Tavor 7 accuracy???

dgradinaru

dgradinaru

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 99.8%
410   1   1
Location
British Columbia
Hi gun nutters, looking at possibly buying a Tavor 7 soon, only thing that is throwing me off is the accuracy reports. Most the reviews I've seen shot 2-3.5" groups at 100 yards which in my books is poor accuracy considering the price tag. I'm sold on the ergonomics and reliability but not the accuracy. Looking to hear from fellow gun nutters here. What type of accuracy are you guys getting out of yours?
 
4MOA is about right when using Federal Lake City 149 gr. Worse with some 155 gr. I was surprised to see reasonable groups going heavier. Amax 167 match and precision hunter 178 gr both shot 5 shots at 100m around 2". Given that its a 1 in 12 twist, not sure how well the heavy bullets will do out to 400m.
 
dgradinaru said:
Hi gun nutters, looking at possibly buying a Tavor 7 soon, only thing that is throwing me off is the accuracy reports. Most the reviews I've seen shot 2-3.5" groups at 100 yards which in my books is poor accuracy considering the price tag. I'm sold on the ergonomics and reliability but not the accuracy. Looking to hear from fellow gun nutters here. What type of accuracy are you guys getting out of yours?
Click to expand...

Its a battle rifle. Its accuracy is acceptable.
 
Very satisfied for bullpup and surplus. Tavor7 and Hirt 74 give me 2.5 or less all day... If i apply myself. Good test for you all, 10 clays at 100, rapid fire, can easily break 7 or 8. I luv this 308
 
dgradinaru said:
I was expecting to hear battle rifle accuracy. Interesting that even my SKS's or type 81 can shoot 4MOA at 100 yards. I was hoping to hear it can do better than that.
Click to expand...

well that may not be the tavor for you if you re looking for accuracy ... it is a battle rifle not a dmr or sniper one. like the x95 and sar21 but they work good for they have been created ...
 
Is it a battle rifle though? It's not like they have any military contracts for the Tavor 7.

I think of the battle rifle as covering that cold-war era with G3s, FALs, and M14s, cropping up in distant battlefields today where range, cost, and supply are all key deciders.

The west is coming back around to the heavier-bullet larger-cartridge idea with the XM5, but would anyone call that a battle rifle?

Wherever we're headed with these new NGSWs, the idea of an ambidextrous, suppressor friendly, piston driven, intermediate cartridge select-fire rifle with connected optics and LAM packages are all definitely exceeding 4MOA.

The Tavor 7 is an odd duck. Who's it for? It fits nicely into our laws, which is a massive benefit to Canadian shooters, but I don't see any large scale adoption of the rifle.
 
They were designed for the India, and the contract was won by SIG 716 DI.


TV-PressPass said:
Is it a battle rifle though? It's not like they have any military contracts for the Tavor 7.

I think of the battle rifle as covering that cold-war era with G3s, FALs, and M14s, cropping up in distant battlefields today where range, cost, and supply are all key deciders.

The west is coming back around to the heavier-bullet larger-cartridge idea with the XM5, but would anyone call that a battle rifle?

Wherever we're headed with these new NGSWs, the idea of an ambidextrous, suppressor friendly, piston driven, intermediate cartridge select-fire rifle with connected optics and LAM packages are all definitely exceeding 4MOA.

The Tavor 7 is an odd duck. Who's it for? It fits nicely into our laws, which is a massive benefit to Canadian shooters, but I don't see any large scale adoption of the rifle.
Click to expand...
 
TabulaRasa said:
Here's some good info:

https://gatdaily.com/is-the-tavor-7-accurate/
Click to expand...

It is more revealing to see how the centers of the groups are moving around in the 3 serials amongst the 3 samples.

Two possibilities:

1) Shooter is not having consistent chin wield - he does better with ACOG because ACOG ( a fix prismatic sight) is more tolerant to parallax than higher power Vari-power scopes, it is sloppier with eye position.

OR

2) Shooter is good - the rifle starts doing zero wandering when it heats up or there are some other mechanical things going on, or there are shooter induced mechanical issue.

It is probably a mix of 1) and 2) most of the time. Note how he shot the KAC a bit low in the third group. Also note that the T7 is generating "elliptical groups". The problem with "elliptical groups" or "split groups" is that you can really tell where the center actually is. IMHO elliptical groups are mechanical, could be pressure on the barrel or something more fundamental in the architecture.

There is mechanical accuracy, but also there is ergonomic accuracy, what a real human can squeeze out of the mechanical capability. We are not robot arms. It is also possible it is a trigger pressing issue.

But the fact is that he could more or less produce round symmetrical groups with SCAR and M110 indicate at the very least most people can have better practical accuracy with these two systems, the combined result of mechanical and ergonomic accuracies.
 
Last edited:
4tkal said:
4MOA is about right when using Federal Lake City 149 gr. Worse with some 155 gr. I was surprised to see reasonable groups going heavier. Amax 167 match and precision hunter 178 gr both shot 5 shots at 100m around 2". Given that its a 1 in 12 twist, not sure how well the heavy bullets will do out to 400m.
Click to expand...

Bullet stability increases with distance traveled. If it is stable at 100 yds it will be stable further out.
 
I consider myself to be an above-average shot, due mostly to the 18 months of one-on-one mentoring that I received at the hands of a retired Canadian Army Master Sniper. 34 years as an infantry soldier helped as well. Despite all of that, the Tavor 7 was one rifle that I could not "tame" and as a result my shot groups were all over the target zone. There was no seeming rhyme nor reason to my lousy groupings such that they could be analyzed and the cause(s) discerned. There was just something about the rifle's particular recoil impulse that threw me off - literally! The best that I could ever do with PMC 150gr Ball ammo was approximately 4 MOA. To me, that is a terrible result for a Battle Rifle which I believe ought to be able to group 2 MOA to be decent, with 3 MOA at the limit of acceptability. But hey - that's just my opinion on the matter. Others obviously and understandably differ and that is fine. the Tavor 7 simply was not for me. I like my X95 just fine, and am neither wedded to the bullpup design, nor adverse to their comparative advantages. In that regard, I can happily "swing both ways"! The Tavor 7 however, was the singular example (to date) of a military arm that I could not wield to its full potential and advantage.

Such is life.
 
Last edited:
Bartok5 said:
I consider myself to be an above-average shot, due mostly to the 18 months of one-on-one mentoring that I received at the hands of a retired Canadian Army Master Sniper. 34 years as an infantry soldier helped as well. Despite all of that, the Tavor 7 was one rifle that I could not "tame" and as a result my shot groups were all over the target zone. There was no seeming rhyme nor reason to my lousy groupings such that they could be analyzed and the cause(s) discerned. There was just something about the rifle's particular recoil impulse that threw me off - literally! The best that I could ever do with PMC 150gr Ball ammo was approximately 4 MOA. To me, that is a terrible result for a Battle Rifle which I believe ought to be able to group 2 MOA to be decent, with 3 MOA at the limit of acceptability. But hey - that's just my opinion on the matter. Others obviously and understandably differ and that is fine. the Tavor 7 simply was not for me. I like my X95 just fine, and am neither wedded to the bullpup design, nor adverse to their comparative advantages. In that regard, I can happily "swing both ways"! The Tavor 7 however, was the singular example (to date) of a military arm that I could not wield to its full potential and advantage.

Such is life.
Click to expand...

That's good enough for me. My curiosity about the platform is now tame.
 
If I recall, Tavor delayed the launch of this rifle to try and sort out the accuracy issues as they could not achieve better than 4 MOA consistently. Then they said 'it's a battle rifle' and released it. I guess that resonated. Maybe they made some improvements. Not sure I'd be happy with 4 MOA given some of the other accurate 308 platforms out there. Heck, the Swiss P210 is a service pistol and it is 4 MOA - from a 4.7" 9mm.

I should add that I still want one. and looks like some folks are extracting decent performance from theirs so that is promising.
 
Last edited:
If the objective is to have a NR to launch big heavy bullets at decent speed, T7 is the right choice. Compared to other 308 NR in Canada, T7 is one of the most reliable and robust in functioning IMHO.

If you plan to carry it alot ( and do bush whacking) and only shoot it within 150m for some hunting application, T7 is way better platform than anything else. There is no comparison between carrying a bullpup and a 1m stick, especially in things bigger than 223. Even a 16" SCAR or a 16" 308 AR is a "big boy rifle" if one desires to run it like a 5.56. There is no way one can gun and run a B&T 308 like a T7, or want to carry one to bush whack.

In the US, I will take a 8.9" MCX pistol if I need to launch 120gr + bullets....but that's in the US. The MCX pistol can do 2.5MOA easily within 100m shooting.

But if I really want to run at high speed and stay NR in Canada, a T7 loaded with some 110 to 130 gr copper bullets could be a great speed demon. That will be the way I want to run a T7 in Canada as a close range 30 cal rifle.


gdawg said:
If I recall, Tavor delayed the launch of this rifle to try and sort out the accuracy issues as they could not achieve better than 4 MOA consistently. Then they said 'it's a battle rifle' and released it. I guess that resonated. Maybe they made some improvements. Not sure I'd be happy with 4 MOA given some of the other accurate 308 platforms out there. Heck, the Swiss P210 is a service pistol and it is 4 MOA - from a 4.7" 9mm.

I should add that I still want one. and looks like some folks are extracting decent performance from theirs so that is promising.
Click to expand...
 
As Greentips has noted, the utility (and accuracy) of the T7 is entirely dependant upon its intended role. As a DMR? Definitely not my first choice due to inherent accuracy limitations. The APC 308 is the clear remaining NR .308 winner in that specific context. However the T7 outshines the competition as a close-range big-bore semi-auto for really big, really close hogs.... and such. With very few exceptions (eg. SCAR H), there is no "free lunch" when it comes to accuracy versus weight. You have to know the intended role in order to select the appropriate tool for the job. It is really that simple. This was my T7 setup:


20200106-202211.jpg




Some rifles which manage to do all things reasonably well, tend to rise to the top of the popularity heap. The aforementioned SCAR H is one such example. I would argue that the short(er) 16" B+T APC 308 could conceivably fill that same "general purpose" role, as could the 16" Colt USA LE-901 (basis for the C20 Sniper Rifle) or the Larue Optimized Battle Rifle (OBR). The T7, not so much due to its accuracy limitations for the long(er)-range DMR-type engagements. Here is my (now Prohib) LE-901 configured as a DMR, a rifle capable of sub-half-MOA accuracy, which all of a sudden "has no sporting purpose in Canada":


20200413-202139.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom