Originally Posted by
gunf1ghter
I'm not the one griping that something doesn't perform in a way it was never designed to perform.
X95 Pros;
1. Highly compact but not NFA regulated. With slim butt pad and pinned muzzle brake or flash hider is only 27.5" long total length.
2. Rear weight bullpup design results in easier one handed operation, faster to get on target in some situations, etc.
2. Piston driven system is very reliable, rarely needs cleaning.
3. 2-3 MOA accurate @ 100 yards with factory ammunition.
4. Can be converted to a variety of calibers including 9mm, 300BLK and soon 7.62x54 and 5.45x39.
X95 Cons;
1. Expensive.
2. Bullpup design... requires ambi conversion for lefties, etc.
3. "only" 2-3 MOA accurate @ 100 yards with factory ammunition. Under rapid sustained fire some copies have been observed to "string" shots as far as 6-9 MOA from point of aim.
4. Heavy.
5. Parts are proprietary/expensive.
Most semi rifle under sustained rapid use will open up a lot.
That's a moot point. You think when a military guy is getting fired at and he or she is shooting backing are doing 4moa groups?
Military guidelines of grouping is what 2 to 4 if I'm not mistaken.
Basically a tavor is pretty much an exact copy of the military version with obviously some changes.
The MDR is not a battle rifle and is not made for the military.
They wanted their rifles to be bench, paper target. And it's nothing wrong with that.
I'm sure the tavor 7 will be an improvement for accuracy since people don't get what the tavor was meant to be for in the first place.
It seems the tavor 7 is going to be free floated barrel.
Depending on the success, who knows this could be future designs of the next tavors/x95.
If you get the aftermarket trigger and lighting bow, match trigger and do your part, it will be a 1moa rifle.
But I do agree the tavor is on the expensive side. But so will the 556 MDR.
Sent from my ZTE A2017U using Tapatalk
#ifyourhandtouchesmetal,I swearbymyprettyfloralbonnet,I willendyou
Bookmarks