What are the main differences between the two?
Which is more user friendly in terms of mounting optics, mag release ect.
Any issues with accuracy?

The intention would be self defense in an urban area should things get that bad.

Optics is basically the same with a top rail, controls are more bullpup style with the sar Tavor with the mag release next to mag well and x95 is a ar15 style ambi mag release. Rails up front tend to prefer the x95 as the x95 has the covers that slide off for extra rails like a quad rail. accuracy is over stated but internet rumors say x95 is less precise but between mine I don’t see much of a difference. Charging handle was also moved back on x95, which I like better. Pistol grip was changed and I prefer the sar. Trigger is pretty bad on both but x95 is a bit better. The x95 is suppose to replace the sar state side so there does seem to be some deals as of late on the sar. Palmetto was selling them for 1100 for 16/fde and then again for 1300 I think on the 18/black. They do feel different in manipulation and movement, so far I prefer the standard Tavor between the two with the manticore curved butt plate and a trigger being a great aftermarket change. Can you try both at a local range? If your ever in az you can try mine.  All that said I still prefer the aug and if buying new the aug is around 15-1700 right now too. Just to add a monkey wrench to mess with your plans.

Here is my tldr, both are good and if your train with it it won’t matter much, x95 has what many see as improvements to Manipulations of the gun and people say the x95 isn’t as precise although I haven’t seen that,   but take a look at the aug as well as it’s a solid performer.

I prefer the SAR because I like the angle of the grip and the mag release better.  You can put a bottom rail on the handguard or a bipod stud (which I use for a Harris bipod).  There are also aftermarket trigger packs and handguards available.

I started with SARs when they first came out, sold them and bought X95s and later sold them.  This month I decided to go bullpup again and purchased an ODG and FDE 18" SAR and installed the thin buttplate.  Also purchased a FDE 16.5" (although I don't know why since I love the 18" with thin buttplate). The 18" with thin buttplate are just about the same length as the 16.5" SAR and gives me a shorter LOP which is what I wanted.  Of course you can do that with the X95 also.  Having had both SAR and X95, I just prefer the SAR.

I still have to send them to IWI for left hand conversion but they are not performing conversions until fully opened up for business again.

I think it's purely a matter of taste...inexpensive SARs can't be found right now, especially the ODG and NIB are getting sparce.

I can refer the SAR over the x95

I’ve owned several of both. The X95 for me wins in every category except accuracy. All of my X95s were 3 or 4 moa guns. My SAR were only slightly better. That said I owned very early versions. Maybe the accuracy has improved, the ACE galils I own have had amazing accuracy so IWI is definitely capable of it.

As a SAR owner, I never could get into the X95 in terms of looks, support hand ergos, or how close the mag button release was to the trigger. Plus I heard the accuracy was worse. The new Tavor 7 definitely seems to be a blend of the SAR and X95. I have it and like it, but still dislike the X95. I have a feeling an X95 (2.0) is in the future and it will have the Tavor 7 design. They will probably call it the Tavor 5.

SAR

Dbltap

Own both still prefer the sar with a x95 fire control assembly installed

saber, is the x95 pack good enough to forego the shooting sight pack, in your estimation?

I have the shooting sight pack in my 18" Sar but put a 9mm kit into my first Sar and it has the original Sar pack.

Thanks

I prefer the X95, mainly due to the mag release style and charging handle location. Also prefer the look.

My X95 has a pinned/welded MD and the thin buttplate... much prefer the feel of it over the SAR or the standard X95 w/ rubber buttplate.

These shine in urban/CQ settings.

I preferred the SAR.  I had two 16" and one 18".

Nice guns albeit heavy with marginal triggers (typical of all bullpups ... I've owned 1 preban AUG, 5 current AUG, 1 FN FS2000, 3 Tavors, and 1 Bushmaster M17 Turd).

I've sold everything excluding a handful of AR15s.  ARs are just easier to shoot, and while bullpups get higher velocity (16") vs an AR pistol (10.5 to 12.5") the AR pistol is a lot easier to manipulate.  Also, one manual of arms.  I've found AR pistols to be more accurate too (even with milspec triggers ... drop a $99 LaRue MBT in one and you'll be amazed).

Love my x95, don't care for the mag release on the SAR, and better modularity and charging handle placement.

On this subject, opinions abound. So, here's mine: The only significant improvement the X95 has over the SAR, is charging handle placement.
Again, that's just opinion. I own the SAR, I have a buddy with an X95 (and another with an AUG, but that's a different subject).

I like the SAR mag release. It takes some getting used to, but it works very well. The X95's attempt to mimic AR controls, takes too much effort to operate, IMO. If I did own an X95, I would have to convert the mag release to match the X95.
The X95's trigger is better than the SAR, but still not as good as some of the aftermarket options. I would likely still replace it.
X95 grip is interchangeable. I have no complaints about the SAR grip, and like the full height hand guard.

X95!

SAR here, actually two but one converted to 9mm.

I prefer my SAR, but it also has the MI rail, BCM VFG, a light, Meprolight RDS, and X95 trigger pack.  I prefer the grip, grip angle, charging method, and mag release.

That being said, my understanding is that new SARS aren't being made for the civilian market anymore.  For most people, the X95 would be the better choice, because for the same price I paid for my stock SAR, it has the better trigger already, rail is already installed, and most people prefer the AR-esque mag releases because they have shorter fingers than me.  So an X95 outfitted similarly to my SAR would save you several hundred bucks.

Both will serve you quite well.

One of my greater disappointments in life was firing a SAR with a can on it.  Sooo much blowback.  Is there a way to remedy this?

With my SAR, I have the GHW cover. Also applied a liitle RTV at the back of the rail. Use the Shooting Sight +25% spring to reduce bolt speed and Percival Armaments shell deflector. My can of choice is my Rugged Razor. 7.62 cans seem to work better on the SAR.

It will get gassy with a full mag dump, but if moving and shooting, it isn't bad.

First, I have to ask: What kind of self-proclaimed gun enthusiast doesn't "love the smell of gunpowder in the morning"? Wear that "Tavor Face" like a badge of honor!

It's coming out through a small slot betweeen the plastic body and metal parts under the rear of the rail.

Seal the gap and breathe freely.

FWIW: My can is Elite Iron CQC Elite. The same model is used for up to 6.5 Swede/Creed/etc. Just different sized holes down to .223/5.56.

We do this one every so often. I like the ergonomics and manual of arms of the X95 more, but I like the consistent shooting precision of the SAR more. I went with the SAR because, at the time that’s all that was out, but to me there isn’t a ‘better’ one save for which of the above characteristics you prefer. If I were to do a 95 today. it’d probably be the SBR variant.