User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 10:46:54 AM EDT
[#1]
Quoted:
Which one do you think is tougher, as far as materials and design? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 11:08:51 AM EDT
[#2]
I have used both extensively, and for all practical purposes, I would say they are more or less equal.
Sven Manticore Arms |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 11:15:29 AM EDT
[#3]
AUG's are well known for being solid firearms. The Tavor is most likely right next to it (except for the idiot who purposefully broke his Tavor).
Is one more "tough" than the other? Maybe, maybe not. NSL you've asked more questions than anyone, and have been asking for a long time, maybe you need to just flip a coin. I think you'll be happy with either one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 11:19:24 AM EDT
[#4]
Both are tougher than anything "we" as shooters are going to dish out... |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 11:35:11 AM EDT
[#5]
Ive had an aug jam up bad on tula. Case had to be hammered out. Supposedly tavors feed it beta?
Still like the aug more |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 11:57:03 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
AUG's are well known for being solid firearms. The Tavor is most likely right next to it (except for the idiot who purposefully broke his Tavor). Is one more "tough" than the other? Maybe, maybe not. NSL you've asked more questions than anyone, and have been asking for a long time, maybe you need to just flip a coin. I think you'll be happy with either one. +1, buy one, and then when you have enough money, buy the other one. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 12:53:54 PM EDT
[#7]
I can't see the Tavor having a tougher barrel and gas system than the AUG, the toughness of the ploymers I have no idea.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 1:19:13 PM EDT
[#8]
Owning both, the AUG definitely has better machining/more solid 'feeling' design. Whether this equates to 'tougher', I can't say for sure, but I'd put my money on the AUG. Modern polymers are incredibly strong regardless. Both are awesome guns and I'd highly suggest eventually adding one of each to your safe. Personally, I'd start with the AUG. The Tavor v. AUG threads always make me chuckle because it is akin to asking "do you want a free gallon of beer a week for life or a free pound of bacon a week for life?". Sure, I'd go with the bacon, but either option would make me very happy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 1:19:33 PM EDT
[#9]
In a few IWI videos a car was driven over the Tavor then fired, that's pretty tough.........
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 1:23:26 PM EDT
[#10]
AUG hands down
its been around alot longer, proven itself time and time again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 1:27:28 PM EDT
[#11]
I'm very biased toward Steyr. But the Tavor seems to be a fine rifle.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 1:33:10 PM EDT
[#12]
I have not seen any data to suggest there is a practical difference between the two, and wouldn't make it a factor in your decision.
One thing I like about the AUG is the rapid way a barrel can be removed. The easier it is to get things apart, the easier it is to clear things out or replace parts quickly if there is really weird problem. On an AUG, this means you can access or replace the following items very quickly (assuming you have a spare BBL). -Barrel and its chamber -flash hider -About half the gas system (including cylinder and initial short-stroke piston, and the gas regulator). -Forward grip and it's swivel. A spare barrel will have all those items on it, and so can be swapped out in under 10 seconds. But again, the likelihood of that actually mattering and making a material difference is so remote for an individual civilian user, that I wouldn't consider it relevant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 1:57:52 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: AUG hands down its been around alot longer, proven itself time and time again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 2:08:54 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
From a mechanical and construction stand point you're mistaken Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
AUG hands down its been around alot longer, proven itself time and time again. how so? AUG has been in service since 1977 Tavor? AUG has 20+ years on that and been adopted as a standard service rifle by quite a few countries. please explain yourself. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 2:25:24 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
From a mechanical and construction stand point you're mistaken Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
AUG hands down its been around alot longer, proven itself time and time again. I'd like to know how he is mistaken. When you see reports of people managing full auto rental AUGs with 100,000+ rounds through them, with almost no maintenence, coupled with the rarity of reports of problems from anyone (for a gun that's been in the US for decades) I'm not seeing any data to show me he is mistaken. I picked up an AUG last November and have been much impressed. Not to take anything from TAVOR, they reportedly are great, and handling one seemed high quality to me too (well, except for the trigger, which feels like they subcontracted to the guys they are shooting at). |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 2:53:59 PM EDT
[#16]
I own an AUG that Ive been shooting at our local rifle watch for the past year. One of my shooting buddies has a Tavor that I've shot and stripped down.
Both are very good designs that are very well built, making AUG vs Tavor more like a Ginger vs Mary Ann question. The Tavor is designed to be very soldier proof, field strips to very few subassemblies, and has a simpler design. If you value those things, get a Tavor. The AUG is designed to be flexible (to replace the SMG, carbine, rifle, and LMG) and is more complex. Some of that complexity comes from the tool free quick change barrel, forward assist, and adjustable gas regulator. If you value those things, get a AUG. I chose the AUG, but I don't think that the Tavor is a bad rifle. AJ |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 3:11:37 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
how so? AUG has been in service since 1977 Tavor? AUG has 20+ years on that and been adopted as a standard service rifle by quite a few countries. please explain yourself. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
AUG hands down its been around alot longer, proven itself time and time again. how so? AUG has been in service since 1977 Tavor? AUG has 20+ years on that and been adopted as a standard service rifle by quite a few countries. please explain yourself. Because "length of time around" has zero to do with structural integrity , strength of materials , etc. If the question was "which is the oldest" its the AUG but the topic was which is more durable in which time has no bearing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 3:15:32 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Because "length of time around" has zero to do with structural integrity , strength of materials , etc. If the question was "which is the oldest" its the AUG but the topic was which is more durable in which time has no bearing. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
AUG hands down its been around alot longer, proven itself time and time again. how so? AUG has been in service since 1977 Tavor? AUG has 20+ years on that and been adopted as a standard service rifle by quite a few countries. please explain yourself. Because "length of time around" has zero to do with structural integrity , strength of materials , etc. If the question was "which is the oldest" its the AUG but the topic was which is more durable in which time has no bearing. You may wish to get a refund on your dictionary. Durable: adjective 1. long-lasting; enduring: a durable fabric |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 3:55:22 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I own an AUG that Ive been shooting at our local rifle watch for the past year. One of my shooting buddies has a Tavor that I've shot and stripped down. Both are very good designs that are very well built, making AUG vs Tavor more like a Ginger vs Mary Ann question. The Tavor is designed to be very soldier proof, field strips to very few subassemblies, and has a simpler design. If you value those things, get a Tavor. The AUG is designed to be flexible (to replace the SMG, carbine, rifle, and LMG) and is more complex. Some of that complexity comes from the tool free quick change barrel, forward assist, and adjustable gas regulator. If you value those things, get a AUG. I chose the AUG, but I don't think that the Tavor is a bad rifle. AJ Even though I have an AUG, I don't think I'm really biased on these rifles. Frankly, I was highly impressed with the Kel-Tec RFB, but I just didn't want a bullpup .308. For the big bullet I'm more into my Armalite AR10 .308. From owning an AUG, and then from having acquaintances with the Tavor, I'm seeing more of a six-of-one-half-dozen-of-another kind of comparison. Both seem robust and reliable. The triggers on both need attention, but the Steyr seems a little bit better out-the-box. I did the 20/20 sear mod on my AUG, and it cleaned up that silly length of pull and addressed the creepy break. The Tavor at least does have the complete Timiney drop-in trigger kit, but that's a $300 mod...at least it's available. Appearance and style are strictly preferential, but I think the Steyr looks more like a Ferrari while the Tavor looks more like a Hummer. I also think the Steyr might be a bit easier to break down and clean. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 5:11:37 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Even though I have an AUG, I don't think I'm really biased on these rifles. Frankly, I was highly impressed with the Kel-Tec RFB, but I just didn't want a bullpup .308. For the big bullet I'm more into my Armalite AR10 .308. From owning an AUG, and then from having acquaintances with the Tavor, I'm seeing more of a six-of-one-half-dozen-of-another kind of comparison. Both seem robust and reliable. The triggers on both need attention, but the Steyr seems a little bit better out-the-box. I did the 20/20 sear mod on my AUG, and it cleaned up that silly length of pull and addressed the creepy break. The Tavor at least does have the complete Timiney drop-in trigger kit, but that's a $300 mod...at least it's available. Appearance and style are strictly preferential, but I think the Steyr looks more like a Ferrari while the Tavor looks more like a Hummer. I also think the Steyr might be a bit easier to break down and clean. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I own an AUG that Ive been shooting at our local rifle watch for the past year. One of my shooting buddies has a Tavor that I've shot and stripped down. Both are very good designs that are very well built, making AUG vs Tavor more like a Ginger vs Mary Ann question. The Tavor is designed to be very soldier proof, field strips to very few subassemblies, and has a simpler design. If you value those things, get a Tavor. The AUG is designed to be flexible (to replace the SMG, carbine, rifle, and LMG) and is more complex. Some of that complexity comes from the tool free quick change barrel, forward assist, and adjustable gas regulator. If you value those things, get a AUG. I chose the AUG, but I don't think that the Tavor is a bad rifle. AJ Even though I have an AUG, I don't think I'm really biased on these rifles. Frankly, I was highly impressed with the Kel-Tec RFB, but I just didn't want a bullpup .308. For the big bullet I'm more into my Armalite AR10 .308. From owning an AUG, and then from having acquaintances with the Tavor, I'm seeing more of a six-of-one-half-dozen-of-another kind of comparison. Both seem robust and reliable. The triggers on both need attention, but the Steyr seems a little bit better out-the-box. I did the 20/20 sear mod on my AUG, and it cleaned up that silly length of pull and addressed the creepy break. The Tavor at least does have the complete Timiney drop-in trigger kit, but that's a $300 mod...at least it's available. Appearance and style are strictly preferential, but I think the Steyr looks more like a Ferrari while the Tavor looks more like a Hummer. I also think the Steyr might be a bit easier to break down and clean. I agree. The AUG breaks down further than the Tavor, which is good from the standpoint of user or field serviceability. The downside is you have more small parts to lose. TANSTAAFL applies, as usual. AJ |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 5:22:23 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You may wish to get a refund on your dictionary. Durable: adjective 1. long-lasting; enduring: a durable fabric Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
AUG hands down its been around alot longer, proven itself time and time again. how so? AUG has been in service since 1977 Tavor? AUG has 20+ years on that and been adopted as a standard service rifle by quite a few countries. please explain yourself. Because "length of time around" has zero to do with structural integrity , strength of materials , etc. If the question was "which is the oldest" its the AUG but the topic was which is more durable in which time has no bearing. You may wish to get a refund on your dictionary. Durable: adjective 1. long-lasting; enduring: a durable fabric Fabric? LOL! Next up , working on context...... |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2015 5:40:38 PM EDT
[#22]
Fabric? LOL! Next up , working on context..... example. look that up as well. do you have anything more to add? or just trolling? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/17/2015 5:13:23 PM EDT
[#23]
nsl
They are both equally durable and reliable rifles. They both are well designed and well built military grade PRODUCTION rifles. But so is a SCAR, or a Swiss made 55X. I will give any of the before mentioned rifles an slight edge over that of a G36 or an AR. And all mentioned have been extensively tested and developed. A military grade production rifle is a mass produced weapon designed for a combat and extensive combat training environment. In short, they are made to take the average abuse from a 19 year old grunt up to a certain level. If a Bradley or M113 ran over one..... I'm more than positive it will be destroyed. Including an AK. Short of that, I think you will be ok although individual experiences will vary. So how much abuse are you thinking to put it through? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/17/2015 6:08:48 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I agree. The AUG breaks down further than the Tavor, which is good from the standpoint of user or field serviceability. The downside is you have more small parts to lose. TANSTAAFL applies, as usual. AJ Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I own an AUG that Ive been shooting at our local rifle watch for the past year. One of my shooting buddies has a Tavor that I've shot and stripped down. Both are very good designs that are very well built, making AUG vs Tavor more like a Ginger vs Mary Ann question. The Tavor is designed to be very soldier proof, field strips to very few subassemblies, and has a simpler design. If you value those things, get a Tavor. The AUG is designed to be flexible (to replace the SMG, carbine, rifle, and LMG) and is more complex. Some of that complexity comes from the tool free quick change barrel, forward assist, and adjustable gas regulator. If you value those things, get a AUG. I chose the AUG, but I don't think that the Tavor is a bad rifle. AJ Even though I have an AUG, I don't think I'm really biased on these rifles. Frankly, I was highly impressed with the Kel-Tec RFB, but I just didn't want a bullpup .308. For the big bullet I'm more into my Armalite AR10 .308. From owning an AUG, and then from having acquaintances with the Tavor, I'm seeing more of a six-of-one-half-dozen-of-another kind of comparison. Both seem robust and reliable. The triggers on both need attention, but the Steyr seems a little bit better out-the-box. I did the 20/20 sear mod on my AUG, and it cleaned up that silly length of pull and addressed the creepy break. The Tavor at least does have the complete Timiney drop-in trigger kit, but that's a $300 mod...at least it's available. Appearance and style are strictly preferential, but I think the Steyr looks more like a Ferrari while the Tavor looks more like a Hummer. I also think the Steyr might be a bit easier to break down and clean. I agree. The AUG breaks down further than the Tavor, which is good from the standpoint of user or field serviceability. The downside is you have more small parts to lose. TANSTAAFL applies, as usual. AJ What small parts are you going to lose with field dis-assembly of an AUG? Everything is captive or in some sort of housing. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/17/2015 7:35:17 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What small parts are you going to lose with field dis-assembly of an AUG? Everything is captive or in some sort of housing. http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/42.jpg http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/PICTURE6.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I own an AUG that Ive been shooting at our local rifle watch for the past year. One of my shooting buddies has a Tavor that I've shot and stripped down. Both are very good designs that are very well built, making AUG vs Tavor more like a Ginger vs Mary Ann question. The Tavor is designed to be very soldier proof, field strips to very few subassemblies, and has a simpler design. If you value those things, get a Tavor. The AUG is designed to be flexible (to replace the SMG, carbine, rifle, and LMG) and is more complex. Some of that complexity comes from the tool free quick change barrel, forward assist, and adjustable gas regulator. If you value those things, get a AUG. I chose the AUG, but I don't think that the Tavor is a bad rifle. AJ Even though I have an AUG, I don't think I'm really biased on these rifles. Frankly, I was highly impressed with the Kel-Tec RFB, but I just didn't want a bullpup .308. For the big bullet I'm more into my Armalite AR10 .308. From owning an AUG, and then from having acquaintances with the Tavor, I'm seeing more of a six-of-one-half-dozen-of-another kind of comparison. Both seem robust and reliable. The triggers on both need attention, but the Steyr seems a little bit better out-the-box. I did the 20/20 sear mod on my AUG, and it cleaned up that silly length of pull and addressed the creepy break. The Tavor at least does have the complete Timiney drop-in trigger kit, but that's a $300 mod...at least it's available. Appearance and style are strictly preferential, but I think the Steyr looks more like a Ferrari while the Tavor looks more like a Hummer. I also think the Steyr might be a bit easier to break down and clean. I agree. The AUG breaks down further than the Tavor, which is good from the standpoint of user or field serviceability. The downside is you have more small parts to lose. TANSTAAFL applies, as usual. AJ What small parts are you going to lose with field dis-assembly of an AUG? Everything is captive or in some sort of housing. http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/42.jpg http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/PICTURE6.jpg From your picture, the AUG butt plate, stock pin, and barrel aren't removable from a Tavor. If you detail strip the barrel you could lose the gas regulator, piston, and piston return spring from the AUG, the Tavor piston is riveted to the BCGS and it doesn't have a gas regulator or piston return spring. Do I prefer the AUG's adjustable gas regulator? Yes. But I don't pretend that complexity is without a downside. AJ |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/17/2015 8:07:39 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
