[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Atlas vs. Harris (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 11/30/2016 8:20:45 AM EDT
| I have never used an Atlas bipod. Is an Atlas really worth the extra money vs. a Harris? What does that extra money get you? |
| Put the two of them side-by-side. Work them on your rifles, compare the quality of the construction, the ease of use, the features that each have (and don't have). It shouldn't take long to figure it out. However, if you're just going to casually shoot, or hunt, then the Harris will probably work for you. |
|
Quoted:
Put the two of them side-by-side. Work them on your rifles, compare the quality of the construction, the ease of use, the features that each have (and don't have). It shouldn't take long to figure it out. However, if you're just going to casually shoot, or hunt, then the Harris will probably work for you. Thanks for the info, but I don't plan on purchasing an Atlas just to contrast and compare against the Harris. Could you comment on the features of the Atlas so that I could make a more educated decision? |
|
Quoted:
Put the two of them side-by-side. Work them on your rifles, compare the quality of the construction, the ease of use, the features that each have (and don't have). It shouldn't take long to figure it out. However, if you're just going to casually shoot, or hunt, then the Harris will probably work for you. That is why I sold my Atlas PSR. It was stiff as hell and a royal PITA to use compared to the Harris bipods that I own. The fact that you can't isolate the pan/tilt features was frustrating to me as well. I had to be careful to control the rifle when I had the pan/tilt knob loose as if I let go of the rifle when it was loose it would try to topple over due when it inevitably tipped to one side or the other to the Gen II Razor being so heavy which is where I think the features (pan/tilt) should be controlled independently. There was also movement in the legs which was annoying to me. I tried the spigot on my AI AT and no matter how tight I tightened the tension knob it would rotate slightly which was annoying. I bought it from Brownell's so I am 100% positive that it was legit. I really wanted to like it (especially using the spigot mount) to give me more room to grip the rifle but I just hated it. The fact that it costs 3x as much as the Harris really wasn't a factor to me on a $7K rifle as I would have kept it if it worked as well as I had been reading it would. Maybe if I was using it for competition I would think differently. The Harris isn't perfect but it is simple and seems to work for most people all while costing 1/3 of what the Atlas does. If you need QD you can get that from Larue as well but the standard mounting method is pretty fast and versatile on standard rifles. |
|
Kinda depends IMO. I use harris but each has downsides of its own. The non-ultralight harris models are pretty darned heavy and I don't like using them with an underside mounted sling because of all the edges and horns. I prefer harris for prone shooting in general but I'm getting to where I want an atlas just for the weight and reduced pointy-ness. The few times I've used an Atlas was shooting from barricades. I've been shown how in a lot of stages at my local long range matches there are definite advantages to being able to deploy the legs at 45deg to the rear in some stages, which you really can't do with a properly mounted harris. I got to try it and the pro-shooters of course are right. If you shoot PRS I'd think the atlas would be the better option but still not mandatory. If money is a concern, well, that's on your shoulders. Pay or don't is your choice there. |
|
Quoted:
That is why I sold my Atlas PSR. It was stiff as hell and a royal PITA to use compared to the Harris bipods that I own. The fact that you can't isolate the pan/tilt features was frustrating to me as well. I had to be careful to control the rifle when I had the pan/tilt knob loose as if I let go of the rifle when it was loose it would try to topple over due when it inevitably tipped to one side or the other to the Gen II Razor being so heavy which is where I think the features (pan/tilt) should be controlled independently. There was also movement in the legs which was annoying to me. I tried the spigot on my AI AT and no matter how tight I tightened the tension knob it would rotate slightly which was annoying. I bought it from Brownell's so I am 100% positive that it was legit. I really wanted to like it (especially using the spigot mount) to give me more room to grip the rifle but I just hated it. The fact that it costs 3x as much as the Harris really wasn't a factor to me on a $7K rifle as I would have kept it if it worked as well as I had been reading it would. Maybe if I was using it for competition I would think differently. The Harris isn't perfect but it is simple and seems to work for most people all while costing 1/3 of what the Atlas does. If you need QD you can get that from Larue as well but the standard mounting method is pretty fast and versatile on standard rifles. Quoted:
Quoted:
Put the two of them side-by-side. Work them on your rifles, compare the quality of the construction, the ease of use, the features that each have (and don't have). It shouldn't take long to figure it out. However, if you're just going to casually shoot, or hunt, then the Harris will probably work for you. That is why I sold my Atlas PSR. It was stiff as hell and a royal PITA to use compared to the Harris bipods that I own. The fact that you can't isolate the pan/tilt features was frustrating to me as well. I had to be careful to control the rifle when I had the pan/tilt knob loose as if I let go of the rifle when it was loose it would try to topple over due when it inevitably tipped to one side or the other to the Gen II Razor being so heavy which is where I think the features (pan/tilt) should be controlled independently. There was also movement in the legs which was annoying to me. I tried the spigot on my AI AT and no matter how tight I tightened the tension knob it would rotate slightly which was annoying. I bought it from Brownell's so I am 100% positive that it was legit. I really wanted to like it (especially using the spigot mount) to give me more room to grip the rifle but I just hated it. The fact that it costs 3x as much as the Harris really wasn't a factor to me on a $7K rifle as I would have kept it if it worked as well as I had been reading it would. Maybe if I was using it for competition I would think differently. The Harris isn't perfect but it is simple and seems to work for most people all while costing 1/3 of what the Atlas does. If you need QD you can get that from Larue as well but the standard mounting method is pretty fast and versatile on standard rifles. Informative post. Thanks. |
|
I like my atlas. The pan/tilt works well for me, the tension is enough to keep my rifle in place, but I can still easily move it.
Being able to put the legs forward and backwards I find very helpful, as well as the 45 degree angles. I also feel like I can load the bipod more consistently than my Harris. For me in hunting scenarios the atlas is also quieter. |
|
Quoted:
Well I would never buy an Atlas(too much money for what it does) but this happened to me yesterday. Only lasted 7,928 rounds. I emailed them to see if I can get the replacement part. http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y59/glock2027/IMG_20161209_103623_zpsadrl8fkk.jpg |
|
"Worth" is really subjective. The Atlas cost quite a bit more than a Harris. Both are great choices.
I prefer the psr atlas for ease of mounting it to rails. It stays put and doesn't wobble. -Harris requires an adaptor. My adaptor came loose a couple times. The Harris came loose from the sling stud a couple times. Didn't notice it until I couldn't load the bipod correctly. Stopped shooting to tighten everything up. IMO, Harris needs to develop a direct to rail mounting method (either qd or bolt on). Weight-wise I found the atlas to be slightly lighter, but not by much. The legs of the PSR are more stiff than the Harris. This makes consistently loading the bipod easier for me. The legs of the PSR can be rotated forwards and backwards to 45 degree angles. I haven't had to use this feature yet, but it does add increased utility over the Harris. The PSR hugs the rail more tightly than my Harris when the legs are stowed. Makes it easier to fit in my rifle case. I prefer the larger leg feet on the PSR. They don't skid as much on a shooting bench and they don't sink as much in damp soil. The Harris offers much quicker deployment. The atlas is more deliberate, requiring the release button be pressed for each leg. The Harris allows you to adjust pan/tilt independently. The PSR has one tensioning knob to control both. If you completely loosen it on the PSR, the rifle may flop to the side when you release it. Harris has been around a long time. Hard to discount that kind of staying power. B&T has 20 years under their belt, but Harris has been around since 1965. ETA: It wasn't easy to spend that kind of money on a bipod, but I'm glad I did. In the end, the additional price was worth it to me. |
|
Quoted:
"Worth" is really subjective. The Atlas cost quite a bit more than a Harris. Both are great choices. I prefer the psr atlas for ease of mounting it to rails. It stays put and doesn't wobble. -Harris requires an adaptor. My adaptor came loose a couple times. The Harris came loose from the sling stud a couple times. Didn't notice it until I couldn't load the bipod correctly. Stopped shooting to tighten everything up. IMO, Harris needs to develop a direct to rail mounting method (either qd or bolt on). Weight-wise I found the atlas to be slightly lighter, but not by much. The legs of the PSR are more stiff than the Harris. This makes consistently loading the bipod easier for me. The legs of the PSR can be rotated forwards and backwards to 45 degree angles. I haven't had to use this feature yet, but it does add increased utility over the Harris. The PSR hugs the rail more tightly than my Harris when the legs are stowed. Makes it easier to fit in my rifle case. I prefer the larger leg feet on the PSR. They don't skid as much on a shooting bench and they don't sink as much in damp soil. The Harris offers much quicker deployment. The atlas is more deliberate, requiring the release button be pressed for each leg. The Harris allows you to adjust pan/tilt independently. The PSR has one tensioning knob to control both. If you completely loosen it on the PSR, the rifle may flop to the side when you release it. Harris has been around a long time. Hard to discount that kind of staying power. B&T has 20 years under their belt, but Harris has been around since 1965. ETA: It wasn't easy to spend that kind of money on a bipod, but I'm glad I did. In the end, the additional price was worth it to me. Good, informative post. Thanks! I really wish people would post better reasoning (like this), with factual information/data for why they like or dislike something over something else...but I digress |
|
As an update to my earlier post(s) I decided to give the Atlas another try after finding out that an enterprising individual on Snipers Hide started making picatinny adapters that replace the stupid spigot in AICS chassis as well as the AT/AE/AW rifles.
I bought another PSR and an ADM mount (wanted the locking lever this time over the Larue) and have to say that with eliminating the spigot completely I very much like it being further out. The stiffness is still kind of annoying, however, I am hoping that it will loosen up over time. Having said that if I was stuck with putting the Atlas on the forend of my rifle on a section of picatinny I would still just use the Harris . I have since purchased 2 more of the adapters (another for the AT and one that fits the AW/AE/AICS chassis) just in case he stops making them and I buy another rifle in the future. Taking a hammer and punch to a $4K rifle was a bit intimidating but I love the adapter and it was worth every penny. 
|
|
I had an older design Atlas.
In many ways I really loved it. I ended up getting rid of it for the following reasons: 1. The legs would not lock at 45degs. They would collapse under the weight of the rifle. This may have been fixed in the current design, however I didn't have the current design and wasn't going to pay $50+ to have my couple month old bipod upgraded. 2. When shooting on a hard surface, the legs would rotate allowing the rifle to slide around like if it were on wheels. 3. I couldn't lock the bipod for when I had to step away from the rifle. I couldn't leave the rifle up on the bipod, I had to set the rifle on its side or it would fall over. I believe much, if not all, of these issues have been fixed since then. But at the time if I wanted to get that fixed I would have had to pay additional money in addition to my newly purchased Atlas Bipod. This really soured me on the brand. I paid a premium to receive a product that was functionally inferior to my cheap Harris. |
|
Quoted:
As an update to my earlier post(s) I decided to give the Atlas another try after finding out that an enterprising individual on Snipers Hide started making picatinny adapters that replace the stupid spigot in AICS chassis as well as the AT/AE/AW rifles. I bought another PSR and an ADM mount (wanted the locking lever this time over the Larue) and have to say that with eliminating the spigot completely I very much like it being further out. The stiffness is still kind of annoying, however, I am hoping that it will loosen up over time. Having said that if I was stuck with putting the Atlas on the forend of my rifle on a section of picatinny I would still just use the Harris . I have since purchased 2 more of the adapters (another for the AT and one that fits the AW/AE/AICS chassis) just in case he stops making them and I buy another rifle in the future. Taking a hammer and punch to a $4K rifle was a bit intimidating but I love the adapter and it was worth every penny. https://dl.dropbox.com/s/fncg3wdkx2928sl/IMG_3466.JPG Looks like the spigot adapter is bent in the pic. |
|
Quoted:
Looks like the spigot adapter is bent in the pic. They are machined with an angle on the top and then a hollow machined in to reduce weight. Top is the AT picatinny adapter Middle is the factory spigot adapter Bottom is the AE/AW picatinny adapter Attached File Attached File Attached File |
| I like the Harris for easier leveling (I use leg length and angle to get it close), but the Harris is two flips and your set up. Also as stated the Atlas pan/tilt is a pain if you are used to a Harris. Harris legs are a pain if you like to adjust with the Atlas |
| I used Harris for a number of years but wasn't really satisfied with it. It kept coming loose in use. All the items sticking out (springs etc.) from it was always catching on my bags and clothes. I just bought an Atlas for my RPR 308 and like it so far. Need more range time with it. |
|
I really like the spring loaded legs on the Harris.
At my range as the distance  grows the targets are higher up hill. So as I go out and back I have to raise and lower the bipod. It works real slick with the swivel to just lean the rifle to the side, reach up, push the button and let one leg spring out to get my height, then again to lower . |
|
I own & use both but usually choose an Atlas over Harris for the reasons below.
- The Atlas has the ability to PAN, which the Harris lacks. - The Atlas can be stowed either with the legs forward or rearward. - A shooter can preload an Atlas bipod easier and better then a Harris. - Atlas can be deployed silently, where the springs in the Harris can cause noise. - Pulling a rifle towards you to re-position it can cause the legs of a Harris to collapse, where the Atlas will not. - The Atlas offers more deployed positions then the Harris. The Harris is either up (stowed) or down (deployed), with no other options. - A user can add sections to modify the length of the legs along with the type of feet (rubber, spike, etc) with the Atlas at will. Doing so with the Harris is a permanent change & only the type of feet can be changed. |
|
Quoted:
The Harris isn't perfect but it is simple and seems to work for most people all while costing 1/3 of what the Atlas does. |
|
Quoted:
When in doubt try both before you buy. Harris for me but find what works best for you. Everyone here could sing the praises of either but it wont matter if you don't like it. Quoted:
Quoted:
The Harris isn't perfect but it is simple and seems to work for most people all while costing 1/3 of what the Atlas does. I still like the Harris though and own 2 of them. |
|
Like everything else you have to figure out what your going to to do with the rifle before you pick the parts to put on your rifle.
I shoot local PRS style matches and own or have tried the Harris,Atlas, and GG&G I have settled on 2 Harris brm-s 6-9" with notches both with pod-locks and one with spiked feet. I have plenty of time before a stage to pick which bipod or no bipod will work best For me cons of the Atlas Pan feature 
Legs not spring-loaded a lot slower to set up Too tall at 7" to get a good prone position Legs have a lot of flex to them when loading Expensive! I have less money in my 2 Harris YMMV |
|
I have LOOKED at an Atlas and it appears like a nicely manufactured and featured bipod.
I have used various Harris bipods for the last + 25 years and not a single issue or complaint. Unless I acquire one in a trade or deal I doubt I will ever drop the coin on one. |
|
Quoted:
If you buy a a Larue Harris it won't come loose. It's lower and more stable than Atlas. Faster to set up than Atlas. Can be mounted further forward than Atlas while still allowing adjustment from shooting position. |
|
Quoted:
I wish there were some hard rubber feet available for the Atlas. The atlas feet seem to "wobble" a good bit compared to the harder rubber on the Harris. The knock off Atlas bipods have a harder rubber, but the feet are not interchangeable. |