Is it time for me to leave the Tavor?

[mikethebike]

Clearly you've never competed or trained. A switchable system is fine, but can you transition from shoulder to shoulder, round to round and not eat hot brass in the mouth? Can you transition and not compromise your cheek weld for use with optics??

TDC

I'm sorry to set the facts on here, but the brass ejects forward in a Tavor due to the massive brass deflector. So this is moot.

 

[mikethebike]

! Zing !

Mack from Future Weapons shot that almost 8 years ago. Still not being used by anyone......that tells you something about its acceptance in the Military Arena.

Militaries are stupid when adopting superior firearms, example: multiple shot lever guns were available during the Civil war in the US but both sides decided to stick with their single shot muzzle loading springfields and enfields... Their excuse was that the infantryman would waste too much ammo with a lever gun, yep that's real logical when the whole principal is to be slinging as much lead towards the enemy as possible.
Due to politics, favoritism of current providers, local industry lobby, and just plain idiocy.

 

[Brian46]

not sure what happened, but i had commented on this post earlier. Anyway, here it is again.

A switchable system is one thing, being able to transition from shoulder to shoulder without sacrificing ones cheek weld for optics use is quite another. Other than the fs2000 i don't believe there's a bullpup out there that offers full ambi use without the need for replacement/reconfiguration.

Tdc

rfb

 

[ChrisAlston]

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.

I know what a C7 is, if you read my comment you'd see it's what I had in the military. It's not a designation for an AR15, its a Canadian designation for the M16A1E1 if you want to be technical. First the C7A1, with a fixed LOP, then the C7A2 with the C8 style stock. Good rifles, I liked them a lot. I find it curious that you require optics on your rifle in order for it to be capable. Iron sights work fine, they don't typically lose their zero, and they don't run out of batteries. The fixed LOP with a bullpup is quite a different matter vs a conventional rifle. Balance is completely different, and is really not an issue for me. Also you can in fact shoot from the left shoulder. And I have both a 14.5" M4-forgery as well as the T97 to compare with. Soon to have a Tavor as well. I get the sense you simply dislike bullpups. They aren't perfect but no rifle is..

 

[Brutus]

Militaries are stupid when adopting superior firearms, example: multiple shot lever guns were available during the Civil war in the US but both sides decided to stick with their single shot muzzle loading springfields and enfields... Their excuse was that the infantryman would waste too much ammo with a lever gun, yep that's real logical when the whole principal is to be slinging as much lead towards the enemy as possible.
Due to politics, favoritism of current providers, local industry lobby, and just plain idiocy.

The answer here isn't so easy friend. In major battles, Union soldiers shooting the Spencer carbines so quickly produced thick clouds of black powder smoke, they could not even see the enemy they were to shoot at. The Henry rifles/carbines were considered too fragile for army use. The ammo for the Henry rifle, 44 rimfire Henry Flat, was so unreliable the Henry rifle had two firing pins, and at it's best was a moderate to weak pistol cartridge with extremely limited range in battle. President Lincoln himself endorsed the Spencer as fit for military use. The north could have produced more repeating rifles, however it is doubtful the Confederacy could of mass produced enough repeaters to arm thier troops in any great numbers. Remember that the South was routinely melting down bronze cannons to make cap & ball pistol frames. Much of the Southern arms producers were cottage industry, so tooling standardization would have been virtually impossible. Much of thier arms also came from Europe, so anything that could shoot was purchased. Hardly a sturdy environment to support modern repeating rifles.

 

[Madmardigan]

First of all, my opinions are mine and mine alone.


TDC

The AR as a better platform is not my opinion, its fact.


TDC

Your opinion became fact pretty quick. If it's ok with you I'll form my own opinion and not take your word for it. I didn't realize you worshiped your AR. There is no need to get but hurt just because somebody doesn't think the AR is as great as a you do. It's just a tool, and it's only as good as the user. I'm more proficient with a Tavor. I weighed the pros and cons of both, and the Tavor is a better gun for me. I can run it faster than a AR, and I'm more accurate with it. So why would want a AR when the Tavor is better? LOP is another non issue. It's comfortable whether I got my gear on, or if I'm just wearing a t-shirt. I'm not 5' tall so I could care less if I cant shorten the LOP. With a 10" barrel AR and the stock adjusted to where I'm comfortable its 5" longer than my Tavor. That's a huge advantage!
The off set is another non-issue, here's the fix. Aim high when up close. Just another training issue, just like everything else you've posted.
The shadow from my weapon light isn't as bad as you'd think. I set it up properly, you can see just a little of the flash hider. And I do mean a little.
So what is your WROL fantacy? You seem to think you'll be taking your civilian owned AR into combat. Against who? I know governments have mistreated their people. They're doing it right now, so what are you and your AR-15 going to do about it?
How about a reality check. YOU WILL NEVER USE YOUR AR-15 IN COMBAT! Sorry to burst your bubble, but the only situation you'd ever use you AR against another human being would be in a home invasion. And at that, I'd take the gun with the superior ballistics, and shorter OAL. Sorry, that's not your almighty AR.
I await for your next long winded post. But I'll tell you right now, I'm not thirsty, so I won't be drinking any of the AR-15 kool aid.

 

[ztunelover]

Even Israel gives M4s to its SF. The only SF units I can think of that I have ever heard of getting the Tavor were Indian.

You know what India is currently buying for their SF? Colt M4s.

They are also field testing hk416s.

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..

As a civillian we are not limited to geneva conventions. Why not run ballistic silvertips or other soft point frangible ammo? Ultimately shot placement is key. The tavor has a fair bore offset, most quality ars set up right, have a much lower bore offset, pretty important in cqb/home defense terms no?

While we are on the subject of carrying, where are your sling points? The ar is vastly more versatile when trying to sling it compared to the tavor, as for carrying it, how long are you actually holding the rifle up and for what reason?

The tavor is fully ambi. Ejection port can be switched. Saftey can be switched charging handing can be switched and the mag release and bolt close are both ambi

So what if you have to do a shoulder transition? Safety can be switched? Most high end ars have safety on both ends, why doesnt the tavor have this feature? Bolt close is a dumb feature and should not be used. The charging handle is not ambi.

I'm not thirsty, so I won't be drinking any of the AR-15 kool aid.

You don't need to. The tavor has an inferior trigger, fixed lop, and is not ambi(not without removing bits and replacing them elsewhere), and has some rather questionable sling mounting points. Also let us see a picture of this magic setup of yours.

as for aim high when a target gets close, ok what if the target is moving laterally? How do you keep sights on target? Without guessing?

 

[beltfed]

Read the first 6 pages (out of 11 for my settings) and gave up.

I'll sum it up.
The Israeli's get an 'E' for effort on the Tavor.
I really, really wanted to like it - thought it was a 'keeper'.
Truth is -it's a doggy. (and if I was being harsh, I might add borderline abortion...)

Keeping it for a collection as a cool, interesting military firearm with a bit of (recent) history to it is one thing (if you can afford it), but as a 'go to' gun -for anything be it competition (SR, 3 gun, CQB), home defence or hunting, or some screwed-up fantasy shtf scenario, there are better quality, more suited firearms to choose from.

 

[beltfed]

?..it's only as good as the user. I'm more proficient with a Tavor. I weighed the pros and cons of both, and the Tavor is a better gun for me. I can run it faster than a AR, and I'm more accurate with it.

Have you even fired an AR?

 

[Phat Eagle]

LoL... Nice shytestorm you started Klenzer!!!

 

[Phat Eagle]

Tell you what... Run my 10.5 AR on the 25th an we'll see if you score better (cuz you're not fast enough?!)...

My vote would be get an AR, but that's only because I've had 1000s of round of familiarization with it through the CF... Especially with the frequent mag changes we have, even running PCVs like some of you guys... Every mag change is another few seconds and another chance for things to mess up... Last months night shoots proved familiarity and weapon handling drills save the day when the defecation hits the oscillation!

Cuz that's how we roll in SEAL Team 4.5... MANATEES!

Ttyl

Soldier of Fiction

 

[andrew3081]

They are also field testing hk416s.


So what if you have to do a shoulder transition? Safety can be switched? Most high end ars have safety on both ends, why doesnt the tavor have this feature? Bolt close is a dumb feature and should not be used. The charging handle is not ambi.



You don't need to. The tavor has an inferior trigger, fixed lop, and is not ambi(not without removing bits and replacing them elsewhere), and has some rather questionable sling mounting points. Also let us see a picture of this magic setup of yours.

Tavor is better in terms of ambi compared to Ar15.
And it is pretty easy to do a shoulder transition on tavor.

 

[Epoxy7]

I guess I'm going to jump in this pool once again...

Tavor:

The Tavor is an excellent infantry rifle. It would also make a good police patrol rifle. Advantages? length, designed as a piston system (bullpup AK it's been called although not in design), rifle barrel in a very short package. Ergos are good on the Tavor. Mag changes are fast. Once you use your strong hand thumb to hit the mag release and change out with your weak hand the same as an AR. The speed difference is negligible for most applications. AR slightly faster? Depends on the person but I would say for most yes the AR will be just a bit quicker with equal practice but not if you're using that BS magpul art of the fanboy hold. Then the Tavor mag changes will be faster. The balance of the Tavor is awesome. Shoot that sucker off hand. Standing, kneeling or prone. Contrary to many views I've seen you can use the mag as a monopod with the Tavor. No malfunctions. Yes I've done it.

I'm going to address a few common misconceptions with the Tavor. The trigger. The trigger is heavy. It's a combat trigger. Police run into this with all their gear. You have to learn to shoot it differently. One other issue is the release with the Tavor. When shooting a Tavor from a bench the release of the trigger is violent enough that it actually jolts the rifle before the shot which leads to the poor accuracy reports you see on here. But... shoot it off hand and the way the Tavor is supported negates this. As a result the biggest accuracy issue with the Tavor isn't present when shooting offhand and if you adjust for the way you squeeze that trigger along with hold the rifle then the accuracy issues aren't there. It's up there with your regular AR rifles or other battle rifles for accuracy.

Yes you can change shoulders with the Tavor and fire it weak side. If you're concerned about eating brass then angle the Tavor slightly so it ejects downwards and your cheek is slightly more on the outside edge. Although I've mentioned this before and I'll mention it again that most don't change shoulders. ERT, special forces etc might. As they are going in with entry teams. Small groups of regular soldiers or police are less likely to be messing around changing shoulders. Firing off hand is frankly awkward as heck. Ever try to shoot iron sights weak side even with an AR? ya exactly.

Mag changes. Yes very fast with the Tavor. It's the one bullpup that gets rid of the old idea that mag changes are slow with a bullpup. Mag changes aren't a weakness with the Tavor.

Mounting optics etc. Standard flat top rails. No issues. If you're the type that needs, lights, lasers, night vision, vertical grips, multi coloured panels, Laser designating devices, Bayonet and a Swiss army knife on your rifle then yes there isn't enough space.

Balance. You can effectively hold a Tavor on target with one hand. It's short enough you can use your weak side hand to open doors etc. You can hold it on target for very long periods of time without fatigue. It balances great for standing, kneeling, sitting and in prone you can use the mag as a monopod. Off hand the Tavor excels.

The Tavor is a great all around infantry rifle. It does everything decently but doesn't excel in any one area other than as an all around rifle.

Now for the AR rifle.

Modularity and being able to specialize for any purpose are the strong points of the AR and military versions. Want short? No problem. Two pins change out lower and uppers. Mix/match. Piston system? Yup you can get them. Precision rifle? Yup no problem. Designated marksman rifle? Go AR10 or specialized AR15 and again no problems.

The ergonomics on the AR are excellent. Especially with all the new products out there the last few years. Ambi mag releases (nice that STG44 style is back in vogue for mag changes when retaining the mag), ambi safety, ambi bolt release etc etc. Fast mag changes, straight back recoil, easy optics mounting etc etc.

The AR rifle has been around a long time. What it is now isn't what it started as. In reality many of the rifles we call AR rifles could frankly be considered a different rifle than the early ones. Ambi controls, free float handguards, match barrels, pistons, flat tops etc etc. It's a far cry from the early origins.

Summary:

As for the special forces etc adopting the Tavor or the AR (military versions of course). It doesn't make sense for them to go to the Tavor. They can tailor the AR to do exactly what they specialize in. The Tavor is an all around rifle. It won't appeal to those specializing. At least not now. But if you need something that does everything decently without time to change things up then the Tavor is a very good rifle. Rifle barrel, short package. Good ergos and very reliable. It's a lot nicer to carry one of those around than a long barreled AR rifle. Going to be knocking down doors one minute then engaging at 500 plus metres the next? Patrol all day? Well the Tavor has an advantage here. Again infantry rifle or perhaps police patrol.

For competition? The AR will be king. You can modify it to the competition. Unless the competition is an overall test of being Ok at everything then the AR is the better pick simply due to the ability to specialize.

One last note with specialization. There is the idea that those who specialize are elite and therefore really good at everything. I have found this to often not be the case at all. They specialize and are very good at what they do. That doesn't mean they are good at everything. Even within organizations people seem to downplay those who are good all around and excel at that and seem to think that the person who specializes must be good at that and their specialty. Not necessarily so at all. I find with the Tavor it also falls into this as it's an all around excellent rifle but not a precision rifle or special forces specialized firearm. The Tavor may however be the better infantry rifle and that doesn't take second seat to the "elite" sections contrary to common belief. A good infantry soldier, or General Duty police officer is worth their weight in gold. I view the Tavor the same way. It's the work horse not the fancy Thoroughbred race horse.

One of the most common disagreements on forums and in general are the different applications. Those taking courses etc geared for a specific purpose think that's how it must be. For example those competing may find the magpul fanboy hold gives them better results in competition. Those training for police or military etc may find a combination of magwell hold and regular rifle hold or vertical grip etc are better depending on the application. Competition or courses focus on very specific things. Police or military have other concerns and what works for them in their field might not be as good for competition.

An example of this was when I did a bit of IDPA. I used stock duty gear. 12 pound DAO trigger pistol. 3 point safety holster along with all the other gear. For uses in General Duty policing this setup has advantages. For competition while I didn't embarrass myself and did just fine I wasn't competitive with the top guys. They had zero retention safety holsters which gave a slight advantage on the draw, along with longer sight radius which helped with accuracy and three pound done up triggers. Again helped in speed and accuracy. On the range excellent. On the streets not as good. Their sights? Target sights. Mine were night sights. Again all around vs specialized. Also when racking the pistol or for releasing the slide after lock back we use the clam shell grip. Most competition guys use the slide release for lock back. On the streets and due to some not so nice scenarios the clam shell works better. The slide release though is faster and better for competition. Once again specialized versus non specialized. Specialized is good for the one situation and but not always better. If you're competing then get what's best for that competition. If it's an all around firearm then it may not be the same choice.

 

[ztunelover]

Tavor is better in terms of ambi compared to Ar15.
And it is pretty easy to do a shoulder transition on tavor.

How?

It's pretty easy to do a shoulder transition on an ar as well, what's your point?

 

[silen]

None of the above "safe space is limited" buy lots more ammo and upgrade what you have and love

 

[DoubleA]

Unless you're deploying in body armour, from inside a mechanized armoured personnel carrier, the Tavor is an inferior choice.

That's the only reason the Tavor was created.

Do you deploy from an APC wearing heavy body armour?

 

[ztunelover]

Unless you're deploying in body armour, from inside a mechanized armoured personnel carrier, the Tavor is an inferior choice.

That's the only reason the Tavor was created.

Do you deploy from an APC wearing heavy body armour?

Usually. Thats where my bed is.

 

[boss351cleveland]

If you choose the AR as your primary SHTF rifle, the Tavor makes a killer backup for your wife/ buddy/ neighbour/ self... shares the same mags and travels well.

barrett50cal your inbox is full . i cant reply to you about the EE sale ..

 

[ActiveShooter]

I've run into the same issues in competition as the OP when I had my Tavor. I'm back to the vz platform. Plus x39 turns concealment into cover in short order. No replacement for displacrment!!!

 

[TDC]

You think door kickers only realize the advantage of a smaller package? What about transporting it, storing it? What about hunting? What about hiking/trekking with it? I can think of many examples of a shorter gun being a huge advantage.








I don't see how being on a knee or prone would drastically reduce the speed of a reload with the tavor. For me, reloads were one of the biggest + factors with the tavor. Maybe bullpups just suck for you. Im sure there are pros/cons but its a perfectly serviceable firearm and has some advantages over the AR platform (along with some disadvantages) I hardly even shot my tavor and I was very proficient with reloads... Not sure what you are talking about there. I love bullpups personally.

Ive posted this before, but here is my reload on second try with the Tavor. This was my second time shooting it and I had shot probably 30-40 rounds through it in total since I got it. My eyes were off the target for maybe 1/4 of a second, but again, Im no pro nor was I thinking about that. With more practice Im sure I could have done it with much less movement and without my eyes leaving the target.

[youtube]?v=BF_RCFkkrgY[/youtube]

If you're hunting in bush thick enough to cause issues with your rifle, you can't see let alone engage anything anyway. Hiking involves open area, so length is a non issue. I have yet to experience an area where a standard rifle has been a hinderance while working outdoors. As for storage and transport, those are the dumbest reasons to buy a compact firearm of any sort. Who f**king cares if its easier to store or transport, performance of the firearm is the priority not storage or transport. Then again, with a lot of members here who rarely shoot their firearms I guess storage or transport would be important factors.

Your video is great, except you're running slick, feeding from the belt and offhand. Show me kneeling and/or prone and add winter clothing. The reload isn't all about faster, its about maintaining situational awareness as well. Tough to do when the magwell is out of sight.

I'm sorry to set the facts on here, but the brass ejects forward in a Tavor due to the massive brass deflector. So this is moot.

So why are there left hand bolts offered for the Tavor if the ejection is "moot"?? I haven't seen a demonstration of anyone acquiring a proper cheek weld from support side and not being fed hot brass in the mouth.

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.

I know what a C7 is, if you read my comment you'd see it's what I had in the military. It's not a designation for an AR15, its a Canadian designation for the M16A1E1 if you want to be technical. First the C7A1, with a fixed LOP, then the C7A2 with the C8 style stock. Good rifles, I liked them a lot. I find it curious that you require optics on your rifle in order for it to be capable. Iron sights work fine, they don't typically lose their zero, and they don't run out of batteries. The fixed LOP with a bullpup is quite a different matter vs a conventional rifle. Balance is completely different, and is really not an issue for me. Also you can in fact shoot from the left shoulder. And I have both a 14.5" M4-forgery as well as the T97 to compare with. Soon to have a Tavor as well. I get the sense you simply dislike bullpups. They aren't perfect but no rifle is..

I never said optics were required, but the reality is that optics increases your effectiveness like no other accessory. All Nato nations issue optics to their infantry soldiers, that's called a clue. My point about the C7 BS is that no one cares about the CF designation for an AR.

Please tell me more about how you can acquire a proper cheek weld and fire your 97 or any bullpup(save for the FS2000) from the left shoulder without eating brass.

Your opinion became fact pretty quick. If it's ok with you I'll form my own opinion and not take your word for it. I didn't realize you worshiped your AR. There is no need to get but hurt just because somebody doesn't think the AR is as great as a you do. It's just a tool, and it's only as good as the user. I'm more proficient with a Tavor. I weighed the pros and cons of both, and the Tavor is a better gun for me. I can run it faster than a AR, and I'm more accurate with it. So why would want a AR when the Tavor is better? LOP is another non issue. It's comfortable whether I got my gear on, or if I'm just wearing a t-shirt. I'm not 5' tall so I could care less if I cant shorten the LOP. With a 10" barrel AR and the stock adjusted to where I'm comfortable its 5" longer than my Tavor. That's a huge advantage!
The off set is another non-issue, here's the fix. Aim high when up close. Just another training issue, just like everything else you've posted.
The shadow from my weapon light isn't as bad as you'd think. I set it up properly, you can see just a little of the flash hider. And I do mean a little.
So what is your WROL fantacy? You seem to think you'll be taking your civilian owned AR into combat. Against who? I know governments have mistreated their people. They're doing it right now, so what are you and your AR-15 going to do about it?
How about a reality check. YOU WILL NEVER USE YOUR AR-15 IN COMBAT! Sorry to burst your bubble, but the only situation you'd ever use you AR against another human being would be in a home invasion. And at that, I'd take the gun with the superior ballistics, and shorter OAL. Sorry, that's not your almighty AR.
I await for your next long winded post. But I'll tell you right now, I'm not thirsty, so I won't be drinking any of the AR-15 kool aid.

Lets fix your English to start with. Again its "AN AR" not "A AR". Lets try "BUTT" not "but". "why would I" not "why would". "can't" not "cant". "fantasy" not "fantacy". I really question your knowledge and put little credit behind your opinions when you can't read and write. There's no grammar check on this forum, but there is spell check.

I'm far from butt hurt by your ignorance or that of others, I really don't care what garbage people run. My problem is when people spew incorrect information about their garbage and perpetuate it as fact. You said the Tavor works best for you, and that is entirely acceptable. However, the fact remains that it does not possess as many or more positive attributes than an AR. Fixed LOP is a non issue for you, but it is an issue for others, same story for non ambi and same story for those needing "rail estate" to mount accessories. I guarantee your light position is well behind the muzzle so your shadow is very much present and it sucks, that setup is far from ideal. All of these negatives are specific to the Tavor not the AR. With some simple math, that's four negatives for the Tavor and zero for the AR. Sounds like a losing argument.

I'm aware of mechanical offset and how your tactics change in order to make hits. That being said, its a lot easier to adjust for offset when it isn't 4-5 inches. At 3-5 yards a headshot with your Tavor will require you to hold above the target(IPSC cardboard), effectively putting the target out of view. That sounds like an easy shot to make You are right, the horrendous offset can be mitigated with training, but that training will require far more time and effort to master than a system with less offset. So the only advantage a bullpup has which is "longer barrel in a smaller package" has now created at least four other issues not associated with conventional designed rifles. Where's the advantage?

You mention "taking the rifle with superior ballistics.." at the end of your post. Please elaborate?

Tavor is better in terms of ambi compared to Ar15.
And it is pretty easy to do a shoulder transition on tavor.

Same request, please elaborate how the Tavor is more ambi than the AR?

TDC