New Assault Rifles for Indian Army

[hitesh]

 

[Ky Loung]

The only advantage you get from a bullpup is compactness but gain crap load of negatives. Bullpup is not modernization. It's backwards. Modernization means does this firearms meet today needs and 25 to 50 years from now. Modernization means a modular design. Bullpups are not modular design. Bullpup are fix in a single shell. Modernizations means can the platform keep up with the relentless western technological advances.

Here are two interesting articles where US special OPS guys mod their rifles with aftermarket accessories to meet their needs in the battlefield.

Tactical AR-15/M4/M4A1 Carbine Aftermarket Accessories for Military Combat Applications: The Competition-to-Combat Crossover | DefenseReview.com (DR): An online tactical technology and military defense technology magazine with particular focus on the

Tactical AR-15/M4/M4A1 Carbine/SBR Aftermarket Accessories for Military Combat Applications: The Competition-to-Combat Crossover, Part II | DefenseReview.com (DR): An online tactical technology and military defense technology magazine with particular

In a modernized battle field where street and house to house fighting will occur, the bullpup design is not good choice. Bullpup design suffer from transition between strong and weak side. In urban fighting corners are 50/50. It means 50% corners are left sided and 50% of corners are right sided. If you're right handed and hide behind a left corner you need to switch to your left hand. Why? Because you want only a small portion of your body to stick out behind the corner when returning fire. You want to maximize protection and fire power.

Bullpup are bad in urban fighting because the ejection port is so close to your face. If the ejection port is right and you shot left handed the super hot brass will hit you. It can cause injuries to your face/eye/teeth/mouth. The Tavor have a quick change ejection port but lets be honest. It take time to switch and in a gun fight you won't have time or most likely you forgot about it.

Lets look at the Tavor because it's a flawed design. IWI knew about the flaws and created an improved version called X-95.

By looking at the X-95 you can somewhat figure out why they made the changes.

The bolt handle in the original Tavor is a safety issue. It too close to the muzzle so there is a chance that your hand or fingers will sweep the muzzle. You do not want the muzzle to sweep any part of your body. They move the bolt back to prevent it from happening.

Magazine release. They went full retard with the magazine release. The magazine release is right behind the hand guard. The magazine lever stick out so much that it is possible to accidentally hit it in a stressful situation. In the X-95 it is move forward so your index figure will release the magazine.

The bolt release is still in a bad place but at least it small enough to prevent snagging.

The stock itself has been steam lined to prevent snagging in tight places.

The Tavor suffer from suppressed issues. Super hot gases and carbon filth leaking everywhere when the Tavor is suppressed. It leaked right back into the shooter eyes, outside the stock, and caused reliability issues.

 

[Ky Loung]

The forum only let me post 8 images. Here are the other two from the suppress Tavor.

One last thing an honest review from a IDF soldier.
A hands on review of the IWI X95 micro tavor

 

[Immanuel]

Well we don't operate the Micro tavor x-95 for a reason, it failed trials, but the basic x95 was deemed fit for service with Cobra units after extensive trials civilian versions in the US are never meant to match mil specs, I have had conversations with active duty SF units in the IAF and Para SF, all pleased with the Tavor, they use it to good effect in the desert, high altitude areas and damp rain drenched Eastern jungles. I can post plenty of nightmare stories of the M4 as well. A rifles reliability depends on many factors, bad quality ammo can chew up even the mighty AK.

A bullpup can be just as reliable as an AR and many SF units use them to good effect. Keep in mind all rifles failed trials in India in phase 1, India is the pinnacle of harsh environments, will be hard for most rifles to work perfectly in India.

 

[ghost]

The forum only let me post 8 images. Here are the other two from the suppress Tavor.

One last thing an honest review from a IDF soldier.
A hands on review of the IWI X95 micro tavor

Answer these two questions.

1 If tar 21 is such a bad rifle(as per you) .Then why is it issued to the elite units of Israel ,where as other units still have m4 and m16 which are much better (as per you)?

2 In India we have 4 different special forces ,all of them make their own independent purchase irrespective of what other are using.One of them is covert and it was the first one to receive tar 21 in India.The other three had previously been using three different standard assault rifle vz 58,ak 47/56 and ak 101 respectively.Among them, para sf were the first to receive tar 21.Which are actively engaged in combat ,in confined areas (villages and cities),in dense jungles,in hills and mountains in J&k.After that the garuds adopted tar followed by marcos.Now, what i want to ask you is this, if tar 21 was that bad why would other special forces follow para sf,when they could have easily gone for some other rifle just as they previously did?And that too after tar 21 had spent considerable amount of time in active combat under para sf,so its fault would be right out in the open for other forces to see and gauze before deciding to adopt it,why?

This gentleman is biased against bullpup,just like you.See what he has to say about tar 21.Please do hear.


AND what about him


I have never fired tar 21,but the fact that it has been adopted by all the special forces in my country,what these two gentlemen featured above have to say and the fact that tar 21 has build a good reputation throughout the world is enough for me ,to be convinced that most things are right in this assault rifle.

Can you fire like this with ur AR

Now coming to the link you provide about x95.Few things from that same poster.

I've never gotten to even handle the full size Tavor but friends of mine from earlier drafts that got to either train or work for a short period with them before switching over really liked them a lot.

From what I've been told this is a X95 issue, all my friends that had full size experience didn't have these issues.

