X-95 still having accuracy issues?

[tvfreakarms]

It's not about caring, it wasn't made to be a sub moa rifle. It's a battle rifle

Sent from my ZTE A2017U using Tapatalk

[JJHNSN]

There is NO possible way of getting through to to people who are determined to judge every weapon against a bench rested precision rifle. Not worth the effort.

[tvfreakarms]

There is NO possible way of getting through to to people who are determined to judge every weapon against a bench rested precision rifle. Not worth the effort.

True.
And people will compare this to the MDR. But the MDR isn't a battle rifle.
I'm sure iwi will make it more accurate rifles with the tavor with future models.
Get a aftermarket trigger and match ammo and it will shoot probably 1moa. Depending on the shooter

Sent from my ZTE A2017U using Tapatalk

[Aries144]

Arguing that a piston driven bull-pup with a non free-floated barrel should have exactly the same accuracy as a DI free floated gun just indicates to me that you really don't quite "get it" when it comes to this kind of weapon. You don't get it because you insist that the accuracy delta proves they can't make a barrel without acknowledging AT ALL that there are inherent differences that affect accuracy which have nothing to do with the barrel.

Where's the evidence that inherent differences other than the barrel affect accuracy?

I guess what I don't get is why you seem to argue that because it's an expensive piece of equipment it needs to have the same accuracy as a weapon with a different objective (medium ranged engagements).

That's because I never stated that.

I am saying there's no reason the Tavor can't shoot more accurately. IWI either doesn't know how to make their barrel manufacturing set up do that or doesn't care enough to spend money on making changes because accuracy meets the current expectations of their buyers.

I'll also pose the question: Why can the Tavor not do it while Steyr's AUG and Desert Tech's MDR can?

There is NO possible way of getting through to to people who are determined to judge every weapon against a bench rested precision rifle.

Yeah, except no one has strawman. I mean done that.

On the contrary, I think people need to stop viewing weapons like the playdoh "rabbit" their three year old made for them. Really, the weapon makers' feelings can take it.

[gunf1ghter]

Where's the evidence that inherent differences other than the barrel affect accuracy?



That's because I never stated that.

I am saying there's no reason the Tavor can't shoot more accurately. IWI either doesn't know how to make their barrel manufacturing set up do that or doesn't care enough to spend money on making changes because accuracy meets the current expectations of their buyers.

I'll also pose the question: Why can the Tavor not do it while Steyr's AUG and Desert Tech's MDR can?


Yeah, except no one has strawman. I mean done that.

On the contrary, I think people need to stop viewing weapons like the playdoh "rabbit" their three year old made for them. Really, the weapon makers' feelings can take it.

You continue to insist that barrel differences or barrel deficiencies are the primary reasons for accuracy differences in different weapons.

So clearly you don't understand much since if you put the same barrel from a highly accurate precision bolt rifle into a DI or piston driven system it will not achieve the same accuracy. Even a cheap bolt system is typically superior to an expensive semi-auto setup.

Barrel harmonics are real. Free floating barrels for accuracy improvements must be real because the army is spending money to move their remaining M4 platform weapons to free floated versions.

Clearly IWI didn't feel that changing a proven design in order to get 2" groups at 100 yards with mil spec ammo was worth the effort since in real combat people don't shoot bench type groups and their weapons (SAR & now X95) have been used in numerous engagements since the weapon was introduced. What they seemed to think was important was compact size for urban CQB and reliability in terrible environmental conditions. X95 achieves both of those aims.

Look, you think the IWI is overpriced and inaccurate. Fine. We honestly don't really give a shit other than correcting your numerous fact-less assertions so that other people don't actually take the shit you're shoveling seriously.

Most of my training is on M4 platform weapons and semi automatic handguns. Some training with shotguns, bolt guns and some self-training done on AK pattern rifles. I am far more comfortable operating an SBR M4 than I am the X95.

So why do I own an X95?

For exactly the reasons I already indicated. Which are probably similar reasons to why others own them.

[PattonWasRight]

Part of the Tavor / X95's design principle is ease of manufacture. It's actually not that unlike an AK in that regard.

It's not a labor-intensive precision firearm. It's meant to fight in close quarters and be reliable and be able to be produced in mass quantity with minimal fuss.

[feesix]

i have had mine for 4 months and its one of my favorite guns. the spare parts thing is what concerns me but not enough to get rid of it. i have seen them nib selling locally for 1300.00 which is a good price for what it is.

[gunf1ghter]

Part of the Tavor / X95's design principle is ease of manufacture. It's actually not that unlike an AK in that regard.

It's not a labor-intensive precision firearm. It's meant to fight in close quarters and be reliable and be able to be produced in mass quantity with minimal fuss.

I agree with that. It's a firearm that should sell for $1,000 but for whatever reason commands much higher prices currently.

I have. O idea what it costs to build but can't cost much more than a colt AR costs and Uncle Sam gets those damn cheap.

[Aries144]

You continue to insist that barrel differences or barrel deficiencies are the primary reasons for accuracy differences in different weapons.

So clearly you don't understand much since if you put the same barrel from a highly accurate precision bolt rifle into a DI or piston driven system it will not achieve the same accuracy. Even a cheap bolt system is typically superior to an expensive semi-auto setup.

How much superior? Why is there an improvement? Can you answer these questions?

Barrel harmonics are real. Free floating barrels for accuracy improvements must be real because the army is spending money to move their remaining M4 platform weapons to free floated versions.

The Army must have Switched to the ACU pattern because it was superior as well. I mean, well, before they decided that it wasn't and switched to Multicam (or at least a government ripoff of Multicam). That beat it. Back when the two were first tested. Before ACU was selected.

What are barrel harmonics? How do barrel harmonics affect shot dispersion?

Look, you think the IWI is overpriced and inaccurate. Fine. We honestly don't really give a shit other than correcting your numerous fact-less assertions so that other people don't actually take the shit you're shoveling seriously.

I do?! I had no idea I thought that! I thought I was just irritated that technology and methods exist in the US to inexpensively mass produce barrels capable of consistently producing lightweight sub 2.5 MOA barrels that don't appreciably shift POI when heated by extended strings of fire, but IWI isn't using them! Thank you for tell me what I think.

[Todd.K]

I'm open to evidence that this could be the case, but until then I'm going to stick with my current understanding, which is that 99% of precision is determined by barrel attributes...

Are you familiar with the amount of work that goes into making a match M-14 pattern rifle? A match barrel is only a start.

It's not about magical barrel harmonics, it's about consistency. A design that doesn't free float the barrel can have different external pressure put on it shot to shot.