Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 58

Thread: Israel retiring the Tavor in favor of the M4

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    965
    Feedback Score
    24 (100%)
    I owned a tavor for a while. It was cool, but the cool factor disappeared quickly.

    Outside of working inside a vehicle, bullpup don't do much for me.

    Soli Deo Gloria

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,144
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by jesuvuah View Post
    I owned a tavor for a while. It was cool, but the cool factor disappeared quickly.

    Outside of working inside a vehicle, bullpup don't do much for me.

    Soli Deo Gloria
    I've never seen the attraction of the bullpup design myself.
    The truth can only offend those who live a lie.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Not in a gun friendly state
    Posts
    3,807
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Esq. View Post
    I've never seen the attraction of the bullpup design myself.
    The bullpup looks like the ultimate assault rifle on paper. Long barrel in a short package. It seems like the perfect all-in-one rifle for everything from CQB to providing sniper overwatch. It's just that reality of the drawbacks make them equal at best, if not inferior to, the conventional rifle layout. I know some companies have addressed typical bullpup problems (the X95 has a decent trigger for a bullpup, and obviously the FN F2000 has the forward ejection), but some problems, such as the awkward magazine placement and the long length of pull can't really be fixed.
    Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who do not.-Ben Franklin

    there’s some good in this world, Mr. Frodo. And it’s worth fighting for.-Samwise Gamgee

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    33,884
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Esq. View Post
    I've never seen the attraction of the bullpup design myself.
    Good bullpups are great like the AUG, clunky bullpups are clunky like the FN2000. I planned on buying a Tavor till I had one in my hands. Lots of things were just odd. I think the biggest problem was trying to lay out the features in a way common to an AR but on a bullpup and it just didn't work.
    It's hard to be a ACLU hating, philosophically Libertarian, socially liberal, fiscally conservative, scientifically grounded, agnostic, porn admiring gun owner who believes in self determination.

    Chuck, we miss ya man.

    كافر

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    33,884
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by okie View Post
    Was it though? I've never shot one, but isn't it just a pretty typical open bolt SMG?
    In the 1950s it changed everything when most SMGs were as heavy as a Garand and as long as a M1 carbine. It wouldn't be until the MP5 came along in the 1970s that the Uzi was outclassed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Esq. View Post
    Ever seen a VZ 26? Lots of similarities....
    Almost every successful design is based upon a predecessor. The Sa 26 was the telescoping bolt, but the Uzi incorporated lots of improvements.
    It's hard to be a ACLU hating, philosophically Libertarian, socially liberal, fiscally conservative, scientifically grounded, agnostic, porn admiring gun owner who believes in self determination.

    Chuck, we miss ya man.

    كافر

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    ME
    Posts
    459
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    I like my Tavor. Might be heavy, but the weight does sit in a good spot for manipulating the rifle. Real question will be if I like suppressing it. If I do, it will stay.

    If not, I’ll think it over… but might end up for sale. Likely without the Aimpoint PRO.

    I guess I like it better since I changed the charging handle (Gear Head Works) and the trigger/pack (Geissele for both). Being I got into it prior to moving to a free state (NJ to ME), and prior to suppressors (three in jail right now), I hope that it checks off enough boxes that I feel justified to keep it.

    But if not, I might pick up a Colt or something else for a spare carbine. I probably won’t get what I have into it, but will get enough to put it into something else I’d like.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Not in a gun friendly state
    Posts
    3,807
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by SteyrAUG View Post
    Good bullpups are great like the AUG, clunky bullpups are clunky like the FN2000. I planned on buying a Tavor till I had one in my hands. Lots of things were just odd. I think the biggest problem was trying to lay out the features in a way common to an AR but on a bullpup and it just didn't work.
    The AUG is the only bullpup that I've ever found to be comfortable.
    Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who do not.-Ben Franklin

    there’s some good in this world, Mr. Frodo. And it’s worth fighting for.-Samwise Gamgee

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    The South
    Posts
    4,420
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by okie View Post
    Was it though? I've never shot one, but isn't it just a pretty typical open bolt SMG?
    At the time of its development and adoption, yes the UZI was an improvement over other contemporary SMG designs. Telescoping bolt, advanced primer ignition, multiple safety features to allow condition 1 carry, improved ergonomics compared to legacy and other contemporary designs, mostly ambidextrous controls, lighter weight than most designs of the time, compact size, very controllable ROF in FA, among others.

    As Steyr mentioned, the UZI was only really outclassed by the mp5. And even then the UZI still saw widespread use, including with USSS.
    Last edited by JoshNC; 09-08-21 at 23:09.
    SLG Defense 07/02 FFL/SOT

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    33,884
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by JoshNC View Post
    At the time of its development and adoption, yes the UZI was an improvement over other contemporary SMG designs. Telescoping bolt, advanced primer ignition, multiple safety features to allow condition 1 carry, improved ergonomics compared to legacy and other contemporary designs, mostly ambidextrous controls, lighter weight than most designs of the time, compact size, very controllable ROF in FA, among others.

    As Steyr mentioned, the UZI was only really outclassed by the mp5. And even then the UZI still saw widespread use, including with USSS.
    Even with the German military, Uzis known as the MP2 stayed in inventory with many Armored units after the MP5 entered service because really there was nothing wrong with them. And as much as I consider the MP5 to be the definitive SMG and superior to anything before or since, I would still feel comfortable doing most things with an Uzi, especially suppressed.

    The only real weakness of the Uzi are tight sights which impair rapid target acquisition, less precise first shot placement (all open bolt vs. closed bolt) and that heavier bolt is a little more chatty full auto suppressed.

    I also hate the stock, the folding Uzi stock is second only to the AK underfolder as one of the most uncomfortable stocks regularly encountered. But honestly, the HK A3 stock is right behind the Uzi stock for shitty cheek weld and both have fixed stock options that are actually really nice. That the Uzi wooden stock was push button release also made it adaptable back in the 50s. I only wish the Uzi folding stock was push button release so you could swap them out with the ease of the MP5 but you can't have everything.

    It's also a bit heavy, but it's built like a tank and you really can't have it both ways. If I had to grab my Uzi or a B&T 9...I might grab the Uzi.

    Once I got a bayo lug mounted rail for the Uzi so I could run a weapon light, it was a practical subgun....again. Maybe not a MP5...but nothing is.
    It's hard to be a ACLU hating, philosophically Libertarian, socially liberal, fiscally conservative, scientifically grounded, agnostic, porn admiring gun owner who believes in self determination.

    Chuck, we miss ya man.

    كافر

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    25
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by BoringGuy45 View Post
    I think the Tavor suffered the same problem that all the “3rd Generation” assault rifles of the late 90s and early 2000s suffered: They were decent, but just not any major improvement over the rifles they were designed to replace. In that, it suffered the same problem as the SCAR. The AR design has gone from 20 years ago being considered obsolete to now being recognized as ahead of its time.

    From what I remember, the decision to adopt the Tavor was one of insider deals, as well as national pride. The Israelis wanted an Israeli designed rifle, and the fact that it’s a bullpup was used as a selling point for being the best close quarters weapon. M4s were WAY less expensive for the Israelis to buy, but they wanted to go with national pride. Of course, as is the case in most countries, the conventional troops went to the bullpup rifle while the special forces opted to stay with the M4.

    I have to wonder, with Israel ditching the Tavor and France ditching the FAMAS a couple years ago for the 416, are we starting to see the death of bullpups? I have to wonder if the UK is going to finally give up the L85 soon and go with the M4, C8, or 416.

    The AR, in its various forms, has now replaced the FAL as the Right Arm of the Free World.
    I believe the UK SF and the Royal Marines are already using AR type rifles as the L119A2. Wouldn’t be surprised if the whole British military ditched the SA80 in the near future and went with a L119A2 type rifle which I think is based on the Colt Canada C8.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •