Can you 'bump fire' with a bipod?

[caribou]

I have ''Zip'' experience with 'bump fire' devices, but I remember the ''trigger pack'' that could be used in a very loose grip, and the rifle held almost as loose. The one I tryed back in the early 90's couldnt do more than spray a few shots, so how reliable is a bumpfire device on an AR? Can the work with a bipod in place?

 

[1stmarine]

yes. with the right conditions one can bump fire with a bipod. But it is a waste of ammunition as you are not in control of the firearm nor can achieve
any kind of precision fire.

 

[BigBore44]

Yes. But having the rifle tucked in tight while shooting prone or sitting, greatly inhibits the mechanism from working properly. Especially with the added resistance the bipod creates.

 

[Mitlov]

yes. with the right conditions one can bump fire with a bipod. But it is a waste of ammunition as you are not in control of the firearm nor can achieve
any kind of precision fire.

Waste of ammunition for lawful purposes. Unfortunately and tragically, they have utility for unlawful purposes where rate of fire matters more than accuracy. To avoid moderation, I'm going to just leave it in generalities/hypotheticals.

 

[caribou]

Thanks, I just wonderd, due to recent events, if the 'Bump fire' was anything better than the old trigger trippers.
I find it odd that a mechanism designed on momentum would work reliably while being held fairly stedy, on the bipod. Probly depends on the bipod itself, certainly if it were adapted from , say, the MG-42 series, as they have a lot of forward/back play.

Nobody I know has such a device. I live where pistol cartridge guns have very limited use, and aiming is what you do with each shot, and with the price of ammo and shipping being crazy, I was never interested in inaccurate play, either.
.

 

[748]

Well the stereotype for such devices was that they were inconsistent or not reliable and finicky.

 

[Tirod]

When held, the bump fire stock remains stationary against the shoulder and the upper receiver moves back and forth. Adding a bipod implies restricting the gross movement of the barrel and upper as it's holding it somewhat stationary. The M60 and M249 are both used that way in the field.

Searching the internet shows some doing it. If used from 525 yards away angling downward with no serious optics, it's not going to narrow targeting - it's a volume fire area application. This is doctrine in military use with a cone of fire striking a beaten zone with repeated impacts.

Anybody who's taken basic training in the Armed Forces is exposed to this concept when instructed on the use of small arms. The M16 had an issue light duty bipod in the field 30 years ago. It clamped onto the barrel by spring pressure and came with it's own pouch for the LBE. Subsequently the trigger was modified to three round burst as doctrine moved to light intensity conflict instead of traditional field combat.

There are over 25 million prior service men and women trained in the US who have all gone thru small arms instruction. When Uncle Sam gives you crates of ammo, three meals a day, a range to teach you, and a paycheck, you willingly learn how to do it. It's called "defending our country" in the practical application and very much part of our tactics and doctrine.

We misapply a lot of things in life, driving vehicles into crowds with trucks or flying airplanes into skyscrapers is another method of killing large numbers of people. There hasn't been and never will be complete safety in this world. It's what we strive to do, not what we have as a norm, and it requires accepting a common set of beliefs. That's been made a lot harder by those opposed to it.

 

[lemaymiami]

I suspect that although the media is focusing on "bump fire" -what the firearms specialists handling the weapons will actually find is a few weapons that were illegally converted to fire full auto (and that most of the weapons in that hotel room were never actually fired)... The few audio clips I heard initially did sound like full auto, period. At the published distance in various media reporting this was purely full auto working a beaten zone with far too many easy targets under the gun...

Now, Iike everyone else, I'll be waiting to learn what actually is found after a thorough investigation.

 

[bassjam]

I suspect that although the media is focusing on "bump fire" -what the firearms specialists handling the weapons will actually find is a few weapons that were illegally converted to fire full auto (and that most of the weapons in that hotel room were never actually fired)... The few audio clips I heard initially did sound like full auto, period. At the published distance in various media reporting this was purely full auto working a beaten zone with far too many easy targets under the gun...

Now, Iike everyone else, I'll be waiting to learn what actually is found after a thorough investigation.

Was listening to an interview this morning on NPR with the Las Vegas sheriff, he confirmed that all the rifles in the room had been converted to bump-fire stocks.

 

[mstreddy]

I'd have to check the images again, but 2 images that were out on some news source showed 1 rifle with a bump-fire stock, and another with a regular collapsible stock.
OK, found the images. Here they are. The one on the left seems to be a standard collapsible stock. The one on the right is one of the bump fire stocks, with the Sure Fire mag.

 

[george burns]

I told my wife that's bump fire not auto, as soon as I heard the sound clip. The cyclical rate was too slow and not consistant. Turns out that is what it was. If he would have had an full auto rifle, he would have fired a lot more rounds, That sounded like 300 to 500 rounds on some bursts. Also the reason the strings were so uneven.Watch the ATF make bumpfire illegal now. I never had any interest in owning one but have heard enough on utube to see it is a waste of ammo.

 

[Robert]

Asked and answered and now we are drifting into speculation without fact and we are not going there.