User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/15/2002 3:39:35 AM EDT
Civilian legal version that takes AR15/M16 mags....interesting.
www.isayeret.com/weapons/assault/tavor/civi.htm A little more interesting in military trim |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2002 3:51:19 AM EDT
[#1]
how much $
if more than $1,000.00 i will stick with my ar |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2002 3:54:41 AM EDT
[#2]
Isayeret website says near 2G. Barrett is apparently going to import them. Israel is planning on adopting them to replace all the M4/M4A1's they've been buying since 98'. It's turning out to be nothing more than an effort to shore up IMI's small arms division. They've been losing money for years.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2002 6:12:11 AM EDT
[#3]
I've been waiting for Barrett to bring those out since they displayed them at the SHOT show. I really, really want one.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2002 8:19:00 AM EDT
[#4]
$2000 for a post-ban bullpup???
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! You're kidding right? Buy a Bushmaster M17S and laugh all the way to the bank. If you like Israeli army stuff - buy a t-shirt for $10. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2002 8:31:20 AM EDT
[#5]
Dude, you forgot about the post ban Steyr AUG rifle the USR. That was in the 2k price range when first introduced about 5 years ago. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2002 11:44:19 AM EDT
[#6]
Interesting pictorial commentary on the Israelis attitude about M16 mags. The military version takes Galil mags.
Bullpups made with plastic?? Not in my house! Not when it was Austrian and not when it's Israeli either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2002 11:53:59 AM EDT
[#7]
I'll believe they are coming to the US when I have one in my hand. They were supposed to be introduced "shortly" about a year ago.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2002 5:16:36 PM EDT
[#8]
now why the hell didnt they just make it look like the original, sans flash hider?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2002 5:26:21 PM EDT
[#9]
 Damn that thing is ugly! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2002 5:26:45 PM EDT
[#10]
So you can buy the Surplus stocks and such later to make it look like the mil version....duh
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2002 6:00:11 PM EDT
[#11]
Ah,big deal.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2002 6:00:50 PM EDT
[#12]
Boys I think the Mill and Civ versions are two different animals. the Israeli Mil looks like a derivative of the South African one.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2002 7:24:01 PM EDT
[#13]
The civilian version is actual based on the newer Tavor 2 which hasnt been fielded yet. The original Tavor has seem limited testing in the field. Apparently there were some reliability issues that are addressed in the Tavor 2. Both are ugly as hell, but the original is the better looking of the two. Both were designed from the beginning to use M16 magazines. They are trying to have it made in the US, at least partially. The money we send them for defence requires them to purchase US made miltary equipment. Tavor 2 in commando version Check out the website. Lots of cool M16/M4 pics www.isayeret.com |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2002 9:55:56 PM EDT
[#14]
For that price I rather pay a little more and buy an AUG.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2002 10:27:11 PM EDT
[#15]
I didnt say I was buying one LOL. Just thought it was interesting. Funny thing, guns fascinate me. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/15/2002 11:45:52 PM EDT
[#16]
as i look at this thing one "word" comes to mind...
pug-fugly yech. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/16/2002 6:44:08 AM EDT
[#17]
It looks awkward in trying to change mags.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2002 1:46:12 PM EDT
[#18]
Thats an aweful lot of money for something like that, it better be top notch. I kinda like the look of it though, which is strange because I normally hate the bullpup setup.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2002 2:30:12 PM EDT
[#19]
How much does a FA Uzi cost? Id rather have one of those then a Semi post-ban bullpup.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2002 5:56:12 PM EDT
[#20]
According to Barret this deal fell through and it does not look like it will make it to production here in the US. Sorry to burst anyones bubble.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2002 6:30:00 PM EDT
[#21]
Damn, that is ugly. Can't wait to shoot someone elses Tavor. I'll never buy one.
Bob |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2002 7:44:22 PM EDT
[#22]
Not going to break my heart. I think the bullpup design is pretty much flawed from the beginning. I cant believe they are once again compromising on weapons because of political concerns. They'd be better off with the M16s and M4's they bought. Its a proven design. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2002 7:49:52 PM EDT
[#23]
Bought?? Did they buy them or did we give them to them. Or, did they use the money we gave them in the first place to buy them.. :)
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2002 8:21:08 PM EDT
[#24]
I think I covered that in my 2nd response on this post....reading is fundamental. I hope this post dies soon. LOL |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2002 8:33:08 PM EDT
[#25]
Oh, look at that.. now, did you actually think I'd read the WHOLE thread.. :)
And, this post will never die... :) |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/20/2002 7:08:27 AM EDT
[#26]
Can you explain why you think "the bullpup design is pretty much flawed from the beginning"? Not trying to flame you, I'm geniuinely curious since I consider the bullpup design fundementally superior. Other than perfecting a longer trigger linkage, and the gas system problems on the British SA-80, what's so bad about the bullpup design in itself? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/20/2002 7:38:37 AM EDT
[#27]
Guys, before you write this one off, remember that the TAVOR, just like the AR, has a 9mm conversion. The TAVOR conversion was DESIGNED to be used with Un-MODIFIED UZI mags.
If they build it, we will come. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/20/2002 8:30:25 AM EDT
[#28]
Before you guys write this gun off completely. I have an "operator" friend of mine that has played with one of the military versions. He said "...it's hands down the MOST accurate .223 battle rifle I've played with..." The gas system is very unique, and lends itself to great accuracy. The Israelis know how to build a rifle. Just 'cause it may not look nice, doesn't mean it won't shoot well. If it comes in at a reasonable price, I'd pick one up. I'm not a snob.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/20/2002 10:12:45 AM EDT
[#29]
yea, I was under the impression that the bullpup design, for many reasons, had the potential for the creation of a superior weapon...what gives with the anti bullpup sentiment? (other than yea, it's fugly -but I dun care)
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/20/2002 10:55:19 AM EDT
[#30]
The only draw back of a Bullpup is unable to shoot from the weak side. This problem was solved by the new FN F2000 which eject the empty casing out of front of the gun.
Bullpop is shorter overall in length, and Weight is center close to your body for better balance. I have an AUG, and I love it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/20/2002 11:08:47 AM EDT
[#31]
Try shooting a bullpup from the hip though, I never did like them as much as a conventional rifle. Just my.00000002.
P.S. I bet they suck for bayonette fighting! _______________________________________________ Got F.A.L.? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/20/2002 12:51:39 PM EDT
[#32]
I really hope that rumor of the deal with Barrett falling through isn't true! I've been waiting for one of those for a long time now!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/20/2002 1:19:41 PM EDT
[#33]
Bad points on Bull-Pups for MILITARY operations: 1) poor trigger 2) Can't shoot it from 50% of the world's cover (i.e. opposite side). 3) Magazine Changes are piss-poor and slow due to the awkward location. Bullpups are great for LEOs who want a compact weapon and don't have the cover issue nor worry about lots of magazine changes, like Soldiers and Marines do. SGM Lee is correct the FN version is ejecting from the front to cure problem #2. However from what I've seen the cases kinda dribble out. I'd hate to see reliability when it gets the ejection tube clogged up with mud and dirt after some hard use by the infantry. I don't doubt the rifle is accurate - but more so than an AR-15?? At best it can do is match it and with the type of trigger linkage I doubt you could match the results given the same shooter and identical optics. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/20/2002 4:45:08 PM EDT
[#34]
another over priced POS
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2002 6:09:44 AM EDT
[#35]
My dislike of bullpups was pretty much hit by Forest, with the exception I would put his list in the order of #2,#3,#1 with the last 2 running distant 2nd and 3rd. Im looking from the LE and civilian self defense standpoint. Given the statistical chances in a sustained fight of being injured by incoming fire in the hand or arm area, I dont like giving up the ability to transition to my weak shoulder. Even if you consider that unlikely, Im not fond of guns that don't allow that option at least. I also like to be able to cover either side of the available cover with as little of me sticking out as possible. Given the AR15/M16's high sight radius above the bore line, I like to use the side of cover when possible for the same reason. My Wilderness single point sling on a GG&G bracket allows me to make right to left transitions easily. Out of the current designs, obviously the AUG is the most refined and proven. Someone using it certainly couldn't be said to be at a true disadvantage, it's just not my cup of tea. To each his own. If you get the hits with it, you can cover my back with whatever you prefer. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2002 6:44:01 AM EDT
[#36]
I've heard that, with practice, reloading a bullpup can be just as fast as reloading a more conventional gun (like the M4).
But I've only HEARD that. I've yet to see any real evidence. The person that told me this said that the way to do it is to point the muzzle skyward and perform the reload with the left hand (assuming you're a rightie). Imagine trying do do it while prone. I'd gladly shift paradigms, but only for a good enough reason. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2002 6:48:18 AM EDT
[#37]
If I heard right, the gas system was not the only problem with the SA-80. The barrel was sweated into the receiver and could work itsself out after a while, there were plenty of small parts that had a way of getting lost, and the receiver was stamped out of thin sheet metal that could dent and bend if abused. Supposedly, Her Majesty's rifles were to be re-worked by H&K. I do not know if this has solved all the problems. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2002 8:24:34 AM EDT
[#38]
They were worked over but they still have issues. Lots of problem in Afghanistan right now. They were blaming it on the soldiers not cleaning the guns right - but even then their quoted failure rate was too high IMHO. If they were smart they dump thos POS bullpups and replace them with M16s or C7s |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2002 11:35:38 AM EDT
[#39]
I'd rather spend my money on a FAL
|
|
|
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.
