Tavor vs type 97?
- Thread starter Jeffhere
- Start date
PinaKaleada
CGN Regular
- Location
- South of most
Same, and also have listed out pros and cons numerous times on similar threads haha! But in short, there’s quite a few modifications that helps with light and lasers/pressure pads mounting.
I actually prefer the ergonomics and balance of the T97 to the X95 (can't speak for the Tavor), but that's with the FTU and LHG mods which means greater cost and are next to impossible to find now, but ultimately the feeding issues and mag pickiness of the T97 (all 3 I've owned) moved me over to the X95 and I would never go back.
X95 is expensive, complicated, almost impossible to detail disassemble, comes with very stiff factory trigger. But it looks, feels much better than T97, and it works right out of the box.
T97 is crude, ugly, ergonomically flawed, not as accessory-friendly (Gen 2 and 3 are big improvements), and usually has a few issues, or requires a few "upgrades". But it is much cheaper, much easier to disassemble, and not less accurate.
If you have money, go for the X95. If you don't, well...
T97 is crude, ugly, ergonomically flawed, not as accessory-friendly (Gen 2 and 3 are big improvements), and usually has a few issues, or requires a few "upgrades". But it is much cheaper, much easier to disassemble, and not less accurate.
If you have money, go for the X95. If you don't, well...
coleman1495
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Whitecourt
I don’t have substantial experience with the T97 but I can say mounting optics is problematic. There is the FTU model but its a gimmicky method of mounting.
coming from the T97 with the FTU from T97.ca, I really liked that rifle. Pros for me:
1) Really easy to take down
2) Rugged and reliable
3) mods available depending on what you get
4) Ergonomics can be learned
5) Common issues (feed ramp smoothing, Mag well tightness) can be easily solved with a file and 15 minutes of work.
I like that it's cheap as well considering the other models you are looking at, so this is why I chose the T97. The extra cash went into optics and accessories to provide more overall value.
1) Really easy to take down
2) Rugged and reliable
3) mods available depending on what you get
4) Ergonomics can be learned
5) Common issues (feed ramp smoothing, Mag well tightness) can be easily solved with a file and 15 minutes of work.
I like that it's cheap as well considering the other models you are looking at, so this is why I chose the T97. The extra cash went into optics and accessories to provide more overall value.
In normal times I would take a Tavor over the Type 97 any day of the week. The Tavor or the X95 is a infinitely better rifle. However in todays polical climate here, I would buy 2 Type 97's instead of a Tavor. When it comes time to turn them in, turn one in for your rebate and sink the other one in the bottom of a lake.
I own both.
Better rifle means higher price tag, this goes without saying.
I find their accuracy is about on par. The T97 is surprisingly accurate with the right ammo but I also find it's EXTREMELY ammo sensitive. Point of impact changes WILDLY between brands of M193 or commercial .223, sometimes to the point you cannot even adjust the iron sights far enough to get a zero. Trying to shoot M855 out of it looks like your firing buckshot at your target.
The T97 is also more difficult to be accurate with because of the odd trigger, high sights (higher if you use an optic) poor sight picture (if you're not) and the perceptible lock time of the linear hammer.
The X95 might have better or worse groups with different brands of ammo, but they land where you're aiming, pretty much no matter what you feed it.
Dissassembly is about the same. Ever try to take the bolt of your T97 apart? I'd take the X95 over the T97 for that kind of basic maintenance any day.
Fair points and I appreciate the civil response. I'd only point out that my response was to you initial statement that ...the T97 is utterly outclassed by the X95 in every way.
At retail the X95 costs 220% more - apart from just wanting/preferring the X95, is there legitimately 220% more intrinsic (not perceived) value?
Accuracy, in your experience is nearly equal, with the caveat there is ammo sensitivity in your sample group - is that generally held as true for all units?
Breakdown is about the same in your experience.
So, and I hope you'll excuse me being obtuse, where/how does the X95 utterly outclass the T97?
Again, I'm absolutely not saying you're wrong or anything of that nature. I'm just trying to understand how people set and interpret data points while attempting to limit subjectivity and bias - it may be an impossibility. I get it, sometimes we just like what we like and want what we want...and so very often nothing else matters.
When I bought mine? Yes. At current prices? Less so.
I should add that I've owned a different T97 previously with identical performance.
I'll phrase it like this: With the "ideal" ammo selection, the T97 has the potential to be about as accurate as the X95. But on a practical level, this is Canada. Our ammo selection fluctuates wildly, a brand common today might be gone tomorrow and you wont see any more of it for years. My T97 shot Aguila 62gr 5.56 (which was NOT M855, as it had no steel penetrator that I could find) very well, which was great because it was cheap and plentiful... until one day it wasn't. So I managed to find another that I could get a zero and a decent group with, which was cheap and plentiful... until I was desperately buying the last few boxes off of the store shelves last month. Not sure what I'll use when that runs out. The ammo that is plentiful tomorrow might be next to useless in the T97 because of the differences in POI, as I mentioned.
The T97 also requires much more EFFORT to be accurate with. There's more factors at play, as I described.
The X95 will give you a consistently good performance with just about anything, and a very good performance with the right ammo.
I equated them because you could remove the barreled action f the T97 from the polymer shell quite easily without tools. A nice convenience, but the important sub-assemblies, like the bolt, are much harder to break down. I'd rate the X95 as higher for knowing what's important.
I think it largely comes down to build quality and handling. The X95 feels rock solid, even more so than the TAR-21. The safety switch is exactly where it should be, the bolt release placement is brilliant, and the magazine release is in the very-good AR-15-style location. The X95 also has a redundant magazine release in the buttstock, just in case. It has more potential for modification with top rails, and a threaded muzzle.
The T97 is also notoriously picky with magazines. You can modify the magazines (or rifle, like I did) to be more accepting, it's a chore, and is not a 100% solution. Even your "good" magazines will (rarely) misfeed and crush your round into the trunnion. My T97 was been very reliable, with only a handful of malfunctions in thousands of rounds, which I mainly attribute to particular magazines.
But my X95 has it beat with 0.
Spare parts are a consideration. If a bolt shears a lug in my T97, the rifle is done. If a bolt shears a lug in my X95, I buy a new one. If a firing pin breaks in my T97, I think I might be able to carefully modify an AK one to work. If the firing pin breaks in my X95, I already have a spare on hand.
Last edited:
