User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/5/2016 6:39:37 AM EDT
[#1]
Quoted:
how they will group then throw out a zinger opening the group up to sometimes 4" -5" regardless of the ammo quality or bullet weights. Is this even possible? How would a rifle group, then throw out a zinger? And do it consistently? If so, can someone explain what is going on mechanically? It's sounds more like there's not enough shots, so conclusions can't be drawn, it's operator error, or something else. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/5/2016 8:08:38 AM EDT
[#2]
Mine was a 3-5" gun from what I could tell. I just sold it a while ago, not so much over accuracy, more wanting something Ambi without conversion like an RDB since I'm Left eye dominant, but the accuracy didn't help for sure!
I only shot for groups one time at 50y with 6x magnification and my best ones were 1.5" to 1.75" most were 2" or a little over. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/5/2016 10:20:09 AM EDT
[#3]
I'd want one too since I like my Tavor, but the X95 accuracy reports made me decide not to.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/5/2016 11:12:31 AM EDT
[#4]
From what I've seen, It's not that bad. A 15 shot 3.25" group out of something that's not supposed to be a precision rifle is not bad at all. I think most people just aren't used to shooting 15 shot groups so it sounds terrible. The military arms channel looks like he did the best test on it and I'm going off of that.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2016 5:05:04 PM EDT
[#5]
I'm getting headshots out to 200 yrds with M855.
Good enough for me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/6/2016 9:22:44 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm getting headshots out to 200 yrds with M855. Good enough for me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/10/2016 5:59:56 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Are your using a magnified optic? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'm getting headshots out to 200 yrds with M855. Good enough for me. Yes and no. I had a ACOG TA11G on there first but broke the elevation turret the same day and had to send it back. Then I put an Eotech 553 on there from another rifle till I get my ACOG back. Obviously with the ACOG it is easier. Eotech it is harder. I shoot a steel target whose head is about 5x4". I can hit the head and any misses I find them to be my fault. For what it is worth I have a Specwar 556k can on it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/10/2016 6:08:54 PM EDT
[#8]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/12/2016 10:36:26 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote History
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/14/2016 10:02:25 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Mine was a 3-5" gun from what I could tell. I just sold it a while ago, not so much over accuracy, more wanting something Ambi without conversion like an RDB since I'm Left eye dominant, but the accuracy didn't help for sure! I only shot for groups one time at 50y with 6x magnification and my best ones were 1.5" to 1.75" most were 2" or a little over. Mine was 3-5moa also, even in a sled with a scope. The x95 is a great CQC gun but I prefer my AUG and the accuracy it brings. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2016 8:09:27 AM EDT
[#11]
Other than a new cool factor, what does the X-95 do that Tavor can do more accurately?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2016 4:30:40 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Other than a new cool factor, what does the X-95 do that Tavor can do more accurately? For me, it's much easier to mount a light to the gun without having to spend extra money on some aftermarket fore end. The X95 balances better in my hand. I prefer the location of the charging handle on the X95 to the Tavor. And I prefer the magazine release location to the Tavor. The differences are enough to have prevented me from buying a Tavor every time I've handled one since they were released. The X95 addresses almost every issue I had with the Tavor. The only reason I do not own an X95 right now is the uncertainty of the accuracy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2016 8:49:21 AM EDT
[#13]
If you look at the groups there is stringing. It is a bedding issue. Just remove
The front polymer ring and not cut the barrel for it IWI and your problems will be fixed. You jews need to stop circumcising everything 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2016 12:58:41 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted: Soooo has IWI ever offically addressed all the accuracy concerns? Understanding my 16" IDF Tavor appears to be considerable more accurate then the X95, I don't want to hear any of that BS about combat accuracy.... something appears to be wrong with the rifle how they will group then throw out a zinger opening the group up to sometimes 4" -5" regardless of the ammo quality or bullet weights. My Tavor or countless other 5.56 battle rifles don't perform like this. I want one, but would like to understand that its being looked into or at least not written off. I agree with your sentiment. "Combat accuracy" is a excuse. There are plenty of accurate rifles out there, that don't have inconsistencies with groupings. We can be snobby in this day with so many choices. It's not too much to ask for a consistent shooting rifle that is good for HD and anything else. This issue is why I am going to buy an F90 and not a Tavor. They should take this shit seriously. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2016 4:44:28 PM EDT
[#15]
There is no "problem" with the TAVOR X95's accuracy. Learn how to shoot it well, and it will do it's part. Here are 2" MOA groups at 100, using Wolf Gold 55gr, posted on the Bulpup Forum. Get a lighter trigger, magnified optics and better ammo and you'll probably get better results.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2016 4:52:00 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There is no "problem" with the TAVOR X95's accuracy. Learn how to shoot it well, and it will do it's part. Here are 2" MOA groups at 100, using Wolf Gold 55gr, posted on the Bulpup Forum. Get a lighter trigger, magnified optics and better ammo and you'll probably get better results. I think it is disingenuous to say "learn how to shoot it..." when clearly longtime shooters are getting widely varied accuracy results. That's the core of the issue, one person getting acceptable accuracy while another is getting subpar results (not related to the shooter but rather the firearm). |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2016 5:35:54 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think it is disingenuous to say "learn how to shoot it..." when clearly longtime shooters are getting widely varied accuracy results. That's the core of the issue, one person getting acceptable accuracy while another is getting subpar results (not related to the shooter but rather the firearm). Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
There is no "problem" with the TAVOR X95's accuracy. Learn how to shoot it well, and it will do it's part. Here are 2" MOA groups at 100, using Wolf Gold 55gr, posted on the Bulpup Forum. Get a lighter trigger, magnified optics and better ammo and you'll probably get better results. I think it is disingenuous to say "learn how to shoot it..." when clearly longtime shooters are getting widely varied accuracy results. That's the core of the issue, one person getting acceptable accuracy while another is getting subpar results (not related to the shooter but rather the firearm). Nothing "disingenuous" about it, it is just a simple fact. Each rifle requires familiarity with how best to hold it, brace it, etc. The X95 is no different. You may be the most experienced shooter in the world, but you have to get used to shooting each particular rifle you handle. All this belly aching and moaning/growning about "poor accuracy" is just bullshit. The rifle is fine for what it is meant to do and is plenty accurate. It almost makes me laugh when people get all worked up over trying to make a battle rifle into a precision rifle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2016 6:14:47 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nothing "disingenuous" about it, it is just a simple fact. Each rifle requires familiarity with how best to hold it, brace it, etc. The X95 is no different. You may be the most experienced shooter in the world, but you have to get used to shooting each particular rifle you handle. All this belly aching and moaning/growning about "poor accuracy" is just bullshit. The rifle is fine for what it is meant to do and is plenty accurate. It almost makes me laugh when people get all worked up over trying to make a battle rifle into a precision rifle. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: There is no "problem" with the TAVOR X95's accuracy. Learn how to shoot it well, and it will do it's part. Here are 2" MOA groups at 100, using Wolf Gold 55gr, posted on the Bulpup Forum. Get a lighter trigger, magnified optics and better ammo and you'll probably get better results. I think it is disingenuous to say "learn how to shoot it..." when clearly longtime shooters are getting widely varied accuracy results. That's the core of the issue, one person getting acceptable accuracy while another is getting subpar results (not related to the shooter but rather the firearm). Nothing "disingenuous" about it, it is just a simple fact. Each rifle requires familiarity with how best to hold it, brace it, etc. The X95 is no different. You may be the most experienced shooter in the world, but you have to get used to shooting each particular rifle you handle. All this belly aching and moaning/growning about "poor accuracy" is just bullshit. The rifle is fine for what it is meant to do and is plenty accurate. It almost makes me laugh when people get all worked up over trying to make a battle rifle into a precision rifle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2016 9:57:50 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But if you have two battle rifles, one capable of 1-2 MOA and the other a 3-5 MOA gun, why would you bother with the less accurate one? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There is no "problem" with the TAVOR X95's accuracy. Learn how to shoot it well, and it will do it's part. Here are 2" MOA groups at 100, using Wolf Gold 55gr, posted on the Bulpup Forum. Get a lighter trigger, magnified optics and better ammo and you'll probably get better results. I think it is disingenuous to say "learn how to shoot it..." when clearly longtime shooters are getting widely varied accuracy results. That's the core of the issue, one person getting acceptable accuracy while another is getting subpar results (not related to the shooter but rather the firearm). Nothing "disingenuous" about it, it is just a simple fact. Each rifle requires familiarity with how best to hold it, brace it, etc. The X95 is no different. You may be the most experienced shooter in the world, but you have to get used to shooting each particular rifle you handle. All this belly aching and moaning/growning about "poor accuracy" is just bullshit. The rifle is fine for what it is meant to do and is plenty accurate. It almost makes me laugh when people get all worked up over trying to make a battle rifle into a precision rifle. I agree. No way my Tavor is accurate and the supposed better improved version is less accurate? For 1800 bucks it needs to match or exceed the previous accuracy performance |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2016 10:17:06 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nothing "disingenuous" about it, it is just a simple fact. Each rifle requires familiarity with how best to hold it, brace it, etc. The X95 is no different. You may be the most experienced shooter in the world, but you have to get used to shooting each particular rifle you handle. All this belly aching and moaning/growning about "poor accuracy" is just bullshit. The rifle is fine for what it is meant to do and is plenty accurate. It almost makes me laugh when people get all worked up over trying to make a battle rifle into a precision rifle. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There is no "problem" with the TAVOR X95's accuracy. Learn how to shoot it well, and it will do it's part. Here are 2" MOA groups at 100, using Wolf Gold 55gr, posted on the Bulpup Forum. Get a lighter trigger, magnified optics and better ammo and you'll probably get better results. I think it is disingenuous to say "learn how to shoot it..." when clearly longtime shooters are getting widely varied accuracy results. That's the core of the issue, one person getting acceptable accuracy while another is getting subpar results (not related to the shooter but rather the firearm). Nothing "disingenuous" about it, it is just a simple fact. Each rifle requires familiarity with how best to hold it, brace it, etc. The X95 is no different. You may be the most experienced shooter in the world, but you have to get used to shooting each particular rifle you handle. All this belly aching and moaning/growning about "poor accuracy" is just bullshit. The rifle is fine for what it is meant to do and is plenty accurate. It almost makes me laugh when people get all worked up over trying to make a battle rifle into a precision rifle. Consistency is what the x95 lacks. One guy takes his x95 out the range and gets 2" groups with wolf while another goes to the range and gets 4" groups with match ammo. Its been well documented everywhere over the net since it came out. The SAR models dont seem to have this issue. When the SAR models hit the streets, shooters were (and still are) getting reliable and consistent 2 MOA (give or take .5) out of the rifles with ease and people praised them. With the x95 one day you get 2 MOA another you get 4 MOA (even with the same ammo some times), people document it and throw it on the internet. The first response out of guys defending it is "WHA?! Its a Bullpup, not a decked out SR25/ benchrest/fuck-matic 9000 sniper rifle. What do you expect?!"
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2016 10:54:09 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There is no "problem" with the TAVOR X95's accuracy. Learn how to shoot it well, and it will do it's part. Here are 2" MOA groups at 100, using Wolf Gold 55gr, posted on the Bulpup Forum. Get a lighter trigger, magnified optics and better ammo and you'll probably get better results. http://i.imgur.com/v42yZQt.jpg http://i.imgur.com/NYIu3iFh.jpg http://i.imgur.com/jb8pqFIh.jpg http://i.imgur.com/IHbgAvbh.jpg http://i.imgur.com/gX6PcoGh.jpg  |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2016 10:57:55 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nothing "disingenuous" about it, it is just a simple fact. Each rifle requires familiarity with how best to hold it, brace it, etc. The X95 is no different. You may be the most experienced shooter in the world, but you have to get used to shooting each particular rifle you handle. All this belly aching and moaning/growning about "poor accuracy" is just bullshit. The rifle is fine for what it is meant to do and is plenty accurate. It almost makes me laugh when people get all worked up over trying to make a battle rifle into a precision rifle. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: There is no "problem" with the TAVOR X95's accuracy. Learn how to shoot it well, and it will do it's part. Here are 2" MOA groups at 100, using Wolf Gold 55gr, posted on the Bulpup Forum. Get a lighter trigger, magnified optics and better ammo and you'll probably get better results. I think it is disingenuous to say "learn how to shoot it..." when clearly longtime shooters are getting widely varied accuracy results. That's the core of the issue, one person getting acceptable accuracy while another is getting subpar results (not related to the shooter but rather the firearm). Nothing "disingenuous" about it, it is just a simple fact. Each rifle requires familiarity with how best to hold it, brace it, etc. The X95 is no different. You may be the most experienced shooter in the world, but you have to get used to shooting each particular rifle you handle. All this belly aching and moaning/growning about "poor accuracy" is just bullshit. The rifle is fine for what it is meant to do and is plenty accurate. It almost makes me laugh when people get all worked up over trying to make a battle rifle into a precision rifle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2016 11:44:36 PM EDT
[#23]
Much ado about nothing.Just something for gun forum xpurts to talk about, most of whom have never shot one, and whatever they do shoot, they don't shoot well because they spend most of their trigger time clattering on their computer keyboards.
LOL 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2016 2:07:39 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The funny thing is most of the folks getting "Poor Acuracy" are alrady Tavor SAR owners or AUG owners more so then most are accustomed to the pro and cons of the bull pup design. This^ I am glad you are very happy with your X95 AsymmetricShooter. You keep posting the virtues of the X95 on every forum as if you are on a personal crusade to smite the infidels that badmouth the X95. Just face it maybe you good a good one & there are plenty of lemons out there. If it were not a issue it really would not be a issue. There are tons of bullpup lovers & people that try to collect all of them. No one is trying to deliberately bad mouth the X95 or lower its reputation - it did that itself. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2016 6:14:43 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Consistency is what the x95 lacks. One guy takes his x95 out the range and gets 2" groups with wolf while another goes to the range and gets 4" groups with match ammo. How do you know the 4" groups aren't the shooter? Not trying to be sarcastic, but I really want to know. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2016 9:36:19 AM EDT
[#26]
Turning into a non-tech pissing match...
|
|
|
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.
