The Canadian Tactical Rifle choices...

S

superlative

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
46   0   0
Location
Calgary
Okay, there's been a lot of XCR bashing lately, and I get it. People are bored and arguing gives them something to do. For a while there our passions were lighted with the Swiss Arms fight, but that seems to have died down, so the topic du jour is XCR.

So here's my 2c.

1. Restricted: at the $2500 and less range, the clear restricted choice is AR15 and nothing else compares.
2. Non Restricted 223, here are the choices in order of price:

a. Kel Tec Su-16: $800
b. CSA VZ58 223: $900
c. T97: $1050
d. Ruger Mini-14: $1200
e. Benelli MR1: $1700
f. S&K SL8-4: $2250
g. XCR-L keymod lightweight barrel: $2350
h. Tavor: $2800
i. ACR: $2850 + $550 (barrel conversion) = $3400

Here's the breakdown:
a. SU-16: just too risky to shoot this rifle with a plastic receiver. It's like playing Russian Roulette. If they had used metal for the upper receiver, this rifle would be #1 on my list.
b. VZ58 223: if they've fixed the gas port issue, this would be a good, reliable, cheap option with the magazine well conversion to accept STANAG mags. Limited rail capability.
c. T97: ugly and with terrible ergonomics, and no rails. I think it's risky having such a cheap bullpup with the explosions right by your face and only a piece of plastic to protect it.
d. Mini-14: doesn't accept STANAG mags. No rails. The problem with this rifle and the VZ58 is that you have to mod it to have decent rails.
e. MR1: front heavy and compromised ergonomics. This is a good sporting rifle, but the lack of rail capability means it cannot function as a tactical rifle.
f. SL8: Very heavy. Weighs 9.26lbs without magazine. This makes it just a sporting rifle IMO, and not a tactical rifle. People have reported spotty accuracy with this rifle
g. XCR-L: very light, very ergonomic, and very tactical. You can put anything wherever you want it without any wasted rail space. Out of the box, this is the cheapest non-restricted tactical rifle, "tactical" meaning having the ability to attach anything anywhere with adjustable stock and can use STANAG magazines.
h. Tavor: Very balanced, some compromise to ergonomics due to bullpup. With the $70 rail add-on to the front hand-guard, it becomes competitive with the XCR-L for rail flexibility.
i: ACR: the most expensive option on the list. People have reported it to be very accurate. About 1lb heavier than the XCR-L keymod.

For a tactical rifle, I think there are only 3 choices out of the box: XCR, Tavor and ACR. Each rifle has it's very very different qualities:
g. XCR: light, ergonomic
h. Tavor: balanced, short
i. ACR: accurate
 
I'm in total agreement that the choices in the NR category are slim and that the price point on the few 'better' models is not buyer friendly. Seems pointless to bash anyone of those top 3 or 4 choices considering what the alternative are in the same classification.
 
I think your breakdown of strengths and weaknesses is VERY biased toward the XCR... just because your an XCR fan doesnt mean you have to act like the haters, but in reverse, and hate on anything that ISNT an XCR.
I disagree with your assessment of what makes a gun "tactical". Rail space is NOT the only factor. I have an AR with ONLY a top rail... all other rails removed. Does this make it LESS "tactical" than my other AR with a full quad rail? No.. of course not. I think the tactical nature of a gun is determined by how useful or functional it is in a tactical environment. I which case I see some holes in your assessments.
The T97 is an excellent gun. Being afraid of it from a "safety" standpoint but NOT being afraid of the Tavor in the same way doesnt make sense. I agree its limited in customizability in stock form... but if your looking to customize a gun you should have no issue with adding the FTU, which gives it almost identical rail real-estate to a Tavor... Only downside of the T97 IMO is the wonky mag release and safety. The mag release issues can be over come with practice but the safety is stupid. On the other hand, for less than half the price of a Tavor and nearly half the price of an XCR you can have a T97 with FTU... hard to find many downsides to this.

The VZ is a fantastic platform as evidenced by its use by militaries around the world. Limited rail space can be overcome with a few simply modifications, after which, its still half the price of an XCR. Downsides I see are its weight after upgrades (though it may not be alot heavier than an XCR), spotty reliability from the .223 version (though many would argue the same about an XCR) and the plastic mag well conversion. Still, for the money, a very good choice.

MR1 is just a strange gun. There are a number of things that do, legitimately limit its tactical usability. Mini 14 is similar, and I agree that its lack of stanag mag compatibility is a huge down side. For the same $$ as an SL8 you can have a number of the others and I agree again, its super heavy and bulky. Not a choice id make.

The Tavor is an excellent gun. Loved mine... probably my favourite gun ever. But costly. Its only downside IMO is its price tag. Everything else, for me, was near perfect. ACR has some reliability issues reported as well. Cool gun no question, but the price and complexity of getting it non restricted puts it way off the charts for MOST gun owners. Therefore, its not a good choice because most people can't afford it.

I owned a non Keymod XCR and loved it. Mine was %100 reliable. Great shooter, easy to manipulate. I loved it. Though, it was very heavy. I understand the Keymod versions are lighter but for half the price I can run my T97 and in a truly tactical situation, I think id be equally as effective with it. On the other hand, if it ever comes to the point where we, as Canadians, are in a TRULY tactical situation, I'm not sure my AR being restricted is going to matter. And its the one id choose.
 
pavmentsurfer said:
I think your breakdown of strengths and weaknesses is VERY biased toward the XCR... just because your an XCR fan doesnt mean you have to act like the haters, but in reverse, and hate on anything that ISNT an XCR.
I disagree with your assessment of what makes a gun "tactical". Rail space is NOT the only factor. I have an AR with ONLY a top rail... all other rails removed. Does this make it LESS "tactical" than my other AR with a full quad rail? No.. of course not. I think the tactical nature of a gun is determined by how useful or functional it is in a tactical environment. I which case I see some holes in your assessments.
The T97 is an excellent gun. Being afraid of it from a "safety" standpoint but NOT being afraid of the Tavor in the same way doesnt make sense. I agree its limited in customizability in stock form... but if your looking to customize a gun you should have no issue with adding the FTU, which gives it almost identical rail real-estate to a Tavor... Only downside of the T97 IMO is the wonky mag release and safety. The mag release issues can be over come with practice but the safety is stupid. On the other hand, for less than half the price of a Tavor and nearly half the price of an XCR you can have a T97 with FTU... hard to find many downsides to this.

The VZ is a fantastic platform as evidenced by its use by militaries around the world. Limited rail space can be overcome with a few simply modifications, after which, its still half the price of an XCR. Downsides I see are its weight after upgrades (though it may not be alot heavier than an XCR), spotty reliability from the .223 version (though many would argue the same about an XCR) and the plastic mag well conversion. Still, for the money, a very good choice.

MR1 is just a strange gun. There are a number of things that do, legitimately limit its tactical usability. Mini 14 is similar, and I agree that its lack of stanag mag compatibility is a huge down side. For the same $$ as an SL8 you can have a number of the others and I agree again, its super heavy and bulky. Not a choice id make.

The Tavor is an excellent gun. Loved mine... probably my favourite gun ever. But costly. Its only downside IMO is its price tag. Everything else, for me, was near perfect. ACR has some reliability issues reported as well. Cool gun no question, but the price and complexity of getting it non restricted puts it way off the charts for MOST gun owners. Therefore, its not a good choice because most people can't afford it.

I owned a non Keymod XCR and loved it. Mine was %100 reliable. Great shooter, easy to manipulate. I loved it. Though, it was very heavy. I understand the Keymod versions are lighter but for half the price I can run my T97 and in a truly tactical situation, I think id be equally as effective with it. On the other hand, if it ever comes to the point where we, as Canadians, are in a TRULY tactical situation, I'm not sure my AR being restricted is going to matter. And its the one id choose.
Click to expand...

The tavor has a piece of metal protecting your face. Not plastic.
 
I have no dog in this fight (if it is going to be one). I have had the AR, the SL8 and am now running a Tavor.

A couple weeks back a friendly soul let me shout his brand new XCR (It was flat dark earth, .223)...and boy oh boy...that thing was one sweet ride. If I recall he was doing 1.25" average groups with it, and I smacked the 100m gong 5 out of 5 off my hind feet. If I recall that sweet heart had a standard weight barrel too. I may yet indulge in one.

If somebody wants to say that XCR is the best of the bunch...I ain't gonna argue. It is as at least as good as all the others, about the only gripe I have was a few years back when the company's owner started beaking off at his detractors. It was a pi**ing match...but even so that boy came off sounding arrogant and conceited. Sorry, can't remember what the issue was.
 
pavmentsurfer said:
I think your breakdown of strengths and weaknesses is VERY biased toward the XCR... just because your an XCR fan doesnt mean you have to act like the haters, but in reverse, and hate on anything that ISNT an XCR.
I disagree with your assessment of what makes a gun "tactical". Rail space is NOT the only factor. I have an AR with ONLY a top rail... all other rails removed. Does this make it LESS "tactical" than my other AR with a full quad rail? No.. of course not. I think the tactical nature of a gun is determined by how useful or functional it is in a tactical environment. I which case I see some holes in your assessments.
Click to expand...

I agree. I think what you hopefully have proved once and for all is that there is no sense in bashing ANYONE's gun because everyone purchases based on their own set of individual requirements, tastes and circumstances. Man I wish the mud would dry up so I can get back out and shoot!
 
And if the AR-15 was classified correctly we wouldn't even be having these conversations. I wonder what kind of margins Ruger is making on the mini-14.
 
I define tactical as configurability (rail positions), ergonomics and weight/balance - because these three things allow it to be used in any situation - ie. tactical. You cannot switch from day time use to night time use if you've just got a top rail because there's no where for your flashlight, ergo - it's not tactical in the literal sense. The XCR-L keymod is the #1 on that list for configurability, and that's a really neat feature IMO.

And I mentioned the XCR a few times because it's gotten a lot of flak lately, and I don't think it deserves it when you compare the price and it's features. Sure - it's not a DMR, but it is a superb TACTICAL rifle.
 
Ive mounted a flashlight on my T97, on the top rail and it doesnt get in the way of the sights or scope or anything else I've mounted. You can do it with an offset mount, or you can use a 45degree mount with a pistol style light. You can also mount a rail under the hand guard (a few guys on this forum have done it) and it looks pretty cool if you MUST have an AFG or VFG. If you want a laser (I've also mounted one of those) you can do that just as easily as the light.

I guess it all depends on how much stuff you feel you need to bolt to your gun before its considered tactical. Personally, I feel less is more, only the necessities... and that stuff has all fit on both my T97 and my Tavor.
 
this word...."Tactical" is relevant to what you are trying to do.

tac·ti·cal [tak-ti-kuhl] Show IPA


adjective
1.of or pertaining to tactics, especially military or naval tactics.
2.characterized by skillful tactics or adroit maneuvering or procedure: tactical movements.
3. of or pertaining to a maneuver or plan of action designed as an expedient toward gaining a desired end or temporary advantage.
4. expedient; calculated.
5.prudent; politic.

Could say bulpups are most tactical because they keep your movements close to the body and short. That they are easier in tight spaces.
Could say wearing a rain jacket in a storm is also tactically sound to approach a rain storm.
having a light for when its dark would be tactical.

I find that measuring something by how "tactical" it can be silly. There are many things that go into it being a fine rifle more then how "tactical" it could be, because there are so many situations that different things could be tactical and the other not, vise versa.

Weight, maneuverability, reliability, accuracy, the size of round, spare part availability (hopefully don't need but always nice), ability to hold optics or other railed items. MANY MANY more other things come into play.

What ever you find best or can afford.

Everything that can go wrong will go wrong especially with extra parts when you need them

No one ever remembers the tactics, gun or caliber. Just who survived.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom