and discarded. They do look cool however and the great thing about airsoft is you're seldom having to hump for miles and miles in a day.
Tommy Gunner I'd be surprised if your conversion will be able to handle the stress and weight. If the VFC BARs I've handled are any indication I suspect these items are going to be fairly robust. This isn't a dig on your BAR TG as I think you did a gorgeous job on yours but something to consider.
|
|
|
Post by Tough Ombre on Feb 26, 2008 14:36:38 GMT -5
2nd bat, what you are sayin about the bipod, is true in only some circum stances. I have seen a good amount of pictures of it being used still in the ETO. For some reason it wasnt ditched as fast there. Although when you look at pictures of the PTO, it is a slim chance of seeing one. As they went for all mobility. Move and strike from another angle was there mentality. Though in the ETO there was alot more holeing up. Its one of those things that is still dependant on the individual though. -Cary
|
|
YankeeDiv26
Staff Sgt.
Frustrated Mac Owner
BDM<33
Posts: 2,462
|
Post by YankeeDiv26 on Feb 26, 2008 15:05:03 GMT -5
Seems a wee bit pricy. I've found real USGI parts for just as much, if not cheaper. I'm planning on ordering my B.A.R. as soon as my ebay sale for the .30 cal ends and probably still will just put original USGI parts onto it at the next gunshow or from a B.A.R. fanatic within my unit. A lot of the guys definitely took off the Bi-pods, but then again some definitely left them on. Either method is correct, in some theatres more than others.
|
|
|
Post by KippySmi7h on Feb 26, 2008 15:16:42 GMT -5
Yeah, the most expensive carry handle and bi-pod I've seen! Idk though, some may want it.
|
|
KRaddatz
Private 1st Class
505th
Posts: 589
|
Post by KRaddatz on Feb 26, 2008 19:24:31 GMT -5
you can get a real bipod and carry handle for $140
|
|
YankeeDiv26
Staff Sgt.
Frustrated Mac Owner
BDM<33
Posts: 2,462
|
Post by YankeeDiv26 on Feb 26, 2008 19:36:54 GMT -5
you can get a real bipod and carry handle for $140 yeah that's the range I've usually seen them in. Where'd you see one for that price? I'd like to snag it.
|
|
|
Post by Tough Ombre on Feb 26, 2008 20:28:34 GMT -5
Check Numrich. e-gunparts.com -Cary
|
|
|
Post by Gordak on Feb 26, 2008 23:38:57 GMT -5
still, these are the first parts you ditch when you get a BAR issued to you -Gordak
|
|
YankeeDiv26
Staff Sgt.
Frustrated Mac Owner
BDM<33
Posts: 2,462
|
Post by YankeeDiv26 on Feb 27, 2008 21:26:08 GMT -5
still, these are the first parts you ditch when you get a BAR issued to you -Gordak That they are. An airsofter may like it more though, seeing as how they only have to carry it for a few hours as opposed to several weeks/months. My great uncle was an assistant B.A.R. man who later became his squad's B.A.R. man. He said within a week of becoming the squad B.A.R. man he ditched the bipod and carrying handle. He had several reasons for doing so. The added weight, especially on the end of the gun. when he carried it he typically put it across his belt and arms over it, or slung it, no need for a carrying handle. bipod made it harder to shoot accurately if you weren't in the prone position, and folding the bipod legs out was just 1 more step to do before firing. Also, it made both him and his weapon a higher target when in the prone position or in a foxhole. In a nighttime position such as a foxhole, he had to move his body more to shoot (seeing how the axis of rotation was on the rifle, not him), and he could not use firing stakes with it (again, due to the axis of rotation being on the front of the rifle). It is however still historically accurate to see guys using the carrying handle and bipod, but there were several reasons why vets didn't.
|
|
2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on Feb 28, 2008 0:38:44 GMT -5
In an airsoft game, since ranges are so abbreviated the fact that it forces you to present a higher profile and reduces the immediacy of your reaction to targets proves especially challenging.
Our MG gunners with both tripods and bipods experience the same down side. Thank goodness for their dramatically increased firepower (since other non MG gunners are restricted in our games.) Otherwise the downsides would simply be too great.
|
|
|
Post by ivymp4 on Feb 29, 2008 1:59:19 GMT -5
202 for post war parts? ?? the ww2 bipod has the adjustments for drooping the legs at the bottom of the bipod and carry handles are post war!! Save your money! Cody
|
|
|
Post by BURT "The Great" on Feb 29, 2008 14:06:25 GMT -5
202 for post war parts? ?? the ww2 bipod has the adjustments for drooping the legs at the bottom of the bipod and carry handles are post war!! Save your money! Cody BAR with pod and handle during WW2 and this
|
|
|
Post by ivymp4 on Feb 29, 2008 15:57:38 GMT -5
what makes that pic ww2? THE bible for the BAR "a rock and a hard place" states that the carry handle is post war. I never said that all bipods were post just the one they are selling.
Cody
|
|
|
Post by ivymp4 on Feb 29, 2008 17:03:29 GMT -5
I wounder why he doesn't have a bar belt on thats going to suck after the first mag is empty!! It looks like he's got on a M-51 fishtail parka but as Tom said its way too small of a pic to see any detail.
Cody
|
|
|
Post by Tough Ombre on Feb 29, 2008 18:58:20 GMT -5
Look at the truck... Looks post war too me, if thats the grill you can see to the left of the man in question. -Cary
|
|
|
Post by Gordak on Feb 29, 2008 23:30:02 GMT -5
thats korea, but still the gun came with the crap on it, then you ditch it Im sure there were guys who kept em too, but we know this was very rare. -Gordak
|
|
azeeze
Private 1st Class
Posts: 622
|
Post by azeeze on Mar 1, 2008 11:15:48 GMT -5
Im going to have to say it was the gunners choice, I dont think it was rare to see a bipod on a B.A.R. -Nick Edit: off topic but in the last picture i posted you can see the lead guy has a german canteen strapped to his belt.
|
|
YankeeDiv26
Staff Sgt.
Frustrated Mac Owner
BDM<33
Posts: 2,462
|
Post by YankeeDiv26 on Mar 1, 2008 12:20:30 GMT -5
B.A.R.'s with bi-pods most definitely served in WWII, but the one's avalable from VFC is not a WWII model bi-pod. The 1918A2 B.A.R.'s that were issued in WWII had bipod's that had an adjustment for lowering the legs near the bottom of the legs, where as the bipods that were commonly seen in korea did not.
Azeeze, please note that picture #3 is of a Marine at camp Lejeune in North Carolina. When you're not in combat, you're typically gonna expect an inspection (especially when you're stateside). If a soldier was issued a Bi-pod and he failed to produce one at inspection, it would come out of his paycheck.
Also, although I don't have a proper source for picture #1 I'm 99% sure it was staged for a propaganda and/or training film. Again, that very likely means stateside, and goes along with the situation in picture #3.
Unless I want a korean-era Bipod and carry handle set for more than an original one would cost, I don't plan on getting a VFC produced one.
|
|
|
Post by ivymp4 on Mar 1, 2008 17:16:33 GMT -5
thanks YankeeDiv26 thats what i was trying to say ;D
cody
|
|
|
Post by Tough Ombre on Mar 1, 2008 18:35:50 GMT -5
I think the point of azeezes photos were just to prove that bipods WERE infact used. Not that the VFC ones are correct, or that carry handles were used. -Cary
|
|
|
Post by troyluginbill on Mar 15, 2008 3:11:19 GMT -5
I can immediately tell you all that any bipod you get will look totally cool and you will run around thinking you are the coolest guy on the field until you have to set the @#$%$#%#$%@#$%^^%&$%^! thing up. The BAR bipod is second on my list as the most useless bipod ever designed. (The M16 pinch bipod is the worst.) Guys dumped them fast because they were heavy but also because you cannot easily set them up under fire. A minimum of 2 wing nuts need to be loosened to drop the legs. The legs need to then be locked in place and the wing nuts retightened enough that the legs won't come loose when you fire it! This means that when you go to stow the legs you have to undo REALLY tight wingnuts! The rear monopod is just as bad.
But it does look totally kick a$$ when it is on.
|
|
YankeeDiv26
Staff Sgt.
Frustrated Mac Owner
BDM<33
Posts: 2,462
|
Post by YankeeDiv26 on Mar 15, 2008 10:13:32 GMT -5
Haha yeah, it is pretty sweet looking and even more useless. That's for sure.
Just to clear up any confusion on this. The carry-handle was in fact a WWII issue item, albeit in small numbers and later on in the war. I have a picture in one of my books that I've been looking for for the past few days that shows a B.A.R. man clearly holding his B.A.R. by the carry-handle at one of the river crossings (was either the Rhine or the Roer). When I find it I'll post it.
|
|
|
Post by schmitty on Mar 18, 2008 12:06:52 GMT -5
According to the book "the Browning Automatic Rifle" by Terry J Gander. Carry handles where available for the BAR by late WWII although it does not give a specific date.
How is the VFC bipod different than a WWII bipod? It does have the wing nuts to extend the legs. Looks the same as every picture I can find. Not trying to argue, realy would like to know because I'm thinking about ordering these. I have not seen any real bipods for less.
Schmitty
|
|
YankeeDiv26
Staff Sgt.
Frustrated Mac Owner
BDM<33
Posts: 2,462
|
Post by YankeeDiv26 on Mar 18, 2008 16:04:41 GMT -5
Early style Bipod legs had the wing nuts at the bottom of the leg. www.bmgparts.com/products/earlylegset.jpgLater style Bipod legs had the wing nuts at the top of the leg. www.bmgparts.com/products/leftleg.jpgSchmitty, I'm going to a live fire range day on sunday and will run into our unit's "gun parts guy" who I'm betting has a Bipod and has always had very reasonable prices. If you'd like I can pick up one for you and ship it (won't charge extra) or possibly get you in contact with the seller. Give me a budget and/or what you're specifically looking for and mabye I can work something out. Drop me a pm if you're interested.
|
|
|
Post by schmitty on Mar 19, 2008 10:07:56 GMT -5
Yankee: Thanks for clearing that up. I see now looking at WWII pictures that some have the wing nut near the bottom, It's hard to tell in most photos especially when the leg is extended because the wingnut is right in the middle. Some WWII photos definetly seem to have the wing nut at the top though, must be very late war?
I think the combination of a carry handle and bipod can be used quite effectively. Remember that the real BAR is a lot heavier than the airsoft one. The Idea is that you set up the bipod and go prone with the gun, When you want to move you don't fold up the bipod each time, you get up and run with it holding it by the handle. When you get to the new position you drop it and go prone again. This has worked well for me when using the Bren gun which is quite heavy.
Yankee: I am very interested in getting a bipod for the BAR. Thanks for your offer to check with your parts guy. If he has one for around $100 I'll take it. If it's much more than that could you please just let me know?
Thanks Schmitty
|
|