That's an opinion. Fact is the Tavor is so much more reliable than the T97. That's a biggie for a lot of us.Originally Posted by D3vin
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
That's an opinion. Fact is the Tavor is so much more reliable than the T97. That's a biggie for a lot of us.
I like the way this new T97 looks. It's not anything against the FTU in my case, I just happen to prefer this... Can we please not start an internet cat fight over this? There's nothing wrong with the Tavor, it's a gun, and guns are why we are here...
According to a review I just read, the top rail DOES NOT need to be removed in order to disassemble the rifle
I have two FTU T97 but id want one of these too...
More important than a rail is a lower with proper fighting rifle ergonomics; safety catch manipulation and mag catch are completely ridiculous and until it changes I'm not buying one... '
Any possible update from North Sylva?
Like the T97.ca lower?
Which is exactly my plan for this rifle. Getting the best of both worlds.
Form over function, same logic that got us Turdeau 2.0
Please for the love of god tell me this is sarcasm.
I have never had an issue with the original T97. No, it's not super-tacticool-uber-modern-warfighter, nor is is designed as a marksman's firearm... I like the way it looks, I don't mind the controls at all, and it's a decent rifle for its purpose as far as accuracy is concerned. I started this thread to ask a question, not talk politics or start a flame war between different parts/firearms manufacturers and products.
Posting Permissions
