http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2018/01/22/shot-2018-iwi-tavor-7-israeli-308-bullpup/

there ya go

Looks great!  Good features.  Wonder what accuracy is gonna be like.

Still looking like a Tavor 7 will be added to my collection. I cannot wait to see some actual reviews on it!

Why is there a lock to disable the gun on the side? Do all Tavors have that?

Barrel lug, not gun lock; and yes, all Tavors have it.

I wonder what the intended niche of this thing is. 7.62x51 is not exactly ideal for clearing rooms, and the Tavor is not known for its accuracy.

Awesome, very nice features. I wonder how long it will take for IWI to surpass DT in numbers sold and delivered.

I love my SAR, but if they get all those features on the 5.56 guns, I'll have to switch, as long as the accuracy is the same or better.

A short 308 with gas block, but with an 16.5 in barrel?

Damn near perfect bullpup.  FYI .308 is great for clearing rooms if your OAL is short enough, and with this it certainly is.  The market for these worldwide is huge, for governments that don't want to switch form 7.62x51.  For the US civi market it will be somewhat niche as with all bullpups, but damn this thing could help drive them more mainstream, be what the MDR should have been.

But in my eyes there are two large hurdles for it beyond the basics like reliability:

1.) Did they fix the gas issues while running suppressed?  They seemed to on the x95 in .300blk which was a good sigh, but this is a whole different gas system, and that "quick reverse ejection" looks like it might allow for a very easy path for gas to escape and gas out the shooter if you run anything other than an OSS or Nexgen.  Not sure if it would be easy to address with aftermarket parts due to the design of that system as well.

2.) What is the accuracy going to look like?  Yes they free-floated it which is a great first step, but mass production CHF barrels aren't exactly known for their accuracy in semi-auto platforms (they are known for the opposite actually).  If factory accuracy isn't up to par, I wonder if it will ever be possible to get aftermarket barrels?  I don't think I've ever seen an X95 or Tavor aftermarket barrel but those weren't free-floated.

High hopes, but coming off the MDR once bitten twice shy.

Really like the idea of going back to slower twist rate in short chrome barrel.  Other semi 16 in 308's owned or tried with the 1::10 twist had poor accuracy with anything below the 165-168 grain bullets.  Also prefer some type of durable open sight option.  Yes I am old, and slow to adapt but might wait for any possible teething problems to get fixed before selling off unused hunting rifles to get one.

Happen to like concept of short 308.

Im intrigued because it would be nice to have a .308 that isn't a mile long or have the CG way out front.........

A few concerns though:

1.  What if I want a 20" barrel.......for 2 reasons:  velocity (hunting) and muzzle blast (a 16 on a .308 is going to be loud.  bring the muzzle face closer to your face and that loud is going to be perceived closer to you.......).

2.  What magazines is this going to use?  Is there a pmag for it, or does it use some odd proprietary junk?

If I can get 5 round pmags for it (or blocks) so I can use it hunting.....that would be very intriguing due to the size factor alone.

Nice!

Ah! that makes SO much more sense!

Thanks for the schooling!

It is offered in 20 inch barrel i think, at least 18" anyways.

and sr25 magazines

That looks incredible, I hope they are reasonably accurate.  With the way it is set up, I would imagine a 6.5 Creedmoor conversion wouldn't be out of the realm of possibilities either.  I'm thinking an 18" or 20" barrel.  I love my SAR, so I might have to own one of these.  If only they could shave some weight off.

A .308 bullpup can be pretty handy, I always forget to turn on my camera for the shoothouse
(10rd first mag to force reload)

Interesting.

I'll hold my excitement, though, until accuracy reports are available.

IWI rep at SHOT claimed the Tavor 7 is 2 moa or better, while the X95 is 3.5 moa or better.

Overall it felt pretty good.

Sounds about right for the barrel they are using.  I guess it will be up to aftermarket if we want to get any better, which a lot of us do obviously.

If he's shooting FGMM or Black Hill HPBTM and gretting 2moa, hand loads will cut that to 1moa. With a lot more time behind the gun, it might be sub moa.

MY Tavor SAR is about 2-2.5moa with high quality ammo. Hand loads and learning the peculiarities of head position, where to put bags, hand pressure etc, cut that to 1-1.25moa on a very good day. I'm not shooting 10rd groups, but rather 5rds. I have a bad habit of opening up a group on the last shot. I'll say with mil surp type under 75gr, it's 4-5moa.

The X95 has just had some issues for whatever reason.

Any indications on price yet?

$2299 was mentioned in one video.

Which is only $300 more than they MSRP the Tavor. If that difference correlates to real world price difference, they’re going to be a pretty nice buy. That’d put it a good 500-700 less than the MDR, and I doubt this one has such a high return rate.

No kidding, it'll suffocate the MDR out of existence.  IWI knows how to put out good product.

Price isn't that bad, I have more than that into my AUG. It'll probably sell at or above MSRP for a while after it initially releases.  Could never bring myself to buy a SCAR, but I could justify this every day and twice on Sunday.

It looks even better aesthetically in those videos than I thought it would.

I dig the off gas setting for hunting etc.

You’re going to want to get the SCAR 17 too eventually. Short of my stamp collection, it’s the least likely firearm I am to ever sell. I’d rather be homeless with my 17 than under a roof without it.

No offense, but as far as I know no one has yet shown a CHF barrel on an AR doing <1moa 5x5, let alone 3x10.  If you can do it, please post up to the MOA challenge, especially with your Tavor as we currently have no bullpups even close to 1moa on it.  I'm just hoping for aftermarket barrels since it is now FF'd.

I don't think anyone has stated that any of the rifles mentioned are doing 1moa 5 times in a row for five shots, or anything like that. They are saying they shot those group sizes once or more times, which proves the mechanical accuracy is there to achieve it. Factoring in the human , you're adding to the spread, how much depends on the human, how the human is feeling that day, if the human is "on" or not, the weather conditions ( how well can that human read wind), and last but not least, that the human doesn't just have a brain fart or a bug fly up their nose while shooting that last round where they had a sub moa group for four shots.

I have had a bug in the eye, and in the nose that caused fliers. I've also had my arm slip, or had a massive pain that made me flinch and pull a shot. Sometimes just lose concentration or have a big wind blow across when it had been very still before.  A million things can happen.Sometimes you just have bad day.

But, that's why you can hand a nice competition rifle that has shot incredible groups and has been proven in competition to several people and everyone shoot different group sizes. It doesn't mean the rifle is not capable of the accuracy or rather precision that it was  before. It just means the shooters that didn't do well were not capable of shooting to the capability of the rifle.

Most rifles , in fact all, are capable of way more than the human equation can wring out of it.

Mechanical accuracy vs human interference.

None of that is the fault of the rifle and none of that diminishes it's capability.

Yeah I have a more difficult time grouping with a rem700 than I do with my x95.  I dont understand why, but my point is the whole <moa arguement gets wayyyy more attention than it will ever be noticed in reality.

If it can do <2 MOA or better I’m fine, and the smaller the better, but yes I agree people get a bit silly about fractions of an inch. It’s not a bench rifle, it’s a bullpup combat rifle. I have much better rifles for shooting off a bench for groups.

2 MOA of mechanical accuracy is enough for effective COM hits out to the effective ballistic range of the rifle.

I have similar results with my SAR, though I admit I haven’t put a lot of effort into benching it for groups. With black hills 77’s from a rest I was doing about 2” groups, maybe 2.5” if we shot larger groups and didn’t throw out any BS fliers. This is rested off a range bag, and all OEM save for a G trigger and a TA-33. I don’t doubt that it could do better with a proper scope, proper bench setup, and handloads.

Given the 7 has a lot of mechanical differences, some of which likely to improve accuracy like the floated barrel, I would expect it to do even better.

With an AR10 that I had, I was much better from a bench than I was with my NM M1A. The AR10 was a much more capable gun mechanically. I did have a rigid rest that I could isolate myself from the gun about 90%. Both of those being shot from that with my only contact being the trigger, the AR10 was much more accurate.

When I picked them up and actually shot them from the shoulder or other position shooting, the M1A was vastly superior for me. I was just a lot better with it, and had grown up shooting that style rifle.

Funny but true story. My wife had bought a new AK and we went to the range to sight it in and let her have a day of blasting. I took my NM M1A and some 168gr hand loads. I only was going to shoot a couple of groups and be done.

When we got there and went out to put the targets out at 100 yards, she saw a mallard duck head ( decoy ), just the head and part of the neck. I took it and put it on top of one of the posts at the 100 yard line that held up the netting stuff they used.

We went back to the line, and I figured what the heck, I'll see how close I can get standing. Now, with that sort of rifle, I learned from my dad ( Korean War vet , FT Benning shooting instructor 50'-52') and I had that chicken wing from hell, and all the other standard old high power shooting techniques.

I watched my front sight settle in and right as the front sight was just about to drop on the the duck head I pressed the trigger to the rear and boom, the duck head went flying about 20 feet to the berm behind it.

My wife was like " Damn you!!", and I was like " Yep, and that's how you do it."

She tried to get me to repeat it, but I put my gun up right then and told her it was her day, have fun. No way I was going to try that twice in a row. I probably couldn't hit it standing again in 10 more tries. I tend to get those lucky shots on my first trigger pull of the day, when there are other people around to be amazed by it. Can't repeat them, but it's funny how that works.

A 4moa rifle/ammo combo is capable of hitting a human torso at 500 yards with regularity. That is with iron sights. The info is out there on how to range with the front sights and where to hold for a COM hit in calm or up to about 10mph winds. The Appleseed project and targets teach that method. Basically a M1a with ball ammo.

I know the Tavor 7 or any Tavor doesn't have "real" sights that are for more than backup, but with a red dot or a LP scope, or LPV it shouldn't be a problem if it's a 2moa gun.

I just want to giggle that looks great!

I’m definitely getting one.

Never really been all that interested in bullpups, but this is pretty dang neat.

This is incorrect.  Five rounds is not near enough to show mechanical accuracy of a firearm, as Molon and many others showed.  There is a reason why we have standards for accuracy.  You don't have to go do the MOA challenge if you want, strap it to the bench instead or have a world champion do the shooting.  You will find the same results, basically no CHF AR does <1moa, and no bullpup does <1.5moa and most are around 2moa.  That is due to mechanical accuracy (this is assuming using match ammo which the barrel likes) of the platform.

You cannot claim a firearm that does 1x5 is moa.

Again let me say that unless IWI has contracted with SAKO or something, those CHF barrels aren't going to be very accurate even FF'd.  I hope the aftermarket addresses this as they are starting to do with the MDR.

We're picking nits here.

It takes about 30 rounds in one group to actually prove the capability of a firearm/ ammo / shooter / setup combo. Even 5x5 is not proof because you would have inconsistencies moving from aiming point to aiming point, even if you overlap them, although that is better than one group of 10 or less. We know that. 3rds, 5rds, 10rds, none of that is statistically significant.

30rds, fired at intervals that allow the barrel and chamber to be the same temp between shots, with the same atmospheric conditions ( wind, temps, humidity etc ) through the entire string is what it actually takes. That is nearly impossible to do for most people, as you need a device to read barrel and chamber temp to be perfect and out in the real world wind speed and direction changes from shot to shot, the sun moves in and out behind the clouds etc. So, the best you can do is 30 shots, with a timed interval of around 10 seconds.

Nobody is going to do that with several types of ammo, especially match grade ammo that is costly. Maybe hand loads, but that brings a factor into the equation that no other shooter can exactly replicate.

So, what do we have left that we can do? What do most people do when shooting these weapons to get an indication of potential accuracy. They shoot 5rd groups. No it issn't perfect, and no it isn't 100% and doesn't eliminate fliers that may come up during a more meaningful 30 rd group, but it is what most do.

I have never seen a gun that could shoot one 5 or 10 rd group that couldn't repeat the group size again. No, every group will not be that small, there will be larger groups sometimes. Normally, though, those groups that are opened significantly are opened up by fliers caused by the shooter and not inconsistencies with the gun and ammo.

For instance, the last time I had decent glass, Bushnell Elite 6500 2.5x16 ( back around 2009 ), my I shot 5 x5 with my my ARP 6.8x43 Recon using 90TNT over 29.8gr of RE7 at 2925fps. My best group was .420, three groups were between .450 and .500, one group was @.650. That .650 had a called flier. I knew it when I pulled the trigger. The other rounds were @.350. I got nervous because I knew that group was the best I'd ever done, and I rushed the shot. That gun/ammo combo was still capable of and was a 1/2moa gun, it was me that messed it up. It was moa with a couple of other loads. I don't know if the photos are still up of the groups, but they were on the 6.8forum way back then. Would I have been able to shoot 30rds into a group that size? I doubt it, but the rifle was capable of it. Had it been in a solid rest taking me out of the equation, there would be no doubt.

I don't have anything capable of that kind of accuracy anymore, just have the Tavor SAR, and it is what it is, a combat rifle.

As to the MDR, I haven't seen any 5x5 or 30rd single targets period, but supporters and the company was claiming 1moa. The groups I have seen have not been there. There have only been a few groups posted, but they are not high rd groups or multiple 5rd groups to bear out anything anymore than the Tavor 7 groups have.

The fact is, the MDR is just about done. The Tavor will hit the market, and will be accurate enough, and more reliable, and actually be on the shelves to pick up and take home, with a world class military arms manufacturer to back support it.

DT may be insolvent by this time next year.

BTW, as I stated, the reports on the Tavor 7 are around 2moa. These are first shots with it, without going through different brands and weights of ammo to find what it likes best. That will be done, and the group size will come down some, time behind the gun will help, and hand loads will help as well.

If the MDR does 1moa, and the Tavor can do 1.5-2moa , the MDR is toast.

Internetz deprived...

That was a very long set of excuses again, most of them incorrect.  Lots of people including myself test out tons of match ammo (I've been through about 20 different loads to find the right one, all 5x5 testing) and/or reloading and doing ladder tests.  Molon did it as well.  At 100y, wind and so on factors in very little.  But plenty of folks just do testing at indoor 100y ranges to take away that tiny factor.  So again, totally incorrect.  Just because you are incapable or don't want to do it doesn't mean everyone is.  Is it expensive and time consuming?   You bet.  Is it for everyone?  Nope.  Do I and many others find it fun?  Absolutely, just step over to the hide or the moa challenge to see lots of people who like nothing better.

We agree on the other points, the MDR has not been shown to be 5x5 1moa except by CBM who is a DTA employee so obvious conflict of interest.  And I agree with 2moa on the T7, I'm just saying I'm hoping that the aftermarket will provide even more accurate barrels for the IWI T7 as they are already starting to for the DT: https://bullpupforum.com/index.php?topic=12711.0.

YAWN...

Wake me when they make one in 7.62x39.

@ the highlighted...

I agree with the remainder of your post and think this rifle will do well overall.

I'm glad you agree with the rest.  But just like 5.56/.223 it is all load dependent.  A well setup .308 rifle using 110gr TAP is similar to the 55/60gr 5.56 loads: http://www.hornadyle.com/products/rifle-ammunition/308-win-tap/110-gr-tap-urban just with more energy and recoil.  The problem is that most of the rifles suck for CQB, but things like the RFB are fine (when they work right).  The Tavor 7 and MDR are looking to remedy this.

Why do you drop your rifle when you move???

Faster/better to keep it up.

True!  To be honest just reading your previous comment and taking it at face value was what made me chuckle, but, you are indeed correct.  The right load for the right job can move rounds into and out of certain categories for accomplishing problems.

On a side note concerning the two competitors, to the credit of DesertTech, I think their heart was in the right place when designing their rifle, it's the communication and delivery that were, abysmal at best.  They (DT) will need to do a lot in order to recover the trust most people had prior to them announcing their bullpup project (If that's even possible at this point due to them continually stepping on their dicks even after deliveries started, let alone the issues with the delivered rifles that exist).  In the meantime if IWI gets the Tavor 7 into production and it works as intended (which, lets face it, when was the last time IWI didn't uphold their promises in a timely manner?) then IWI will eat DT's lunch and be the .308 bullpup to beat...

I'm interested, if it's reliable (which I expect it to be) and shoots decent (1.5-2".@ 100yds) with reasonably priced hunting rounds I'll get one to use hunting some when I want a short gun in the tree stand without giving up too much ballistically.

Tentatively in for an OD tavor 7 and a geissele trigger to go with it, probably a primary arms 5x prism already have tons of pmags to go in it.

The dual side ejection port covers are slick.  If IWI could've somehow managed a quick, switchable on the fly style ejection mechanism like the ARX-100, instead of having to manually remove & turn the bolt, this would be about as perfect as a bullpup could hope to be.  Too bad it doesn't at least have a shell deflector.

All the same, still an awesome evolution of the platform.

It does have brass deflectors. The part you grab to open / close a ejection port is the deflector. Different design but same location as the deflectors in the SAR and x95.

Well, watching it in action, it doesn't look like it would be possiible to rely on the deflector alone to shoot offhand without eating brass, which is an inherent bullpup "weakness".  Certainly not world-ending, just that I wish it didn't require disassembly only to shoot offhand.

I'm ready to see one in person.