From your picture, the AUG butt plate, stock pin, and barrel aren't removable from a Tavor. If you detail strip the barrel you could lose the gas regulator, piston, and piston return spring from the AUG, the Tavor piston is riveted to the BCGS and it doesn't have a gas regulator or piston return spring. Do I prefer the AUG's adjustable gas regulator? Yes. But I don't pretend that complexity is without a downside. AJ Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I own an AUG that Ive been shooting at our local rifle watch for the past year. One of my shooting buddies has a Tavor that I've shot and stripped down. Both are very good designs that are very well built, making AUG vs Tavor more like a Ginger vs Mary Ann question. The Tavor is designed to be very soldier proof, field strips to very few subassemblies, and has a simpler design. If you value those things, get a Tavor. The AUG is designed to be flexible (to replace the SMG, carbine, rifle, and LMG) and is more complex. Some of that complexity comes from the tool free quick change barrel, forward assist, and adjustable gas regulator. If you value those things, get a AUG. I chose the AUG, but I don't think that the Tavor is a bad rifle. AJ Even though I have an AUG, I don't think I'm really biased on these rifles. Frankly, I was highly impressed with the Kel-Tec RFB, but I just didn't want a bullpup .308. For the big bullet I'm more into my Armalite AR10 .308. From owning an AUG, and then from having acquaintances with the Tavor, I'm seeing more of a six-of-one-half-dozen-of-another kind of comparison. Both seem robust and reliable. The triggers on both need attention, but the Steyr seems a little bit better out-the-box. I did the 20/20 sear mod on my AUG, and it cleaned up that silly length of pull and addressed the creepy break. The Tavor at least does have the complete Timiney drop-in trigger kit, but that's a $300 mod...at least it's available. Appearance and style are strictly preferential, but I think the Steyr looks more like a Ferrari while the Tavor looks more like a Hummer. I also think the Steyr might be a bit easier to break down and clean. I agree. The AUG breaks down further than the Tavor, which is good from the standpoint of user or field serviceability. The downside is you have more small parts to lose. TANSTAAFL applies, as usual. AJ What small parts are you going to lose with field dis-assembly of an AUG? Everything is captive or in some sort of housing. http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/42.jpg http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/PICTURE6.jpg From your picture, the AUG butt plate, stock pin, and barrel aren't removable from a Tavor. If you detail strip the barrel you could lose the gas regulator, piston, and piston return spring from the AUG, the Tavor piston is riveted to the BCGS and it doesn't have a gas regulator or piston return spring. Do I prefer the AUG's adjustable gas regulator? Yes. But I don't pretend that complexity is without a downside. AJ I'm not sure why you would ever remove the gas piston in the field. Its basically akin losing your tavor barrel wrench then having to put it back together. I have to agree though... "complexity is without a downside". 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/17/2015 10:02:36 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
From your picture, the AUG butt plate, stock pin, and barrel aren't removable from a Tavor. If you detail strip the barrel you could lose the gas regulator, piston, and piston return spring from the AUG, the Tavor piston is riveted to the BCGS and it doesn't have a gas regulator or piston return spring. I'm probably the most anal cleaning person on the board, since I routinely clean my AUG gas piston, spring, regulator (your "detail strip") but I think anecdotal evidence suggests that's atypical for field use. If you're worried about our hypothetical grunt losing his/her barrel, then I think the discussion is over because that's not a "small" part  Anyway, even *I* don't find it necessary to clean the hammer pack - so I would argue that one need not and probably should not remove the butt plate and stock pin in the field. Thus one cleans the AUG by removing the barrel, separating the stock, and pulling out the bolt carrier group... None of those are small parts, IMO.
To clean the Tavor, one *has* to open the butt plate - and if memory serves me one has to remove the hammer pack to get the bolt carrier group out. Now while the Tavor butt plate and (captive) pin cannot be lost at this point, they can, and do, get in the way of cleaning. Personally I find the captive butt plate to be an extreme annoyance, and my first thought was "Surely this will get broken off in the field???" Likewise the clever captive pins... So pick your poison - lost barrels or broken buttplates?
Richard |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/18/2015 9:27:35 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm probably the most anal cleaning person on the board, since I routinely clean my AUG gas piston, spring, regulator (your "detail strip") but I think anecdotal evidence suggests that's atypical for field use. If you're worried about our hypothetical grunt losing his/her barrel, then I think the discussion is over because that's not a "small" part Anyway, even *I* don't find it necessary to clean the hammer pack - so I would argue that one need not and probably should not remove the butt plate and stock pin in the field. Thus one cleans the AUG by removing the barrel, separating the stock, and pulling out the bolt carrier group... None of those are small parts, IMO.
To clean the Tavor, one *has* to open the butt plate - and if memory serves me one has to remove the hammer pack to get the bolt carrier group out. Now while the Tavor butt plate and (captive) pin cannot be lost at this point, they can, and do, get in the way of cleaning. Personally I find the captive butt plate to be an extreme annoyance, and my first thought was "Surely this will get broken off in the field???" Likewise the clever captive pins... So pick your poison - lost barrels or broken buttplates?
Richard Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
From your picture, the AUG butt plate, stock pin, and barrel aren't removable from a Tavor. If you detail strip the barrel you could lose the gas regulator, piston, and piston return spring from the AUG, the Tavor piston is riveted to the BCGS and it doesn't have a gas regulator or piston return spring. I'm probably the most anal cleaning person on the board, since I routinely clean my AUG gas piston, spring, regulator (your "detail strip") but I think anecdotal evidence suggests that's atypical for field use. If you're worried about our hypothetical grunt losing his/her barrel, then I think the discussion is over because that's not a "small" part Anyway, even *I* don't find it necessary to clean the hammer pack - so I would argue that one need not and probably should not remove the butt plate and stock pin in the field. Thus one cleans the AUG by removing the barrel, separating the stock, and pulling out the bolt carrier group... None of those are small parts, IMO.
To clean the Tavor, one *has* to open the butt plate - and if memory serves me one has to remove the hammer pack to get the bolt carrier group out. Now while the Tavor butt plate and (captive) pin cannot be lost at this point, they can, and do, get in the way of cleaning. Personally I find the captive butt plate to be an extreme annoyance, and my first thought was "Surely this will get broken off in the field???" Likewise the clever captive pins... So pick your poison - lost barrels or broken buttplates?
Richard The Tavor BCG is removable w/o having to remove the hammer/sear pack. When I was rabbit and coyote hunting last year I was using my AUG. The area we were hunting in is very dusty with fine, talcum powder type dust. At the end of the day I'd split the receiver from the stock and BCG and brush the dust off the 3 parts and apply more lube. I never had any problems with functioning after a long weekend of doing this. Eventually I would have needed to detail strip the BCG and knock the dust out of the hammer pack, but I saved that for when I got home. The point is I agree that you don't normally need to detail strip a AUG in the field, but you might, given bad enough conditions. The AUG simply has more parts to it than a Tavor. The extra parts give you more flexibility and control, but you never get something for nothing. AJ |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/18/2015 10:58:30 PM EDT
[#29]
Your putting way too much thought into this IMHO... both are battlefield tested designs and will take more abuse than any civilian will ever apply to a rifle
Apples to Apples |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2015 11:02:28 AM EDT
[#30]
Someone with some money to burn needs to do a side by side test. Crazy and equal abuse on both rifles until one fails first. Until then we can only guess which is the toughest rifle!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2015 11:19:11 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have used both extensively, and for all practical purposes, I would say they are more or less equal. Sven Manticore Arms This is info I would trust. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2015 11:21:23 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Someone with some money to burn needs to do a side by side test. Crazy and equal abuse on both rifles until one fails first. Until then we can only guess which is the toughest rifle! This would be great. The only comparison that remotely tests these rifles side-by-side in even a minor way is that Jerry Miculek shootout of the Steyr, Tavor, and FN that lasted about 40 minutes. And really, that only offered a vignette of performance in these rifles. Long term wear-and-tear and operating under severe, adverse conditions obviously isn't addressed...but it was somewhat entertaining. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYzwUsnryTo |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2015 1:54:51 PM EDT
[#33]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2015 3:22:00 PM EDT
[#34]
I have both The only mechanical difference that I have had in use was the AUG had to have a steel casing pounded out luckily it has a quick change barrel, the Tavor used all the ammo that I threw at it with no problems. The other plus is the Tavor takes AR mags instead of Styer mags. Since I live in MD I cant take advantage of the occasional surplus AUG mag sells so I am stuck buying at full price in VA.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/22/2015 12:07:15 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Your putting way too much thought into this IMHO... both are battlefield tested designs and will take more abuse than any civilian will ever apply to a rifle Apples to Apples ....BINGO!!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/22/2015 2:59:42 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
how so? AUG has been in service since 1977 Tavor? AUG has 20+ years on that and been adopted as a standard service rifle by quite a few countries. please explain yourself. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
AUG hands down its been around alot longer, proven itself time and time again. how so? AUG has been in service since 1977 Tavor? AUG has 20+ years on that and been adopted as a standard service rifle by quite a few countries. please explain yourself. Just because the AUG has been around longer, that does not equate to it being more rugged and reliable than the TAVOR. The TAVOR, which came into service in 2001, has gone through some rigorous testing and usage in it s short time used as a primary weapon system by Israel and by these other countries: Azerbaijan, Brazil, Cameroon, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Macedonia, Mexico, Nigeria, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, Vietnam, and the USA. The AUG has its place, as does the TAVOR. I do not own an AUG, but I can attest to the ruggedness of the TAVOR. I am sure that the AUG is a very rugged platform as well. Both are formidable platforms. I would be hard-pressed to say which is more rugged and reliable than the other. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/22/2015 3:17:53 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You may wish to get a refund on your dictionary. Durable: adjective 1. long-lasting; enduring: a durable fabric Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
AUG hands down its been around alot longer, proven itself time and time again. how so? AUG has been in service since 1977 Tavor? AUG has 20+ years on that and been adopted as a standard service rifle by quite a few countries. please explain yourself. Because "length of time around" has zero to do with structural integrity , strength of materials , etc. If the question was "which is the oldest" its the AUG but the topic was which is more durable in which time has no bearing. You may wish to get a refund on your dictionary. Durable: adjective 1. long-lasting; enduring: a durable fabric Durability has to do with a weapon holding up to the rigors to which it has faced and will face during its lifetime. Just because a particular weapon platform has been around for a long time, that does not mean that it is durable. That just means that it is older. Some of the weapons in that platform may suffer some very hard usage, while others seldom do or will. Those that hold up under harsh use are a testament to that particular weapon's assembly, usage, and proper care. Not every weapon in that platform will hold up, but many do. You do not hear about the ones that do not hold up. You cannot make a blanket statement about a weapon platform being more rugged, or durable, because it has been around longer. The TAVOR has only been around for a short time, but it has made a name for itself as a service weapon. Like I said in my earlier post, I own one and I will vouch for it. It is a very robust weapon platform. IMI did their homework when they designed the TAVOR. IWI has produced a fantastic weapon platform. I will say this and I will shut up, most of the guns we own will never see the rigors of the battlefield and will hold up for years and years to come. Most weapons that are used by civilians will outlast their owners. Heck, I have a 1918 Colt 1911 that still has it original parts and I still shoot it. It has not seen battle since 1945. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2015 4:42:47 PM EDT
[#38]
The AUG was designed in Austria and the Tavor was designed in Israel.
If you live in an Austria type climate go AUG, a Israel like environment, Tavor. Really, either one will be fine anywhere you may live, just pick the one that floats your boat. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2015 8:10:06 PM EDT
[#39]
These are both infantry weapons designed, manufactured by military weapons manufacturers
Both IWI and Steyr have controlled climate tests and actual field trials in all climates conditions with weapons that are offered on the world Arms Market.... IWI/Steyr spend HUGE funds on T & E...... before their products hit the market. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 5:07:28 PM EDT
[#40]
No experience with the Tavor, and I own an AUG + M4 so I am biased.
The enclosed gas piston system of the AUG is very nice though. And the quick detach barrel is just awesome. Both are as close to 100% reliable as you can honestly get. Both are exponentially better than the direct gas M4 in terms of reliability/durability. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2015 1:59:45 PM EDT
[#41]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2015 3:14:57 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How well does it operate when exposed to dirt or sand? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xabG5leX68 He really just poured dirt on the aug...action was closed up and everything. Not knocking the AUG, that just wasn't a test that means much of anything. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2015 9:25:18 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just because the AUG has been around longer, that does not equate to it being more rugged and reliable than the TAVOR. The TAVOR, which came into service in 2001, has gone through some rigorous testing and usage in it s short time used as a primary weapon system by Israel and by these other countries: Azerbaijan, Brazil, Cameroon, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Macedonia, Mexico, Nigeria, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, Vietnam, and the USA. The AUG has its place, as does the TAVOR. I do not own an AUG, but I can attest to the ruggedness of the TAVOR. I am sure that the AUG is a very rugged platform as well. Both are formidable platforms. I would be hard-pressed to say which is more rugged and reliable than the other. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
AUG hands down its been around alot longer, proven itself time and time again. how so? AUG has been in service since 1977 Tavor? AUG has 20+ years on that and been adopted as a standard service rifle by quite a few countries. please explain yourself. Just because the AUG has been around longer, that does not equate to it being more rugged and reliable than the TAVOR. The TAVOR, which came into service in 2001, has gone through some rigorous testing and usage in it s short time used as a primary weapon system by Israel and by these other countries: Azerbaijan, Brazil, Cameroon, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Macedonia, Mexico, Nigeria, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, Vietnam, and the USA. The AUG has its place, as does the TAVOR. I do not own an AUG, but I can attest to the ruggedness of the TAVOR. I am sure that the AUG is a very rugged platform as well. Both are formidable platforms. I would be hard-pressed to say which is more rugged and reliable than the other. I own a Tavor and love it, but that list above is wrong. It is not the primary service weapon in Brazil, Chile, India, Mexico, Portugal, Ukraine, Turkey or Vietnam. It has been used in limited numbers and that's it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2015 11:45:30 AM EDT
[#44]
I don't really get the heartburn that some suffer when it comes to comparing many of the quality firearms available today. Of course there are differences in design, function, and just overall preference and application. It's why we don't have "ONE" firearm to handle every use and please everyone. Tavor...AUG...AR...and whatever else...except for a few that truly are crap, the choices in really good guns is better than ever. Enjoy.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2015 3:31:29 PM EDT
[#45]
Clearly this requires extensive research...
AUG = ZOMBIE PROVEN 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2015 3:55:29 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Clearly this requires extensive research... AUG = ZOMBIE PROVEN http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130218145302/walkingdead/images/f/f6/TWD_GP_310_0831_0210.jpg Points so naturally it practically aims itself.... |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
