Ultimate Shooting Tripod, Ultimate Rifle Tripod

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bill_Rights

Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2009
Messages
679
Location
Annandale, Virginia USA
Does anyone have experience with the McFadden Machine Co. Ultimate Tripod? Would you recommend it for general sighting in and maybe blind hunting?

Here's a video demo.

I do not totally understand what this beastie does, but it does not look like a "lead sled" type of cradle that totally resists rifle recoil, that is, keeps aiming at the exact PoA before and after a high-recoil firing. Is that correct? Even if so, it seems like it would be a lot better than sand bags for aiming.

If the initial aim point will not resist recoil, at least if it'll resist finger pressure on scope windage and elevation knobs, that's be something useful.

Any experience/comments?

Price is ~ $300 shipped, from the manufacturer, if that sways opinion at all.
 
Okay, let me first state that I am more of a believer in taking the prone position, and using a low/mid rifle-mounted BIpod, and either going straight for prone position in a long-distance shot, or, the lesser preferred indian-style sitting position.

Who care's? Just wait, I'm getting there.

If you are hunting, are you going to carry a large tripod along with you? I have found that just using my arm as an elevator, and a natural rest on the terrain, to always perform the job. My father has been taking 200 yard shots on coyote with a 1950s Savage bolt .222, dropping them--with the rifle that he has probably cleaned 3 times in it's life, using no more than the deck rail, and his hand rested, with no rear rest. He is your "average hunter/shooter", and barely at that (sorry father!), by all means. It's pick up a box of 20 from the farm store, and window watch for coyotes, for him. Although I have tried to get him to realize the potential of a heavier gun in say, 6mmBR for the deck, he's accomplishing his goal, without spending money.

Who cares? I'm still getting there. :)

What the OP is asking for in hopes, is sort of non-existent in the field. Heck, it's non existent on the bench. Flicking a rifle in a "lead-sled" will throw it off target. Recoil? It's off target--no ifs , ands, or butts, and the sled probably hopped back a hair on that shot anyway, causing a new POA. Even with a sled, you must be consistent yourself. The gun is allowed to move in a sled. It has padding. Pressure is applied, and you still must "settle-in" for the shot, breath, notice cheek pressure, grip, and squeeze/pull, just as you did on the shot before.

I have grown up shooting 100 meter 3-position competition with small bore, and I can never give back what the coach entrained into us. Many of us believe we need some advantage, but we may only claim to have it available.

My coach taught me a good gun cleaning, breathing method, relaxation method, and final decision when to increase that squeeze, are typically all that is needed to put the bullets where they belong. While we may use devices ourselves such as slings, too much confidence as I see it today is put off on the equipment, not the shooter.

The shooter, plays the bigger role. Always.

Have you maxed out your abilities; do you believe?

You asked, so this is my opinion, OP. Spend the $300 on ammo, and for your sight in's, shoot from a natural position that mimics the field situation. Let trigger pulls make you a better shot, not false confidence in a tall tripod that is still wobbly on grass/brush/dirt. It will not improve your shot anymore than you yourself know how to without one--to reasonable extent (off-hand is apples-oranges here, though).

If you still think you cannot do it, and that this device will be the device you need, please, at least save yourself half the money and build one yourself.

Grab a sturdy $100-140 camera tripod with good smooth adjustment and lock up (preferably with bubble level integrated). Camera pods use 1/4x20" threads. Take a cheap board, like 1x8, and build your own rest. Cut it long enough to put your front and rear rests on permanently (sandbags with velcro and stops for them for disassembly), or, take a simple jig saw and cut out two roughly square boards that have "U"s cutout you can pad with leather or felt. Screw them each tight after you mark them so they stand up (predrill and use 3 screws across the bottom of each location to suck them down without splitting). Now once you finished your platform, mate the two. Find your center of gravity you feel is best, draw a line there, and drill a 1/2" hole through the wood center. Take a brass/steel standoff that drops in the hole and threads onto the 1/4x20" threads. If the standoff is tight, throw a bolt and fender washer on top the male/female standoff, and use a wrench to mount your platform to the standoff tightly on the wood (you may need to cut the standoff down if you only find one just close to working right).

There's your ultimate portable you can just build to your own tastes using a few dollars in hardware on top the tripod. At least the tripod has camera/chronograph uses, too. Good luck.
 
Matt,

Wow! OK, that's a lot of advice. But good perspective.

I got my OP answer: There is no shooting rest or lead sled-type item that will ever maintain PoA against firing recoil, or even, in some cases, against a minor bump or disturbance. You always have to re-aim (hence the fine adjust screws on the sled base or wherever). Therefore, this "Ultimate Shooting Tripod" will not solve that problem.

Yes, it is true: Optimizing my shooting technique will provide superior long-term benefits all around.

I am frustrated by not usually being able to find even a make-shift shooting rest or stabilization technique to sight in my rifles. Even the benches at one shooting range I go to wobble and tilt, plus the sand bags are often being used by other shooters. Often times I am shooting out on a farm where there is nothing but bare dirt/grass or the hood of a car. Yeh, yeh, these are solvable problems without spending $300 on a whizmo tripod.

But it is so sweet to finally get a rifle tightly sighted in. With my .17 HMR (Marlin 917) from a seated rest at the corner of a deck railing, I was able to shoot ~ 75 yards across a creek and cut individual reed stalks on the opposite bank.
 
The Marlin 917 is an awesome gun. I received one free from a family friend down the road, brand new, as I helped him out with some work he was doing.

I own the Savage thumbhole stock 17HMR bolt-action, whatever model they call it, blued (not SS), with Accutrigger, using a Mueller 8.5-25x-44mm "Tactical" scope.

With "all that 17HMR" as you would see it next to the plain-jane Marlin, if I want to set a single empty 17HMR case on a log at 50 yards, then shoot the case, there is one gun I would grab. That gun is the Marlin 917, over my Savage, anyday. (Fun Fact: When I shoot a 17 case dead center, it actually doesn't go through the case. The point digs in and deforms the case to the bullet front profile, then the rebound knocks the case to the berm and I find it. Hehe)

I have an aftermarket, adjustable, silver trigger for the 917, I have it set at about 8-9oz, no idea what brand because it was years ago now I researched for that trigger, but I then found a picatinny rail which is still around and available I know, it's 1-piece machined for the 917, and I love that scope base. I have a 56mm 8-25X scope on the 917, and at 50 yards, you can go nicely to 25X and see every bit of movement you are making, and I've had it in a sled, they are just an adjustable rest. My friend shoots 3/4"-1" groups with the Savage at 50 yards. It was his original gun, and I was with him when he bought it, talked him into it, and that Mueller scope. (I felt dumb after I talked him INTO spending more money.) I can get those groups tighter, down under a half inch to a 1/4" with that Savage at 50, but the Marlin? The Marlin puts them into the same hole at 50. The Marlin darn near puts them into the same hole at 100 yards, if I get a string of shots with low velocity spread. I find 17HMR ammo velocity spread, from the same box (with diff mfgrs) to be on average up to 150FPS every 5-10 shots. Then the rest like to hang around 2500 in the Marlin/Savage, tested through a Beta Master chronograph. I have never seen an HMR break 2600. That are either close to the box velocity, or low into the 2300s, rifles a non-dependent factor for that result.

I need a case gauge for the rims, so I can sort 17HMR ammo out into groups, but I really am not heavily into 17HMR, since I reload. I just know, you have the rifle in your hands capable of 1/4MOA accuracy. Just remember, the cartridge is hugely affected by wind gusts. I like to build 2, "U" cutout blocks with bases, a high and a low, for front and rear, and I just throw an old towel over them both on the bench. It works, you can cut your "U" with jigsaw to fit your gun profile, Wedge in more towel at the front if you want it held tighter, and your ammo doesn't roll away! Use that on any sturdy surface for a $5 bench rest. Wood is your friend. :D
 
Last edited:
Matt,

I am interested in hearing more on the McFadden tripod from other users and don't want to go totally OT.... but

Thanks for the encouragement on the .17 HMR/Marlin 917. I am just using a stock 917 I bought used (haven't even traced the serial # to year of manufacture). For a scope, I put on a 2010-era new Bushnell Banner Dusk & Dawn "17 Super" 3.5-10x36mm (Model 71-3510), a $100 scope, mounted on the factory mounts with no-name rings that came used with the rifle. This scope has bullet drop compensation elevation dial inserts for most loadings, but only for range greater than 100 yards. I haven't gotten into fooling with that. And as you mention, wind drift comes into play with this light projectile, so bullet drop is only half the problem.

I would be interested in hearing what the latest trigger mods are available for the Marlin 917. I measured the trigger pull weight with a Lyman Electronic Trigger Pull Gauge to be about 4-1/2 pounds. But let's research old threads and start a new one if necessary, rather than dragging this thread all the way into the OT ditch :rolleyes:.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top