View Full Version : Tavor, FS200 or Aug?
I rarely post these types of threads and do know the general view towards them here at M4; however there wasn't a clear thread that offered reviews compiled into one source, so I thought it might be worthwhile (mods feel free to correct that :o )
Anyway, I have some spare coin kinda burning right now and have my AR/AK/etc bases covered and would like to branch out into the world of bullpups - so what say the actual users here on the board? I would love to hear specifics, I am pretty well versed in the pros and cons for each; but in a multitude of counsel there is wisdom.
Thanks in advance.
I've shot the Tavor and own a AUG and FS2000. I don't have any plans to get a Tavor.
Some general observations about the three bullpups:
CHs-
The CH on all three is in the right location, but I'm concerned that if the Tavor rifle is dropped on the left side you might break it. The FS2000 and AUG solve this by using folding CHs, which does add complexity. The Tavor is also lacking a FA function, which the AUG and FS have.
Mag release location-
The Tavor has the mag release placed for fast activation but I'm concerned that it could be snagged or otherwise activated. The AUG's mag release is decently shielded but requires some manipulation to reach. The FS2000's mag release is darn near perfect, forward of the mag, well shielded, and easy to actuate by either hand.
Feel-
The AUG is slim, heavy and well balanced, kinda like dating a gymnast. The FS2000 is bulky but not dense. Almost like water wings. The Tavor is somewhere in the middle, not a solid feeling as the AUG but more svelte than the FS2000.
Operating systems-
FS2000 and AUG both use short stroke pistons, Tavor is long stroke. I'm fine with either. I do like that the FS2000 and AUG both have field adjustable gas regulators, so you can blow more gas into the action if the rifle is fouled or with weak ammo. The Tavor doesn't. From a design standpoint all three are very well thought out small arms. Field stripping is easy, with the Tavor having fewer small parts to lose.
Ambidextrous use:
The FS2000 is the only rifle that has ambi ejection, a centrally placed safety and mag release. It shares with the AUG the issue of not being able to swap CH locations. Both the AUG and Tavor are lefty friendly in that they can be swapped to right side ejection, but for shooting off your weak shoulder you're going to have some issues.
TLDR version:
There are advantages and disadvantages to all three, just like very other machine designed by men .
H
JBecker 72
09-16-13, 15:59
The AUG. Why? Because Die Hard!
http://www.avoision.com/portnoy/images/2011/january/SteyrAUG_DieHard.jpg
On a more serious note I recently handled one of them at my local store and it was nice. It was one of the new ones with the flat top upper and the extended rail. Not cheap though.
MountainRaven
09-16-13, 16:32
Having owned and shot all three, the only one I would (and likely will) own again is the Tavor. It's just a little bit better thought out than the AUG and both are better thought out than the FS2000 (probably because one was designed by bored engineers while the other two were designed with direct input from actual end-users).
I have shot the Tavor and the FS2000. I have only ever handled the AUG and never fired it. With that said, I pick the Tavor. The FNS2000 didn't wow me in the slightest.
Gutshot John
09-16-13, 17:38
Bullpups completely underwhelm me, but if someone said this is the only gun you can own...full ambidextrous capability means the FS2000 is the only viable choice...at least for me.
Thank you for the responses so far; as I said in the OP this certainly isn't to be considered a "go to" for me - or at least not yet.
I already have my AR bases covered (x8) and have quite a few AK's etc; I just have some extra cash and wanted something a bit different.
My pros for each so far -
FS2000: ambidexterity, ejection system
AUG: sleek, modular barrels, proven design
Tavor: the future (?), modular barrels coming, availability of future parts
Cons -
FS2000: bulky, only takes GI mags
AUG: ejection system
Tavor: ejection system
Hmmm .....
I owned two FS2000s and fired maybe 1000 rounds combined--cheap commercial, NATO surplus, expensive commercial from 55 to 69 grains--with no failures at all. I liked the FS2000 a lot--I would've liked to keep both if I could've afforded it. Things I liked about it:
Maybe more accurate than the Tavor (2 MOA vs. 2.75 or 3MOA for the Tavor)
Very ergonomic and comfortable to hold
Very well-balanced
Easy field stripping (except for the bolt--that was tricky!)
100% reliable
Trigger reset was short, and once you were passed the heavy first stage, very crisp
Ejected rounds just popped out the front and made a tidy pile at the range
Slightly raised optic rail meant that low mounts could be used for optics (see here (http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b17/Master-G/_MG_7828_zps57ca748c.jpg))
And, to be honest, it was a real attention-getter at the range.
Things I didn't like:
No last shot hold open due to forward ejection
First stage of trigger pull was quite heavy and a little creepy
Lack of drop free mags (although the deal is that the magwell is designed to keep out dirt)
Snappier recoil than the Tavor (of course, it's a 5.56 so it's not bad!)
The charging handle seemed a little flimsy
Hard as heck to sell
I've fired maybe 400 rounds through my Tavor since I bought it--same mix of ammo as the FS2000 and no issues at all with either Lancer or LAR mags. Things I like about the Tavor:
The trigger is close to the feel of a factory AR trigger, just a bit heavier
Smoother, straight back recoil impulse
Polymer mags can be used
Mags drop free
AR-like safety
Last shot hold open
Things I don't like as much about the Tavor:
Not quite as comfortable to hold as the FS2000
A little less accurate
Low optic rail means that even high optic mounts seem a little low (to me at least). Check out the difference on my RMR mount here (http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b17/Master-G/_MG_9058_zpsc52d5c58.jpg) compared with the FS2000
Can't comment on the AUG--they're prohibited by name here and I only fired one once in the late 1980s.
The AUG is sleek but heavy. It's a very conservative design that's well made. For example, the receiver is aluminum but every wear point is steel. The barrel and bolt lock into a steel trunion in the rear. There is another steel trunnion in the front to support the barrel and additional steel inserts for the right op rod, CH and barrel retention mechanism. The op rods themselves run in steel sleeves that are press fit into the receiver.
I think the design brief for F2000 was more 'design a light weight rifle that requires no changes to shoot left or right handed and is well sealed against outside debris.' Is the AUG more robustly built than the FS2000? Sure, but the AUG pays a weight penalty for that.
The Tavor borrows a lot from other previous designs. I'm not fond of the Tavor's lack of a FA* and that it doesn't have a adjustable gas regulator. OTOH, the Israeli's have been in a few fights since 1947 and aren't known for screwing around.
H
*The Uzi doesn't have a forward assist either and the Israeli's made 10 million of them.
H
AUG with a standard stock (non nato), you don't expect your AK to take AR mags.
Interchangeable barrels really does it for me.
SilverBullet432
09-16-13, 23:26
AUG with a standard stock (non nato), you don't expect your AK to take AR mags.
Interchangeable barrels really does it for me.
going by your usrname, im assuming you voted tavor? :D
jk, they are all great choices, with one having advantages over the other and so on. one thing i dont like about the 2k is that is seems real "plastic-y" as in, fake.
AUG with a standard stock (non nato), you don't expect your AK to take AR mags.
Interchangeable barrels really does it for me.
Agreed. I would get both the standard A3 and NATO stocks. It is nice to have the option of using AR mags.
To the OP, I own an AUG A3 with standard A3 stock, USR turned AUG A2 with NATO stock, and a FS2000. I would pick the AUG over the FS ten times out of ten. My FS is simply an interesting reference piece.
I have no experience with the Tavor, but have a friend who has become a very big fan. Honestly, unless we could buy the x95 with its more ergonomic mag release, I just don't see that the Tavor does anything better than my AUGs.
The more I shoot my Tavor the more I like my Tavor. It will become the 5.56 rifle for my company in any future expansion.
going by your usrname, im assuming you voted tavor? :D
jk, they are all great choices, with one having advantages over the other and so on. one thing i dont like about the 2k is that is seems real "plastic-y" as in, fake.
The limited access to the chamber is what drives me nuts. I can't imagine having to do a malfunction drill with that thing.
Out of the 3, the Tavor gets my vote. Saw one at my lgs and was surprised how short it really was.
The FS2000 looks like poop to me lol
BoringGuy45
09-17-13, 23:34
I've never shot any of them, but I've got to handle all three. I found the Tavor the most comfortable. Bullpups all have pretty crappy triggers, but I found the Tavor to also have the cleanest (least mushy) feeling of the bunch. I still like the feeling of a good AR over it any day, but for a bullpup, it's not bad.
The limited access to the chamber is what drives me nuts. I can't imagine having to do a malfunction drill with that thing.
It's actually not that bad. The only malfunctions I've ever had with my FS2000 was doublefeeds induced by not having the mag fully seated. Once I got the knack of really tugging hard on the mag to make sure it's seated I haven't had additional malfunctions. Ever.
For the doublefeed the first indication is dead trigger. If you pull back on the CH at that point you find it comes freely back about 3" and then stops at the op rod. Stop, realize you have a doublefeed, and don't just yank on the CH like a spastic monkey, you'll just make the stoppage worse. Instead, strip the mag out and then run the CH a couple times or until the rounds drop out the magwell. Insert a new mag, run the CH one last time, and you're GTG.
If you did have a really bad stoppage you can always split the FS2000 right behind the chamber, giving you even better access than an AR or even an AK.
H
From what I have seen the Tavor is the best Bullpup there is on the market today by far, I wouldn't mind having one. The Aug is underwhelming:bad: . Although for the money I would first take any flavor of the quality AR family dollar wise. I really am impress with the Tavor though the more I learn about it the more impressed I am.Extra$$$ burning a hole in the pocket ???? Donate some to a pro gun cause.
Though I like the idea of the FS2000, if I was to buy just one it would be the Tavor.
A few reasons for that, mostly already mentioned. Less bulky on the tavor, I dislike the forward ejection tube of the FS2000 & its bolt being so enclosed. I love FN, don't get me wrong, and I would love a FS2000, but if you offered both to me for free, tavor in FDE it would be!
From what I have seen the Tavor is the best Bullpup there is on the market today by far, I wouldn't mind having one. The Aug is underwhelming:bad: . Although for the money I would first take any flavor of the quality AR family dollar wise. I really am impress with the Tavor though the more I learn about it the more impressed I am.Extra$$$ burning a hole in the pocket ???? Donate some to a pro gun cause.
Have you ever fired an AUG? What about the AUG is underwhelming?
Have you ever fired an AUG? What about the AUG is underwhelming?
Around here the major problem with the AUG seems to be that it's not an AR.
The AUG (and every other rifle) is a compromise. The short stroke gas piston, dual op rods, and extensive use of steel carry a weight penalty. You either think these things are worth it or not.
H
Thanks for all the input, I am VERY pleased with my purchase and was able to put 300 flawless rounds through it today.
http://i44.tinypic.com/2m85xl5.jpg
The ammo used was mostly XM193, with some M855 and a bit of Wolf (just to see how it would cycle); the hotter 5.56 definitely ejects much more forward than the .223, but I still had no issues with firing from the support side. Shoulder transitions and CQB movement really seem to be a breeze with a bullpup; I am excited to continue my training and will likely incorporate it into my home defense scenario. Now I need to slap an AAC Blackout 51T on it.
Very nice! What will you be using for sighting equipment?
Have you ever fired an AUG? What about the AUG is underwhelming?
The just don't do much for me when I handled one. that was when they first came on the market 1990s?
Very nice! What will you be using for sighting equipment?
I have a PM in to a member here for a Comp M2, at the range yesterday it was just the BUS.
I have a PM in to a member here for a Comp M2, at the range yesterday it was just the BUS.
Sounds like a good choice. I like a 1X RDS on my short rifles...I had a CompM4S on my first Tavor and a Trijicon RMR on my current one.
Around here the major problem with the AUG seems to be that it's not an AR.
Usually the case.
The AUG (and every other rifle) is a compromise. The short stroke gas piston, dual op rods, and extensive use of steel carry a weight penalty. You either think these things are worth it or not.
H
At just under 1 1/2 lbs. difference I don't think the weight penalty is very significant. Not that I disagree with your overall point or anything.
http://imageshack.us/a/img69/2205/av3i.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img407/702/35ex.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img692/9017/o6gt.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img23/3995/kwi8.jpg
Gutshot John
09-21-13, 07:25
I handled a Tavor in my LGS the other day, and I was more impressed than I thought I would be. I got to compare it to an AUG right next to it.
It's feels like a heavy bitch compared to the AR, but most of the weight is in the rear so I don't know if that will be an issue until I get to shoot one.
