@BigLooch63 Thank you for your feedback.
1. You aren't the only one with this recessed rail issue. This is becoming more common which is a great improvement in stocks but the few that also recess on the front end of the rail too is a problem for our bipod. Would an ARMS 17s option work for you? Gives you the chance to choose exactly what clamping method (leaver or twist) picatinny clamp or Arca clamp you'd like. Only downside is some of these 3rd party clamps are pretty heavy. We could ditch the ARMS 17s and do a twist clamp for Picatinny. I still want to produce the current design too albeit with minor improvements but cannot do every option ourselves.
2. Yeah there can be play in a few areas. The legs have it designed in. Our reason is that the movement in the legs allow a small amount of free recoil to reduce the chance that uneven terrain exerts any force on the rifle as it recoils and it also reduces the shock loading from recoil. Your thoughts on that? Any play in other areas we would obviously like to make zero. This is really around tolerances between the rail and clamping slider which we are working on reducing while increasing the range of rails it accepts.
3. We have had a play round with tilt tension knob. We have found we have had to dramatically increase the size of the parts to get the tension/friction required. So we will highly likely stick with our current design. Although there are a few things we can do to further make them smoother and hold your tilt angles with it being improved smoothness. We have made some improvements on this lately within the same design too. Also dramatic weight and size savings with the current design. Don't think there is a perfect design when trading weight and size in a hunting bipod.
Cheers
Matt