Tavor Barrel Flex Causing Lack Of Accuracy?

870P said:
The problem is any number of older designs (AK-74, AR, AUG etc) shoot better on average, while weighing less and not looking like a Tapco'ed up Kel Tec product.
Click to expand...

Sorry, in the real world, the AUG doesn't shoot any better - bought one, shot one and sold one. When they civilianized the oddball trigger, they produced a trigger with what's technically know as "sh*t trigger syndrome". The Mil AUG was a short pull for semi, and a long pull-and-hold for full, the civvy one was "somewhere between the start and the end, you'll get a bang" - if you're strong enough. Shooting 30 rounds was work, a day at the range produced muscle pain in your hand. The inherent accuracy of the AUG is nothing to write home about either, best groups 2 inches, worst groups 6 inches. The AUG was insanely expensive at the time I owned one, you could comfortably buy 2 Colt AR's for the price of an AUG, and at the time there were an awful lot of good, NR rifles on the market for half the price. It even cost more than the HK 94, which is a superb rifle.
 
Last edited:
Get IWI to make an ar then contrast the price. Trigger's are the clutch of a gun, some people replace them - some people learn to live with them.
 
Rebel Rouser said:
You also have to remember a lot of people of shooting cheap crap 55grn Norco ammo out of it. It is a 1 in 7 twist barrel, it's stabilizes the heavy bullets better.
Click to expand...

I bet if the X95 could be had with an HBAR and shot match ammo, MOA could be achieved easily.

One could always get a quote from Herron Arms for an integrated flashhider match barrel, wouldn't flex has much and be 1" or so shorter if a guy doesn't mind spending an extra $1200.
 
enefgee said:
Sorry, in the real world, the AUG doesn't shoot any better - bought one, shot one and sold one. When they civilianized the oddball trigger, they produced a trigger with what's technically know as "sh*t trigger syndrome". The Mil AUG was a short pull for semi, and a long pull-and-hold for full, the civvy one was "somewhere between the start and the end, you'll get a bang" - if you're strong enough. Shooting 30 rounds was work, a day at the range produced muscle pain in your hand. The inherent accuracy of the AUG is nothing to write home about either, best groups 2 inches, worst groups 6 inches. The AUG was insanely expensive at the time I owned one, you could comfortably buy 2 Colt AR's for the price of an AUG, and at the time there were an awful lot of good, NR rifles on the market for half the price. It even cost more than the HK 94, which is a superb rifle.
Click to expand...

So you found that a '70s design with a horrendous trigger, a very basic fixed optic and the comparatively limited ammo selection of 25 years ago, still shot as well as the Tavor family?
 
Last edited:
870P said:
The problem is any number of older designs (AK-74, AR, AUG etc) shoot better on average, while weighing less and not looking like a Tapco'ed up Kel Tec product.
Click to expand...

Do you or have you owned a Tavor or x95 or are you just basing all your comments on what you've read on the forums?
I owned one and the accuracy was not as good as my AR's when shooting off the bags at the range but when standing freehand I was ringing gongs just as often with the Tavor. The average person shooting in the real world can rarely tell the difference between a 1 moa gun and a 3 moa gun. I sold mine because I like my ACR better, the Tavor did everything it was supposed to do, namely go bang every time I pulled the heavy trigger. It was never designed or intended to be a DMR rifle and just because it costs over $1500 that doesn't mean it will automatically shoot 1 or 2 moa, not shooting tight groups does not make it an overpriced pos, it makes it a standard battle rifle.
I can almost guarantee that if they were to build a DMR model with a heavy barrel that could do close to 1 moa (I don't think the rifle is capable of consistent sub moa due to it's design) then all of a sudden everyone would be crying about how heavy it is and that it doesn't balance nicely in the hands.

Since there are apparently a lot of people who do like them and enjoy them for what they can do I'd say your best option is to simply not buy one if you think they are terrible and not worth what everyone is paying for them.
If you want to talk about overpriced pieces of crap why don't you bash the T-97? $1500 with no warranty and no parts support, build quality is terrible with magazines not fitting the magwell properly on many of them, terrible safety location, many with the gas port drilled half way through the bottom of the barrel, feeding issues for many owners, man the list goes on and on with all the stuff wrong with them yet people still buy them all the time. To me anything Norinco is a $600 firearm.

Do you own any rifles that are capable of 1 moa or better? Have you ever shot back to back 1 moa or better groups with any rifle?
My observations lately lead me to believe that many of the people on this site who go on and on about accuracy and that they need a rifle capable of 1 moa or better are actually the problem more than the rifle is the problem. Just because you have a rifle and ammo combination capable of tiny groups doesn't mean that you will ever see it do it. I've shot my Rem 700 223 and made 0.4 moa groups but when I let my friends shoot it with the same ammo some of them are lucky to get 1.5 moa groups.
In the real world it isn't nearly as important as people make it out to be with a rifle like this, anyone who buys a Tavor to shoot from a bench at paper all day bought the wrong rifle. I'm not making excuses for it, it's like buying a corvette to go race Baja, it may have lots of power but in the end you've bought the wrong tool for the job.
The Tavor/X95 is a well made, well supported firearm that does exactly what it was designed to do, it is a modern design employing polymers and quality metals in it's build in order to save weight where possible while maintaining strength where it's needed. The light profile barrel is standard issue on this type of firearm and performs exactly as should be expected. The problem is that people have unrealistic expectations and think that because the rifle doesn't measure up to their dream of having a rifle that is compact, maneuverable, light weight, accurate, and all at a price every minimum wage earning dreamer can afford that it's no good.

It's not for everyone and it's not for me but that doesn't make it a pos or reduce it's market value.

When I want to make small groups I grab one of these
I need to take a new pic, they've both had an optics upgrade since the pic :)
View attachment 121493
View attachment 121495

When I want to have some fun blasting I grab one of these.
The ACR is actually capable of sub moa with my 300BLK conversion and my handloads but I mostly just shoot it for fun and haven't spent a lot of time with my 223 barrel seeing what it can do.
View attachment 121498
View attachment 121500
View attachment 121502

Use the right tool for the job.
 
Last edited:
Comparing the Tavor to AK rifles, AUG rifles, even AR rifles is a moot point in Canada, we all know why.
I get decent and acceptable accuracy out of my tavor, for me decent = anything under 4moa.

Why are we so obsessed about getting sub moa?

My most accurate while still being extremely reliable semi in 556 are my APCs, and they weigh a ton, close to 9 pounds, they shoot 1.3 moa consistently.

They cost well over 3000 each...

I've shot my noceske spr mk12 AR under 1 moa consistently (5x 5shot groups on the same paper) but it takes a whole lot of really hard effort and no coffee for a week for me to do so. Not something I enjoy doing.

There is a whole lot of B.S. on this site, eventually you get to filter it out. When im not trying really hard, I am about a 1.5 moa shooter, so any rifle shooting under that doesn't really gain any benefit from me shooting it.

Now that being said, as far as barrel flex, that doesn't matter much to accuracy, what matters is there is something binding the barrel, where the barrel doest free float and is able to flex as much as it ants, that will cause accuracy issues.
 
Last edited:
cr5 said:
Do you or have you owned a Tavor or x95 or are you just basing all your comments on what you've read on the forums?
I owned one and the accuracy was not as good as my AR's when shooting off the bags at the range but when standing freehand I was ringing gongs just as often with the Tavor. The average person shooting in the real world can rarely tell the difference between a 1 moa gun and a 3 moa gun. I sold mine because I like my ACR better, the Tavor did everything it was supposed to do, namely go bang every time I pulled the heavy trigger. It was never designed or intended to be a DMR rifle and just because it costs over $1500 that doesn't mean it will automatically shoot 1 or 2 moa, not shooting tight groups does not make it an overpriced pos, it makes it a standard battle rifle.
I can almost guarantee that if they were to build a DMR model with a heavy barrel that could do close to 1 moa (I don't think the rifle is capable of consistent sub moa due to it's design) then all of a sudden everyone would be crying about how heavy it is and that it doesn't balance nicely in the hands.

Since there are apparently a lot of people who do like them and enjoy them for what they can do I'd say your best option is to simply not buy one if you think they are terrible and not worth what everyone is paying for them.
If you want to talk about overpriced pieces of crap why don't you bash the T-97? $1500 with no warranty and no parts support, build quality is terrible with magazines not fitting the magwell properly on many of them, terrible safety location, many with the gas port drilled half way through the bottom of the barrel, feeding issues for many owners, man the list goes on and on with all the stuff wrong with them yet people still buy them all the time. To me anything Norinco is a $600 firearm.

Do you own any rifles that are capable of 1 moa or better? Have you ever shot back to back 1 moa or better groups with any rifle?
My observations lately lead me to believe that many of the people on this site who go on and on about accuracy and that they need a rifle capable of 1 moa or better are actually the problem more than the rifle is the problem. Just because you have a rifle and ammo combination capable of tiny groups doesn't mean that you will ever see it do it. I've shot my Rem 700 223 and made 0.4 moa groups but when I let my friends shoot it with the same ammo some of them are lucky to get 1.5 moa groups.
In the real world it isn't nearly as important as people make it out to be with a rifle like this, anyone who buys a Tavor to shoot from a bench at paper all day bought the wrong rifle. I'm not making excuses for it, it's like buying a corvette to go race Baja, it may have lots of power but in the end you've bought the wrong tool for the job.
The Tavor/X95 is a well made, well supported firearm that does exactly what it was designed to do, it is a modern design employing polymers and quality metals in it's build in order to save weight where possible while maintaining strength where it's needed. The light profile barrel is standard issue on this type of firearm and performs exactly as should be expected. The problem is that people have unrealistic expectations and think that because the rifle doesn't measure up to their dream of having a rifle that is compact, maneuverable, light weight, accurate, and all at a price every minimum wage earning dreamer can afford that it's no good.

It's not for everyone and it's not for me but that doesn't make it a pos or reduce it's market value.

When I want to make small groups I grab one of these
I need to take a new pic, they've both had an optics upgrade since the pic :)
View attachment 121493
View attachment 121495

When I want to have some fun blasting I grab one of these.
The ACR is actually capable of sub moa with my 300BLK conversion and my handloads but I mostly just shoot it for fun and haven't spent a lot of time with my 223 barrel seeing what it can do.
View attachment 121498
View attachment 121500
View attachment 121502

Use the right tool for the job.
Click to expand...

You writing a book? ;)

I'm not a bench accuracy snob, but the mediocre accuracy of the platform kind of limits its appeal.

If it was just another conventional layout piston rifle it'd be an also-ran.

That said, I still may end up getting an X95, but I want to see how the Atrax and MDR rifle shake out first before I do.
 
870P said:
You writing a book? ;)

I'm not a bench accuracy snob, but the mediocre accuracy of the platform kind of limits its appeal.

If it was just another conventional layout piston rifle it'd be an also-ran.

That said, I still may end up getting an X95, but I want to see how the Atrax and MDR rifle shake out first before I do.
Click to expand...

best wait 5 more years and save 4000$

let's chat again then

I'm not sure where you get your analysis, but there are currently some wickedly accurate NR semi rifles: SA, APC, ACR, SL8

You should talk to people who own these if you want true feedback, hint hint me

Waiting for a non-existent platform to be made available in Canada AND NR? Is not a strategy for me.

As for the Tavor I have shot that rifle to 1.5 MOA repeatedly, the gun can shoot given the right ammo and right shooter, look at my older threads for proof
 
870P said:
So you found that a '70s design with a horrendous trigger, a very basic fixed optic and the comparatively limited ammo selection of 25 years ago, still shot as well as the Tavor family?
Click to expand...

It was bad for its day - about as good as an AK, nowhere near my bitzer L1A1, not as good as my HBAR and far, far short of my buddy's HK94 - you're the one who suggested it was better. Incidentally, we had Match Kings back then too, and arbor presses, and powder measures that were accurate.
 
enefgee said:
It was bad for its day - about as good as an AK, nowhere near my bitzer L1A1, not as good as my HBAR and far, far short of my buddy's HK94 - you're the one who suggested it was better. Incidentally, we had Match Kings back then too, and arbor presses, and powder measures that were accurate.
Click to expand...

The one I shot was quite accurate, and that's nothing unusual going by reviews and consensus. But then I think we're talking about newer models here.
 
enefgee said:
Sorry, in the real world, the AUG doesn't shoot any better - bought one, shot one and sold one. When they civilianized the oddball trigger, they produced a trigger with what's technically know as "sh*t trigger syndrome". The Mil AUG was a short pull for semi, and a long pull-and-hold for full, the civvy one was "somewhere between the start and the end, you'll get a bang" - if you're strong enough. Shooting 30 rounds was work, a day at the range produced muscle pain in your hand. The inherent accuracy of the AUG is nothing to write home about either, best groups 2 inches, worst groups 6 inches. The AUG was insanely expensive at the time I owned one, you could comfortably buy 2 Colt AR's for the price of an AUG, and at the time there were an awful lot of good, NR rifles on the market for half the price. It even cost more than the HK 94, which is a superb rifle.
Click to expand...

I shot a few recent production civilian Steyr AUGs as well as the military F88. That must be thing of the past, the triggers of the recent AUGs are more than adequate.

But no matter what you do with an AUG, even in the latest reincarnation in the form of Lithgow F90, it still inherits all the issues from the architecture of the 70's thinking. The right side expose gas plug pretty much makes a useable hand guard impossible and no one wants gas vented close to their hands. The cross bolt safety will not pass the muster of current days manual of arms. All the laser and lights are mounted far away from the muzzle end on the receiver, that creates huge shadow. They are above average weapons ( ignoring that they cannot be submerged) when it is compared to things of that time, like FN FNC, FAMAS and HK33. AUG and SIG 551 were pretty much kings of those days.

For all the mediocre accuracy talk about x95, the Israelis got most of the things right for a "tactical" weapon. All the controls are in the right place, and there is a use-able hand guard to mount essential accessories. The HS VHS-2 has potential, but the folding HK G36 style charging handle kills. it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom