View Full Version : A hands on review of the IWI X95 micro tavor
I have wanted to write this post for quite some time and am finally just getting around to it. I was very excited last year when I began to see the IWI Tavor make it to the US, I have always been interested in new weapons technology and was excited to get some hands on time with the weapon that has been phasing out the M4/M16 family rifles in service in Israel. Fast forward 1 year, and I currently am carrying the X95 micro Tavor as my issued weapon and never got a chance to even get my hands on the full size counter part in the US before leaving for the middle east but now for the review;
Reliability: 5/10
Comfort and Ergonomics: 2/10
Craftsmanship: 2/10
Accuracy: 6/10
Overal rating: 4/10
Reliability: I have found that GENERALLY for the most part my Tavor will go bang when I need it to. However, it gets really really dirty, really really fast. The design of the bolt carrier group I think is a absolute failure and that there are a lot of areas that seem to accumulate lots of carbon during fairly short range visits and are almost impossible to clean appropriately. I have found that my Tavor with various ammunition is extremely sensitive to fouling and will begin to malfunction very quickly. After about 200 rounds or so I will begin to experience failures multiple times per magazine ranging from double feeds to failure to extract and culminating in short stroking. This is a HUGE negative and something that even with almost daily cleaning has left me skeptical of my weapon. I was unable to take any internal photos at this time but will post some later to highlight the areas I am the most concerned with.
Comfort and Ergonomics: I have found the X95 to be very uncomfortable to carry daily. I eat, sleep, and shower with this weapon and am not very pleased with my sling mounting options, I have to resort to the Israeli method of tying paracord loops through the different holes and mounting points molded into the body. My only real option is a two point sling mounted through the hole in the stock portion of the body and a sling mount on the left side. What bothers me the most about this set up is even with my sling tightened as far down as it will go I find it too long for my liking and it seems that in hands free maneuvers my barrel will no matter what find its way to getting stuck inside my knee pad making it impossible for me to run due to the height it hangs at. The second negative is the sling loop is plastic and I have seem a very large number of them break clean off the weapon after very little abuse. I found the X95 to be rather uncomfortable to shoot in the prone, I really miss having the adjustable stock of an M4 and just can't seem to get comfortable. The extremely short front end leaves no room for your hands and the charging handle will end up in the center of your palm unless you use a palm up supporting position (which the Israelis do teach) but if you are one that is used to a thumb over bore grip or a more aggressive grip you will find the X95 extremely uncomfortable. I also have found that the positioning of the bolt catch on the bottom of the gun to the rear renders it useless in the prone as you essentially have to rest your hand on it causing it to not function. In the standing position the rifle shoulders fine and didn't seem to bother me too much but I will say that in day to day use it is noticeably more heavy than my previous M4 with a similar optic. The last item on my comfort list is the trigger, it is a very heavy and awkward trigger pull leaving much to be desired.
Craftsmanship: I will be brief and just say that I am simply disappointed in the final product from IWI. The back up irons are plastic (depending on variation the rear may be metal) and not only is my front sight snapped clean off (plastic with no kind of metal internal support or strengthening) but the front BUIS also does not seem to lay truly flat with the rail when folded if present. The bottom rail of the hand guard is not very stable and with a vertical grip mounted to it play in the rail and bottom of the weapon are very noticeable.
Accuracy: In zeroing this rifle on a 25m target I was getting sub 1 CM 5 shot groups and have been able to comfortably touch at 300 meters so I will say I was quite surprised with what I was able to achieve with the 13" bbl.
Final thoughts, I really wish I carried an M4 but shall make the best of my time with the X95 and hope to see in the future IWI re think some of their design features and improve this system to better equip the IDF soldiers carrying and working with it daily. Below are a few pics I snapped quickly of my weapon to highlight some of what I wrote about.
http://imageshack.us/a/img849/3826/cusy.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img21/7975/rht1.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img706/6882/lfj9.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img27/3356/us0m.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img849/556/i296.jpg
**An update, I am no longer carrying this particular rifle and have been issued a slightly different variation that is actually worse and will be including photos and an updated review on this new model soon.
Thanks for taking the time to make that detailed review. I am sorry to hear that it is so dismal...
Nice write up and thank you for your insight as the likelihood of the US ever getting these is very low. (Okay, who am I kidding. We will never see these over here.) It would seem as though it was designed by one person for their particular taste and then given some crappy BUS just because it was a requirement to have some. If there is a way to detail strip the BCG, maybe you can try some Fireclean on it to keep the carbon build up to a minimum and make it easier to wipe off. I know it's reaching, but it could be worth a try. I don't even own the stuff, but have heard good things about it on here.
As far as the sling goes, is there any way to attach a smaller single point sling? I know it won't help slinging it across the back, but it may keep it off your kneepad. I do like the idea of this PDW as it lends itself to what magpul was teasing us with..... And wish someone would make into a reality here in the states.
Esquire, in other forum
http://www.lightfighter.net/topic/a-hands-on-review-of-the-iwi-x95-micro-tavor
you gave it this rating:
Reliability: 8/10 (compared to 5 here)
Comfort and Ergonomics: 2/10
Craftsmanship: 2/10
Accuracy: 6/10
Overal rating: 4/10
Which one is correct?
TiroFijo, read down a few comments and I had amended that rating, I am not a paid user on LF so I can't edit my original post. I had originally given it an 8/10 because with daily maintenance and constant attention it DOES go bang BUT after more thought and discussion there, the fact that I have to invest so much time and energy into my duty weapon just in hopes it can shoot through the load out of mags I carry is unacceptable. So the score was lowered to a 5.
Thanks for the answer :)
I've read on the other forum that you were rethinking your original rating, but missed your downgrading it to 5 or 6. This reduction is rather drastic, but cleaning every 200 rounds is unthinkable for a combat carbine. Do other people have the same problems?
May I ask how long have you been in the IDF?
IWI US said that they were trying to get a US version of the X95 by 2015.
TiroFijo, yes other guys in my unit have had similar issues, I don't want to dive into my service on the forums, just talk strictly about the guns. I just snapped pics of my current configuration and hope to post them later this weekend. Another note, I have noticed that when I chamber rounds my firing pin leaves a distinct dimple on the primer and am curious if this may cause a ND. I never noticed until this past week when I had a double feed and looked at the rounds after I cleared the malfunction. Something to keep an eye on.
Serious Account
09-26-13, 17:46
Very interesting. Thanks for the post and pics.
I'm surprise and disappointed. I always thought that they tested the hell out of the Tavor/X95 before the IDF adopted it?
Another note, I have noticed that when I chamber rounds my firing pin leaves a distinct dimple on the primer and am curious if this may cause a ND. I never noticed until this past week when I had a double feed and looked at the rounds after I cleared the malfunction.
This is common on the AR platform as well. I've had more than one chambered round have a faint dimple on it. I usually chalked that up as a good mission though. ;) Typically meant I didn't have to use it.
If we could only get the worlds military and rebel forces to go back to bolt action rifles life would be simpler!:help:
Thank you for the detailed and insightful review. After building what sounds like a decent degree of familiarity with the M4, what has your experience been with loading and the placement of the magazine well in the stock? I am interested in your thoughts on the ergonomics.
To address everyone, allegedly they did test the hell out of these. But honestly I just feel like everyone here in Israel doesn't quite "get it" and so I feel like their tests were probably inferior to what we serious shooters may consider sufficient. I got into the shooting world as an AK guy, made the jump into M4 and trained up as much as I could as a civilian in the US on the M4 and really love the platform. Switching to a bullpup has been a real wild ride. I am finally comfortable with it but I hate shooting this rifle in prone due to the mag placement. Also reloads in the prone are a serious pain. I was told most of the problems we are having were not/are not present in the full size tavor but was told the micro is more affordable so they switched to the micro to be able to outfit all of our infantry with them. I personally don't like nor understand why we are using 13" bbl weapons for infantry. I can touch at 300 with one of these but I would say the M4 is far superior. And on the mark on the primer topic, I guess I just never really looked when shooting at home, never had a need to. When I would have malfunctions I always checked the brass and may have just not had that happen to me before. But I was shocked at the size of the dimple left on the rounds from this past week.
I feel like the testing is still continuing because I constantly see guys from other divisions carrying around slightly different tavors with minor differences. I feel like they are still evolving.
Very interesting. Thanks for the post and pics.
I'm surprise and disappointed. I always thought that they tested the hell out of the Tavor/X95 before the IDF adopted it?
I've been wanting a tavor for years. I would imagine the magazine is not optimally designed for prone positions. I'm still going to get one soon, just sad to hear the micro is not all it is hyped up to be(like most things). I fired one of the 16" versions last week, and loved it. Hopefully one day they'll let me use something besides an AR for a patrol rifle.
I've never gotten to even handle the full size Tavor but friends of mine from earlier drafts that got to either train or work for a short period with them before switching over really liked them alot. My issue is I really like shooting in prone with an M4 using the mag and my elbows to create a tripod effect. The magazine being located in the rear and there being essentially 0 real estate for my hands I have yet to truly get comfortable shooting the micro in the prone and have gotten nowhere near the accuracy I was getting with an M4.
Charlie Don't Surf
09-27-13, 10:26
TiroFijo, read down a few comments and I had amended that rating, I am not a paid user on LF so I can't edit my original post. I had originally given it an 8/10 because with daily maintenance and constant attention it DOES go bang BUT after more thought and discussion there, the fact that I have to invest so much time and energy into my duty weapon just in hopes it can shoot through the load out of mags I carry is unacceptable. So the score was lowered to a 5.
Are these reliability issues the same for the full sized Tavor or exclusive to the X95?
Esquire what age were you when you made aliyah?
From what I've been told this is a X95 issue, all my friends that had full size experience didn't have these issues.
Are these reliability issues the same for the full sized Tavor or exclusive to the X95?
Boy, that is a really negative review as I see it. The other TAVOR reviews I have read had negative opinions based on "preferences"... yet provided seemingly factual assessment of flawless function, finding the rifle well made, and concluding that it was well designed. This seems to shed some doubt on those reviews.
I am concerned to read a negative review that comes from field use.
As stated, is this negative result specific to the SBR?
The X95 and the full size seem to be constructed differently. My new X95 has lots of play between the parts.
Dave James
09-27-13, 14:29
Esquire. Whats the answer to Yoni's question???
Dave I sent Yoni a PM, that has no relevance to my gun review and I prefer to not dive into my personal life and keep this review to the gun. I have been issued 2 different X95s throughout my service so far, and I have had the above experience and so have other guys in my unit. Plain and simple I don't go around asking questions about your citizenship and I don't think that has anything to do with gun reviews.
Esquire. Whats the answer to Yoni's question???
Dave,
Esquire is kosher.
He is a good lad for doing what he is doing in terms of his service in the IDF.
I find his report to be alarming and want to work with people I know at IWI in Israel, to get the problem fixed.
Good review Esquire and thanks for highlighting the problems with the X95 Micro Tavor. I hope the IDF fix the problems with the X95 Micro Tavor you mentioned here. I'm just wondering if anyone knows whether the regular Tavor is tested to NATO AC/225 standards (ie. does it involve tropical and cold weather testing)?
RogerinTPA
09-27-13, 21:20
I am disappointed in your findings as I had high hopes for these new carbines. I hope command is receiving yours and others inputs seriously enough to get these bugs worked out. I once entertained the thought of obtaining a Tavor for the past few months. After shooting a few mags through one for fam fire and after spending years with our carbines, the manual of arms/manipulations is just way too different for me to be at the level of comfort I am with my AR carbines without a substantial amount of trigger time. I think I'll stick with my carbines. Thanks for sharing your input and pics.
After about 200 rounds or so I will begin to experience failures multiple times per magazine ranging from double feeds to failure to extract and culminating in short stroking
Double feeds - Have you checked your magazines?
Failure to extract - Have you checked extractor and extractor spring.
What makes you think it is short stroking?
My only real option is a two point sling mounted through the hole in the stock portion of the body and a sling mount on the left side.
There is a sling loop behind the flash hider also.
Ther are many affordable rail mounted sling loops.
If you need one I can hook you up.
I have had short stroking issues where you get a bang, then a click on an empty chamber, yet you have a full mag. My rifle internals appear in good order and I have inspected them thoroughly. And I do number my magazines to watch for these things but as far as the double feed issues go its been scattered throughout all the magazines I carry.
Sling mounting wise my current X95 does not have the flash hider sling loop mount and I chose in the past not to mount my sling off of my bbl. Sling mounting wise I more so miss the convenience of QD attachment points on slings/rail mounted QD sockets etc. But for how we run slings here the options work, I just would rather a different system.
alvincullumyork
09-28-13, 16:54
This is common on the AR platform as well. I've had more than one chambered round have a faint dimple on it. I usually chalked that up as a good mission though. ;) Typically meant I didn't have to use it.
This happens because the firing pin is not spring loaded. Every time you chamber a round the momentum of the firing pin being carried forward in the BCG makes it slide forward into the primer. This doesn't have enough momentum to fire but if the same round is repeatedly chambered it can damage the primer and cause the round not to go bang when the trigger is pulled. Some organizations have policies regulating chambered rounds to training only because of this.
TiroFijo, yes other guys in my unit have had similar issues, I don't want to dive into my service on the forums, just talk strictly about the guns. I just snapped pics of my current configuration and hope to post them later this weekend. Another note, I have noticed that when I chamber rounds my firing pin leaves a distinct dimple on the primer and am curious if this may cause a ND. I never noticed until this past week when I had a double feed and looked at the rounds after I cleared the malfunction. Something to keep an eye on.
I am guessing the X95 has a free floating firing pin as well.
BoringGuy45
09-28-13, 23:51
Esquire, do you see these problems as fixable, or is the X95 pretty much a bust? In your opinion, would the IDF do better by going back to the M4 or to the regular Tavor or CTAR?
Esquire,
A couple of ideas you might try:
1. Observe a buddy's ejection port while he's firing and note whether or not the bolt carrier's rearward movement looks sluggish and how far and what direction the brass is being ejected and compare that to a non-malfunctioning weapon.
2. Try loading several mags for said buddy with only one round in each. If it's short stroking, you'll see that the bolt assembly isn't activating the bolt catch reliably.
If the carrier is moving fast and it's locking back on single-round mags, you might actually have a weapon that's overgassed, which might explain the excess fouling.
Are you using a suppressor or no?
A question about the double feeds: Are you getting a dead trigger and just looking in and finding a double feed, or are you possibly cycling the bolt handle, double feeding a round into an unnoticed unejected case or unfired round?
I hope IWI gets things figured out. Stay safe.
Accuracy: 6/10
...
Accuracy: In zeroing this rifle on a 25m target I was getting sub 1 CM 5 shot groups and have been able to comfortably touch at 300 meters so I will say I was quite surprised with what I was able to achieve with the 13" bbl.
I understand the other criticisms, but (if I understand correctly) 1.5MOA and only a "6/10" in accuracy?
Sorry to hear about your experience with the X95.
Aries144's trouble shooting advice is spot on.
It also would be nice to determine if the failures to feed occur more or less frequently from fully clean and as round count after cleaning goes up. It also would be interesting to determine if the feeding is dependent upon the kind of mag being used.
IWI supplied a polymer mag with a window with the Tavor which I was not that impressed with.
I have been shooting the full size Tavor semi auto and it has been extremely reliable and has not had problems with premature fouling, even after 800 rds without cleaning. Just checked a Tavor bolt group which did 400 + rds this weekend without cleaning and there is no fouling build up visible.
As I understand it, the Tavor bolt group is identical to the x95 as is the location of the gas port on the barrel.
Since the gas port has not been relocated, the physical timing of the opening of the action should not be radically different, but the size of the port has probably been increased to increase gas flow and the gas pressure on the gas piston may be removed sooner due to the shorter barrel.
It is also possible that a very large increase on gas port size has altered flow rates in the gas system to very rapidly apply a high degree of opening impulse to the bolt group while the barrel and chamber are still pressurized and the case is tightly expanded against the chamber, adding extraction drag and locking the case in place, which is similar to what was happening with the Colt M-4.
In the M-4, it created a very violent extraction but the dynamics are different in a Tavor style gas piston gun so extraction failures are possible in this case.
Another issue beyond your control is the particular powder type used. The powder in the ammo is probably the same as used for longer barrels and a faster burning powder is generally desirable for shorter barrels.
Due to the altered pressure cycle and altered gas flow rate, more powder residue can be deposited in the action due to unburned or partially burned powder in the gas system.
If this is the case, the ultimate solution may be an adjustment of powder specs for cleaner burning in the short barrel version.
Thanks for the review and answers.
I saw a regular Tavor at last weekend's gun show. Its a neat rifle but I just can't get over that god-awful stock. An M4 SBR would be a better option IMO.
Thanks for the review and answers.
I saw a regular Tavor at last weekend's gun show. Its a neat rifle but I just can't get over that god-awful stock. An M4 SBR would be a better option IMO.
Anything in particular that makes you say that?
Anything in particular that makes you say that?
Its personal opinion only. I'm not knocking down the Tavor, its definitely a cool gun. I just think the stock is huge.
The same reason why some of us may think AK's are ugly and AR's are a thing of art.
My Tavor is a thing of beauty. More so for it's reliability than for it's looks. It has become my "go to" rifle and has an ELCAN SpecterDR Dual Role optic and a Docter red dot piggyback backup sight. I have purchased an LWRCI M6IC has my new backup rifle. Not a bad combo. The M6IC replaces an LMT MRP CQB that has been given to my daughter. Another great rifle.
I hate hearing bad reports on the X95. I had hoped to purchase one of these when they become available here in the US.
SamM
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.