Tough decision..Tavor vs RFB

IF, big IF...you want to save some $$ and are stubborn on the .308 Win, Canam has the 18.5'' M14 for a good price and they do make a side folding GI stock.

mfs14Callout1.gif
 
i have both and they both have good and bad points....

trigger: rfb all the way, tavor trigger is the worst ive seen.

ambi-friendly: again rfb, but if your the only one using the rifle it shouldnt really matter that much

weight: tavor all the way, and it seems better balanced

size: rfb is a little more compact, so it wins out on this one.

accuracy: my groups are always tighter and much more consistent with the tavor than with the rfb, plus the tavor is far less finicky about what ammo you feed it.

fte's/ftf's: tavor wins here as well, i have far less issues with the tavors then with the rfb's. trying to clear a cartridge from a rfb in the field can be pretty tricky as you dont really have direct access to the inner workings of the rifle like with the tavor.

parts and accessories: tavor as well, they are pretty close on most aftermarket accessories but magazines for the rfb are expensive and sparse whereas the tavor will use any standard ar magazine.

service and support: ive owned 3 rfb's and 2 tavors, and i can say that the customer support for kel-tec is pretty good all in all. ive never had need for customer support with the tavors (that says something right there) bringing me to my next point.

reliability: i have shot the crap outta the tavor and rfb in all environments and the tavor wins hands down. the tavor (albeit plastic) is robust and can take a beating, the rfb not so much. the rfb also has issues with the frame welds and the takedown pins have cracked twice on me so far.

takedown and cleaning: pretty close on this one, but i still give the edge to the tavor.

to sum up....
i tried the rfb as a hunting rifle last year and it did just fine however, i didn't have to hike 600m down a steep hill or into bushes to drag a deer or moose back to the truck (and the overall weight of the rfb with an optic would make it a daunting task). the tavor would be ok for hunting coyote or small game, but 5.56 is not the cartridge of choice for medium to large game. i would rather get a nice tikka or sako for hunting and a tavor for everything else before getting an rfb.

just my opinion....hope it helps.
 
This is great, thanks a lot for taking your time to compare.

Tavor it is.

Thanks to all who provide their feedback and opinion.


pbr streetgang said:
i have both and they both have good and badpoints....



trigger: rfb all the way, tavor trigger is the worst ive seen.

ambi-friendly: again rfb, but if your the only one using the rifle it shouldnt really matter that much

weight: tavor all the way, and it seems better balanced

size: rfb is a little more compact, so it wins out on this one.

accuracy: my groups are always tighter and much more consistent with the tavor than with the rfb, plus the tavor is far less finicky about what ammo you feed it.

fte's/ftf's: tavor wins here as well, i have far less issues with the tavors then with the rfb's. trying to clear a cartridge from a rfb in the field can be pretty tricky as you dont really have direct access to the inner workings of the rifle like with the tavor.

parts and accessories: tavor as well, they are pretty close on most aftermarket accessories but magazines for the rfb are expensive and sparse whereas the tavor will use any standard ar magazine.

service and support: ive owned 3 rfb's and 2 tavors, and i can say that the customer support for kel-tec is pretty good all in all. ive never had need for customer support with the tavors (that says something right there) bringing me to my next point.

reliability: i have shot the crap outta the tavor and rfb in all environments and the tavor wins hands down. the tavor (albeit plastic) is robust and can take a beating, the rfb not so much. the rfb also has issues with the frame welds and the takedown pins have cracked twice on me so far.

takedown and cleaning: pretty close on this one, but i still give the edge to the tavor.

to sum up....
i tried the rfb as a hunting rifle last year and it did just fine however, i didn't have to hike 600m down a steep hill or into bushes to drag a deer or moose back to the truck (and the overall weight of the rfb with an optic would make it a daunting task). the tavor would be ok for hunting coyote or small game, but 5.56 is not the cartridge of choice for medium to large game. i would rather get a nice tikka or sako for hunting and a tavor for everything else before getting an rfb.

just my opinion....hope it helps.
Click to expand...
 
I own both and echo what pbr said. I'll add that I like the LOP on the RFB better than the longer tavor. Once I got my RFB set up with good mags, it's been rock solid. The tavor has been rock solid since the day I got it.
 
.

I own both, and agree with most of what PBR is saying. The Tavor is a combat-rifle design, with the advantages and disadvantages inherent in such a design. RFB is a great rifle, but to me, it's more of a hunting rifle, and not something I'd want to trust with my life. Just my opinion - YMMV. For the OP's stated purpose, I'd go with the Tavor.

Only experiences I've had that differs from PBR's - both my Tavor and RFB have been close to 100% reliable. And, while the RFB trigger is really nice, I don't think the Tavor's trigger is all that bad, once you get used to it...



pbr streetgang said:
i have both and they both have good and bad points....

trigger: rfb all the way, tavor trigger is the worst ive seen.

ambi-friendly: again rfb, but if your the only one using the rifle it shouldnt really matter that much

weight: tavor all the way, and it seems better balanced

size: rfb is a little more compact, so it wins out on this one.

accuracy: my groups are always tighter and much more consistent with the tavor than with the rfb, plus the tavor is far less finicky about what ammo you feed it.

fte's/ftf's: tavor wins here as well, i have far less issues with the tavors then with the rfb's. trying to clear a cartridge from a rfb in the field can be pretty tricky as you dont really have direct access to the inner workings of the rifle like with the tavor.

parts and accessories: tavor as well, they are pretty close on most aftermarket accessories but magazines for the rfb are expensive and sparse whereas the tavor will use any standard ar magazine.

service and support: ive owned 3 rfb's and 2 tavors, and i can say that the customer support for kel-tec is pretty good all in all. ive never had need for customer support with the tavors (that says something right there) bringing me to my next point.

reliability: i have shot the crap outta the tavor and rfb in all environments and the tavor wins hands down. the tavor (albeit plastic) is robust and can take a beating, the rfb not so much. the rfb also has issues with the frame welds and the takedown pins have cracked twice on me so far.

takedown and cleaning: pretty close on this one, but i still give the edge to the tavor.
Click to expand...
 
Throttle_monkey1 said:
I own both and echo what pbr said. I'll add that I like the LOP on the RFB better than the longer tavor. Once I got my RFB set up with good mags, it's been rock solid. The tavor has been rock solid since the day I got it.
Click to expand...

CobraGT said:
.

I own both, and agree with most of what PBR is saying. The Tavor is a combat-rifle design, with the advantages and disadvantages inherent in such a design. RFB is a great rifle, but to me, it's more of a hunting rifle, and not something I'd want to trust with my life. Just my opinion - YMMV. For the OP's stated purpose, I'd go with the Tavor.

Only experiences I've had that differs from PBR's - both my Tavor and RFB have been close to 100% reliable. And, while the RFB trigger is really nice, I don't think the Tavor's trigger is all that bad, once you get used to it...
Click to expand...

good to hear more solid feedback, thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom