All I know is its a lot nicer carrying around my T97 as opposed to the 20" C7 I carried in the army. They both weigh about the same, the C7 perhaps a little more with the Elcan on top. Bullpups just balance a lot nicer for me and seem to carry better if that makes any sense, I can't explain it. Velocity wise I'm always going to take the longest barrel I can possibly get when it comes to 5.56mm while still remaining reasonably compact. An 11" barrel will be inherently more accurate than a longer barrel but the velocity reduction limits it to pretty much CQB only in my mind when using standard FMJ. I like greater flexibility. With a bullpup I get a combination of compactness and long barrel, so it makes the most sense to me. A 14.5"-16" AR is a close second. Just my personal slant on it..
First off, C7 is the Canadian designation for an AR15, particularly the 20" variant. Weight issues aside, you can't properly mount optics to your 97, that makes it a non starter. Nor can you shoot from your left shoulder, or adjust the LOP for heavy clothing/gear/stature.
A negligable increase in accuracy yes, velocity not so much. Approx 2500-2600fps at the muzzle with an 11in vs 3000fps+ in an 18in. Not a big deal for shooting paper but in a theoretical shtf I'd take everything I can get.
Wrong, check the link below. The loss in velocity is not quite that significant. The velocity threshold for "ideal" terminal performance is ONLY required for M193 and M855 ammunition. Shoot whatever you want, like a good HP or bonded projectile and performance remains viable well below the published minimums for the above mentioned FMj ammo. Shot placement trumps all other factors, place your shots.
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/223rifle.html
As a person who didnt start with an AR and doesnt have 20 years worth of practice to cloud my judgment, The Tavor is amazing. The ONLY drawback to its ergonomic layout VS an AR IMO is that you cant see the magwell as easily so verifying where your slamming the mag isnt as easy. BUT... I find WHERE the magwel is to be much easier to get to and much faster.I spent my first few years with a VZ58 and I loved it too. If I could own one other rifle at the moment, it would be another VZ. But its a bit heavy and getting a decent optics mounting system is both expensive and even heavier. That was the ONLY thing I didnt like about my VZ. And the fact that the .223 model is known for reliability issues... if you dont want to shoot 7.62 I dont think a VZ is a good choice.
If your having mag issues with your Tavor you might want to try different mags. Ive been running 10 round LAR mags and have, on VERY rare occasions, had the bolt fail to hold open on the last round. With my Pmags (gen 3) ive never had the bolt fail to lock open... EVER. My Gen 3's drop free as well so (LARs do also) so using the fast mag change method described above (back of your strong hand to drop the mag while reaching for the new mag) is extremely fast.
I will say this about the Tavor, if your trying to load a full mag on a closed bolt... your in for a bad time. I dont know why it would be any different than any other gun but even my Pmags that hold 5.5 rounds will NOT seat on a closed bolt. The process for holding the bolt open is just pointless so, all this is to simply agree that bolt hold open issues on a Tavor can result in alot of time wasted. Would it make me second guess choosing my Tavor as an SHTF gun... not a chance. Its my go to gun for everything. But its not perfect. with that said, the AR isnt perfect either.
Charging an AR is annoying. I hate where the handle is and its not nearly as easy to grab with gloves on as it should be (yes, my AR has an extended latch). Anyone ive known with an AR has experienced reliability issues if they dont keep it extremely clean. To me, this is a big negative for any SHTF gun. If your competing you should be starting each day with a clean gun anyway so thats not an issue but, lets say the world ends and your stuck out in the wilderness for weeks at a time... do you want to worry about having to clean your gun all the time? The Tavor could go weeks with out a cleaning and still function fine. The AR, not so much. A VZ is like a Tavor in this respect. They run dirty or clean, no matter what.
I did just build my first AR. Ill be using it and practicing with it right along side my Tavor so I guess ill see if its better or not.
The ergonomic issue is a constant problem with a bullpup. Fast reloads like you see on youtube are great, when they're all performed slick(no kit) and stationary from a standing/offhand position. Show me a rapid reload from the knee, or prone, with winter gear and load bearing gear on. Oh yeah, how's that left side shooting coming along? Oh right you can't.
Whoever you know with an AR that has issues, is doing it wrong or running garbage brands/gear. A quality built AR with proper maintenance will run without issue. How many times does it have to be posted, go google "filthy 14" by Pat Rogers. The amount of abuse an AR can take and keep running is nothing short of amazing.
Really. Not one issues? I'm new to firearms but seems hard to believe not one problem in 20 years. But hey if I'm wrong all the more reason for me to get my RPAL and get a nice ar
A quality rifle maintained and run properly will run reliably.
i'm with the keep it crowd. A lot of people say "bad ergonomics" when they really should be saying lack of training. This is new to you, operating in the fashion required for a bullpup is new to you and it's different. IF ergonomics was truly bad, the IDF wouldnt have adopted it. I say give it some more time and more practice. As i say to everyone that hates on bullpups for their "ergonomics" train on it like it's your first and only rifle and in time you'll operate it just as efficiently as an AR. I'm not saying there aren't flaws, but those that exist are not as much of a problem as people make them out to be.
Training only improves your manual of arms with regards to speed and consistency. The layout/design of the rifle cannot be changed, bullpups suck. Read above, try your reloads from any other position than offhand and tell me if they're still fast and intuitive.
well here is a list of countries...
azerbaijan
brazil
ethiopia
georgia
colombia
guatemala
honduras
india
masedonia
nigeria
philippines
portugal
thailand
ukraine
vietnam
and a couple police units in the U.S
Mostly poor nations with less than top shelf militaries. I can see that list is definitive.
Regarding barrel length. Did you guys miss the part where longer barrels create better bullet stability and better accuracy?
Go read a book, you're wrong..
Anyone saying Tavor mag changes are slow isn't doing it properly. I had a tavor for a very little amount of time and shot it twice, by the second time my mag changes were as fast or faster than my AR. If you use your shooting hand to release the mag its only 2 motions and extremely fast. You should be able to change the mag in around 1 second literally.
TDC: you said the different in length between a 16" AR and Tavor is negligible? There is at least a 5" difference between the tavor and a 16" AR, with the AR stock completely collapsed which is not how most people shoot, so even longer. 5-6" is a huge difference imo, especially because with the bullpup there is a lot less gun in front of your support hand than with the 16" AR.
I used a 16" AR as the benchmark, as most run one or one that's shorter. If you noticed, an 11" AR produces nearly the same velocities and is again, 5" inches shorter than the average owners 16" AR. You didn't address the second half of my post, the part about kicking doors. If you aren't that guy, there's very little gain in a smaller package. Having a few more inches out front means you can get your hand a little further out, aiding in recoil control and driving the gun. No such option on a Tavor or other bullpups, there's barely enough room to place your hand.
Pffft! Whoever uses these rifles dosent mean squat. Why would the SF all of a sudden drop the rifle that they've spent countless hours training on? That means nothing. And all your doing with yours is punching holes in paper. And at that, your ar-15 is only a semi auto variant of what the forces use.
Yeah, that's right. If I remember my history right, the AR-15 was immeadieay accepted, and adopted by the military after its conception.
I am not at all impressed with the AR. Yesterday I went to the range with my friend. He brought his Noveski, and I brought my Tavor. The Noveski was no more accurate than the Tavor. In fact the tightest group of the day was from the Tavor. Just because you can't shoot accurately with a heavy trigger doesn't mean it can't be done.
His has the 10.5 barrel, and it was still ridiculously front heavy. (Compared the the Tavor anyway). I didn't see any advantage he had. At most you could argue it has a easier to use mag release. But even then, he couldn't do a mag change as fast as I can on my Tavor.
I'm not bashing the Noveski, but even if it was NR I'd still take the Tavor over it.
The Tavor has been out for years, and no one of any credibility is running it. SF run what they want, what works for their mission, and NO ONE IS RUNNING A TAVOR. Sh*t optics mounting platform, non ambi, fixed LOP, and bad ergonomics. Yeah, its cutting edge.
The accuracy statement is plain dumb. Anyone can miss or print poor groups. The shooter is the single most important factor when it comes to printing a group. In addition, the AR platform is NOT A PRECISION SYSTEM, its a service rifle designed for shooting people. Why the masses can't get that through their head is beyond me. Unless you build an AR specifically for precision work(precision barrels, triggers etc etc) you should NOT be shooting from a bench with an AR.
As for your friends 10.5" AR, he likely has a heavy barrel variant which is a dumb design, and his mag change speed is an operator issue, not a design issue. Read above, try your reloads with gear on and from alternate positions then tell me which system has the advantage.
TDC
