I hear great things about the Tavor and have seen troops with them in the Middle East who all thought highly of the design. I shoot an XCR and it is accurate and reliable beyond belief. I have shot it covered in desert dust, swamp mud, beach sand and snow & ice yet it goes bang every time I ever pulled the trigger. The only time it has ever failed me is when I feed it reloaded ammo that won’t fit in my chamber checker. Can’t fault the design for that as any firearm fed that ammo will not function. Also, I can both Deer and varmint hunt with the same rifle.
I cant decide Tavor or XCR ? help
- Thread starter Bcviking
- Start date
Note that he did not say that the rifle did not qualify, and is therefore junk...just that the testing can not legitimately be used as a way to prove the quality of the XCR, since it wasn't actually put through its paces.
Maybe it would do awesomely in the trials, I don't know. That would be cool if it did.
But if I submitted my MIS-5000 car for F1 qualification, and they sent it back because it had no rear spoiler, and that's a requirement for F1 cars, that would prove nothing about my homebuilt car. Maybe it would be a world beater...maybe it would just be a beater. It would be a smart marketing move to advertise it as "submitted for F1 qualification!!!" but I would HOPE that people here would want some sort of objective data rather than marketing hype and that owners would want to offer something other than marketing hype to prospective buyers.
You have to ask yourself, "What am I going to be using this rifle for?"
The Tavor is "light" and small. The XCR is heavy and long (Can be fixed on both accounts though.)
So are you going to be doing a lot of bench shooting, or running matches, standing/ running and shooting, hiking, camping, ect..?
It's all about what you want this rifle for.
The Tavor is "light" and small. The XCR is heavy and long (Can be fixed on both accounts though.)
So are you going to be doing a lot of bench shooting, or running matches, standing/ running and shooting, hiking, camping, ect..?
It's all about what you want this rifle for.
And all that for less money than a Tavor.
shmelmafinga
Regular
I still like my XCR, but I'm ashamed that I bought it for the marketing hype. It's cool and all but hasn't lived up to my expectations. It's a far cry from the gun I expected.
I'm glad some one can read my posts and not just yell at me for being a "hater".
To each their own I guess. I can directly compare it to pretty well every available "black rifle" available in Canada and thats my take. Don't get me wrong there are some nice black guns out there like PE90s and some ARs but for black rifles the Tavor is my pick. Its accurate, fast, has a beautiful balance, is durable, dependable and overall very very well engineered.
My only two beefs are the trigger and the optics package offered by IWI with these guns.
There is something about the Tavor that after you pick it up and handle it for a bit, the damn thing just feels right.
I personally just don’t like the ergonomics of any of the Bullpups types I have shot, SA80’s and AUG’s. The Tevor however looks well made and engineered, just not for me. But I also like the caliber conversions capability for the XCR.
If it was me I would go for a XCR.
If it was me I would go for a XCR.
Being that the XCR and the Tavor are both NR, I think a CZ would be more of a better comparison then the restricted VZ.
Throttle_monkey1
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
As rabid as Paul Morrison is in defending it, you are at attacking it. It did fail the SCAR trials. It did fail because of lack of a BFA. Using those two things to sell or condemn the rifle is stupid, as misanthropist said, it means nothing.
It's a great rifle. I will do a side by side comparison when I get my tavor. I have a feeling that the tavor will have some things that easily beat the xcr and vice versa.
The real question is what does the OP plan on doing with the gun?
I have an sl8 in my safe right now, and it's a beaut. But it is heavy, and much more front heavy than an xcr. But it has a bipod, and will be a great for dusting squeaks laying prone, as the owner of the gun likes to do.
^^^^^ twang twang twang(buffer making noise)
I am pretty sure that the discussion here is more along the lines of best most fantastic NR semi, but if the twang of the AR spring bothers you for some reason, it can largely be polished, and lubed away. I have seen it done, but personally don't bother. It happens well after the round is in the air.
Man, I am not sure where you come off as being an XCR hater. I think that title goes to Beltfed.
You just tried the XCR, didn't like it, and moved on at a loss. I did the same thing, though I spent a fair bit of time repairing the teething issues before moving on at a loss.At the time of the trials, Robarm was in a big time rush to catch up to the other contenders. And in all fairness, doing so with a limited budget. I think that this is where the XCR problems began. Some parts, like the ejector, were thrown over the fence, and shipped as good enough, and other problems were created by production machining tolerances that did not always meet spec.
These are all things that happen with startups. The part that ticks me off is that there was limited reach out to the early adopters to ensure that they had the updates that I keep hearing about.
Don't get me wrong, I think the XCR has potential, but when dealing with the teething issues on a rec shooter budget, with a price point that equals 2 ARs, or a couple hundred less then a Classic Green, it is clear where I send friend's money -- to TSE for a CG.
I would only consider you a hater of XCR fanboys.
I would maybe call you a "detractor" of the XCR, but you often point out that it's a decent civilian rifle that needs some development in order to be a really great rifle.
Well, that is a pretty reasonable review. It's just unfortunate that the price point in Canada is high enough that you have to compare it to the Sig/SAN stuff and the Tavor, and to the upper level ARs if res/non-res is not an issue.
Tough competition at that price point. I would think it's tough to develop a new rifle and expensive as well...if Robarms had build an AR variant that cost what an XCR costs, maybe it would be an incredible gun. Who knows? But there is a reason that you can go on M4C and talk about your ARs, your AKs, your HKs, and yes, even your VZ58s and get a crowd of serious experts to join in your appreciation.
There is not that level of trust in the XCR yet. I hope it will develop over time. I REALLY want that rifle to pan out. But for the time being it just does not seem to be at the level of other $2000-2500 options in this country.
The rifle, as it is now, leaves a bit to be desired but that doesn't mean I hate it. I give Robarm a lot of credit for doing what they did, but in the end they were in over their heads. A small company like Robarm competing at the same level as FN, Colt, HK, etc. is admirable but the outcome was decided long before they even built the rifle.Man, I am not sure where you come off as being an XCR hater. I think that title goes to Beltfed.
At the time of the trials, Robarm was in a big time rush to catch up to the other contenders. And in all fairness, doing so with a limited budget. I think that this is where the XCR problems began. Some parts, like the ejector, were thrown over the fence, and shipped as good enough, and other problems were created by production machining tolerances that did not always meet spec.
These are all things that happen with startups. The part that ticks me off is that there was limited reach out to the early adopters to ensure that they had the updates that I keep hearing about.
Don't get me wrong, I think the XCR has potential, but when dealing with the teething issues on a rec shooter budget, with a price point that equals 2 ARs, or a couple hundred less then a Classic Green, it is clear where I send friend's money -- to TSE for a CG.
I wish they'd make some more M96's.