I'm a bit confused as to the choice of a long-stroke system as I find them to be heavier with stiffer recoil, but again I don't know until I get to shoot one.
Trigger was really heavy, but definitely better than most bullpups I've fired.
One of my bigger complaints with the bullpup design is the difficulty in transitioning to weak side, but they seem to have addressed it so long as I keep a fairly squared stance, it seems possible to shoot weak-side but again until I shoot it...
All in all I've been a strong critic of bullpups, but the Tavor put them back on my radar. I'm not saying I'm sold, just that that I'm willing to reconsider the concept if the execution is there.
Gutshot John
09-21-13, 09:16
I do have one question for bullpup aficionados that hasn't been addressed at all in this thread (maybe others).
What are you losing in terms of accuracy and precision shooting?
Would love to see some groups compared to other bullpups or ARs.
I do have one question for bullpup aficionados that hasn't been addressed at all in this thread (maybe others).
What are you losing in terms of accuracy and precision shooting?
Would love to see some groups compared to other bullpups or ARs.
With PMC (not the best but it's what I have stashed) I'm getting around 1.5MOA with the 16" barreled AUG. Out of the AR (16" non-free float) I can get 1.1-1.25MOA.
It'll be interesting to see what performance 20 and 24" barrels give when they become available.
H
I do have one question for bullpup aficionados that hasn't been addressed at all in this thread (maybe others).
What are you losing in terms of accuracy and precision shooting?
Would love to see some groups compared to other bullpups or ARs.
My 18.5" Tavor will shoot between 2.75 MOA and 3 MOA using an RMR. I tested Federal 55 gr, Federal 62 gr and Lapua 69 gr. Federal 62 grain was the most accurate surprisingly. With similar ammunition I was getting 2 MOA to 2.5 MOA with my FS2000, also equipped with an RMR. Best I could do with my BCM 16.5" AR15 with a 3X ACOG was around 1.5 MOA. All testing was done at 100m--I've shot out to 300m but don't have group sizes.
I do have one question for bullpup aficionados that hasn't been addressed at all in this thread (maybe others).
What are you losing in terms of accuracy and precision shooting?
Would love to see some groups compared to other bullpups or ARs.
Most people suck with a bullpup because they never learn the trigger (same reason I still sorta suck with Glocks).
Just as the guy with the 700 hunting rifle with a glass rod trigger will talk about how crappy AR and FAL triggers are, the guys with ARs will complain about HK and AK triggers and save special criticism for AUG and other bullpup systems with linkage triggers.
Now no matter how expert you become with an AUG, typically it won't outshoot an AR, but neither will an AK, FAL or HK in most cases.
It has been my experience that AR systems are generally the most accurate of all military small arms. Even "sniper" versions of the HK, FAL, AUG and AK have a hard time keeping up with a decent AR rifle.
The only exception to the general rule I've found are true SIG rifles and I have been told Valmets perform similarly (but I have no firsthand experience).
I shot an AUG a few weeks back, and have a question for those with more trigger time on it.
During recoil, it felt almost like the gun rotated or twisted slightly in my shoulder, before settling back. Not like an AR or G3, where recoil is more straight to the rear.
Is this something that sounds familiar at all?
I shot an AUG a few weeks back, and have a question for those with more trigger time on it.
During recoil, it felt almost like the gun rotated or twisted slightly in my shoulder, before settling back. Not like an AR or G3, where recoil is more straight to the rear.
Is this something that sounds familiar at all?
Interesting. I actually find my AUGs to recoil straight back with almost no muzzle rise.
BoringGuy45
09-25-13, 00:19
Hypothetically speaking, let's say new trials for the next service rifle were being held and the military was seriously considering adopting a bullpup design, does anyone think that any of these three designs would be considered? Or would the fact that none of these are American designs make them DOA?
I think the the Tavor has a huge advantage with the use of ploymer mags. I really want to like the fs2000, but about 90% of my mags are pmags.
Hypothetically speaking, let's say new trials for the next service rifle were being held and the military was seriously considering adopting a bullpup design, does anyone think that any of these three designs would be considered? Or would the fact that none of these are American designs make them DOA?
Neither the M240, M249, or M9 pistol are American designs either.
H
MountainRaven
09-25-13, 09:01
Hypothetically speaking, let's say new trials for the next service rifle were being held and the military was seriously considering adopting a bullpup design, does anyone think that any of these three designs would be considered? Or would the fact that none of these are American designs make them DOA?
All the magazines already in inventory, including G2 Pmags work with only one of these rifles.
And that rifle would stand the best chance.
Personally, I don't think any of them would make it, regardless of their positive or negative attributes because we're talking about an extremely conservative military:
A military that saw the benefits of breach-loading percussion firearms, and even designed a pretty good one, and then decided to stick with muzzle-loaders.
That saw the rise of metallic self-contained ammunition and decided to take the muzzle-loaders and adapt them, instead of adopting one of the new firearms designed for it or even one of the breach-loaders adapted for it.
That invaded Cuba, an island defended by Spanish soldiers armed with machine guns and repeating bolt-action rifles chambered in a "small caliber" "high velocity" cartridge, while still issuing those same adapted muzzle-loaders to the majority of their troops. Still using blackpowder ammunition, even.
That when they finally did adopt a service-wide rifle fed by stripper clip, it had to have a magazine cut-off, with the ammunition in the magazine being "only for emergencies" and the rifle being single loaded the rest of the time.
That, while the rest of the world was coming up with new, select-fire rifles in intermediate cartridges with pistol grips... went with the same exact thing they had been using before, except now with a detachable box magazine.
And then had to have the M16 forced down its throat by the DoD nearly fifty years ago; And has been unceasingly seeking to replace it ever since.
All the magazines already in inventory, including G2 Pmags work with only one of these rifles.
And that rifle would stand the best chance.
Yeah, the AUG with the NATO stock is pretty nice but I don't think the Army would adopt it*.
There just isn't funding for replacing the M16 and its variants. Any alternative that's still chambered in 556 NATO doesn't offer the 'quantum leap in effectiveness' that the Army is demanding.
Telescoped or caseless cartridges would offer that edge, but at current funding levels I'm not holding my breath.
H
*Just kidding, I really did understand what you meant.
I do have one question for bullpup aficionados that hasn't been addressed at all in this thread (maybe others).
What are you losing in terms of accuracy and precision shooting?
Would love to see some groups compared to other bullpups or ARs.
I'm getting pretty good results out of the box. I wrote quick note on my blog, which has pictures of my groups that I used to zero my Tavor. Since I wrote my blog (http://www.dukesdefenseworld.com/uploads/3/1/4/7/3147383/tavor_sept-2013.pdf) last week, I've had my gun fully converted to left hand primary controls. Should be much easier to run and gun now. Tim over at Military Arms Channel has about the best reviews available. The more I handle the Tavor, the more I like it. Especially for left hand controls. Will it ever replace my MK-18... Maybe.
http://www.dukesdefenseworld.com/uploads/3/1/4/7/3147383/tavor_sept-2013.pdf
This was a three shot group I made to reconfirm zero (only three shots I know :p), using the 64 grain Speer Gold Dots at 25 yards -
http://i41.tinypic.com/n2d1c1.jpg
* the other holes visable were from previous groups, but all were pretty much touching.
Here is my current set-up -
http://i40.tinypic.com/2hmj7ud.jpg
Since starting the thread, I have roughly 500 flawless rounds through it.
As both an AUG/A3 owner and an IWI Tavor owner, in my opinion the Tavor is a much better weapon system. The AUG was great but the trigger was odd and I never got used to it. Yes, there are fixes for that but after getting the AUG it just didn't measure up. I sold it after having it for just a few months. I did like the AUG quick change barrel but with nothing to change it over to, it was pointless.
My Tavor has been nothing but perfect. After I removed the trigger reset spring, the trigger has been great. I see no reason to spend anymore money for an aftermarket trigger. My Tavor now uses an ELCAN SpecterDR sight and is the perfect weapon. I love it and don't miss the AUG at all. It's accurate, easy to clean and handle.
My backup rifle is a new black LWRCI M6IC. It uses a T1 optic. I feel that I now have the best of both worlds in those two rifles. My next rifle purchase will be a DTA SRS-A1 Covert. It will be used as my hunting/precision rifle with .308, .300WM and possibly the .338LM conversions. I've cut my collection down to these and each has a purpose.
SamM
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.