While other member posted in same thread
My Tavor is a thing of beauty. More so for it's reliability than for it's looks. It has become my "go to" rifle and has an ELCAN SpecterDR Dual Role optic and a Docter red dot piggyback backup sight.

 

[hitesh]

 

[hitesh]

 

[hitesh]

The more i know it ,the more i l love it

 

[s002wjh]

Answer these two questions.

1 If tar 21 is such a bad rifle(as per you) .Then why is it issued to the elite units of Israel ,where as other units still have m4 and m16 which are much better (as per you)?

2 In India we have 4 different special forces ,all of them make their own independent purchase irrespective of what other are using.One of them is covert and it was the first one to receive tar 21 in India.The other three had previously been using three different standard assault rifle vz 58,ak 47/56 and ak 101 respectively.Among them, para sf were the first to receive tar 21.Which are actively engaged in combat ,in confined areas (villages and cities),in dense jungles,in hills and mountains in J&k.After that the garuds adopted tar followed by marcos.Now, what i want to ask you is this, if tar 21 was that bad why would other special forces follow para sf,when they could have easily gone for some other rifle just as they previously did?And that too after tar 21 had spent considerable amount of time in active combat under para sf,so its fault would be right out in the open for other forces to see and gauze before deciding to adopt it,why?

This gentleman is biased against bullpup,just like you.See what he has to say about tar 21.Please do hear.


AND what about him


I have never fired tar 21,but the fact that it has been adopted by all the special forces in my country,what these two gentlemen featured above have to say and the fact that tar 21 has build a good reputation throughout the world is enough for me ,to be convinced that most things are right in this assault rifle.

Can you fire like this with ur AR

Now coming to the link you provide about x95.Few things from that same poster.

I've never gotten to even handle the full size Tavor but friends of mine from earlier drafts that got to either train or work for a short period with them before switching over really liked them a lot.

From what I've been told this is a X95 issue, all my friends that had full size experience didn't have these issues.

While other member posted in same thread
My Tavor is a thing of beauty. More so for it's reliability than for it's looks. It has become my "go to" rifle and has an ELCAN SpecterDR Dual Role optic and a Docter red dot piggyback backup sight.

the tavor suit israel better due to the environment/battlefield they are in mostly urban. the bullpop has its advantage been easier to move in/out from vehicle and easier to fire in vehicle. for a traditional battlefield, the tavor doesn't provide any benefit. I fire tavor before, the trigger sucks almost 12lb pull, and suppressed has issue too. tavor did a pretty good marketing in the US, thats why alot people buy it. is it better than AK/m4, in different situation yes, but it also has disadvantage compare to M4 etc

there is a reason ppl in competition or 223 precision shooting still prefer AR. the ar is such module rifle where you can pop in a different upper under a minute for different situation. ar trigger is better which provide better accuracy. in a battlefield where engagement are in 100-400yrd, i don't think i would use tavor. but for house to house where engagement is less than 100yrd, get in/out of vehicle, the tavor has its advantages.

ppl pay $1800 on gun not gonna say it sucks

Gun Review: IWI TAVOR SAR - The Truth About Guns

The Bad

I. Hate. This. Trigger.

I thought the trigger on the KRISS carbine was bad, but the TAVOR's is quite possibly the worst trigger I've ever felt. Not only is it creepier than an uninvited clown at a 12-year-old's birthday party, it's exceedingly heavy. My trigger finger was too tired to keep pulling after about 20 rapid fire rounds, sooner than any other firearm I've ever tested.



That trigger translates to terrible accuracy downrange. I took the rifle to the Best of the West range and tried my best to get a good 5 round group at 50 yards, but this was the tightest I had all day. Mil spec calls for a 4 MoA or better spread. This rifle, in my hands, could only muster an 8 MoA spread. For me, if I was going to drop TWO THOUSAND dollars on a new rifle, I would expect at least 2 MoA or better.

Don't get me wrong, this is fine if you're expecting "minute of bad guy" accuracy. But it severely limits the usefulness of the gun.



Long range shooting? Forget it. I could hit the gong at 250 yards most of the time, but the gun was dancing all around the 500 yard steel target. The crappy trigger, combined with the short overall length, means that this rifle is most definitely not intended to leave the realm of the red dot.

Competition shooting? While the gun is maneuverable, the crappy trigger and the short overall length are the gun's downfall. While 3-gun rifles have been getting progressively shorter, there's a reason that not a single shooter in the pro series uses a bullpup configuration rifle. The longer overall length allows for more leverage to be placed on the gun to keep it stable, and that's not possible with the TAVOR.

Hunting? While the 5.56 round is more than adequate for most critters here in Texas (and .300 BLK even more so), the less than stellar accuracy of the rifle makes me hesitant to recommend it. The small size does make it ideal for getting in and out of vehicles to hunt and convenient to carry around, but for the same reasons that it doesn't do well as a competition rifle I wouldn't recommend this as a hunting rifle either.

Even with simply firing the gun, it has some issues. The gun uses a combination of direct impingement esque gas tubes and a gas piston to cycle the action, and the point at which they meet is conveniently right next to your face. Which means that after about five rounds, you get as much gas in your face as if you were shooting a suppressed full auto M4 with a 7 inch barrel. For those who have never had the pleasure of asphyxiating on firearms exhaust while shooting before, I can tell you it is not a good time. Add a silencer into the mix on this gun and the blowback would be more than I would find comfortable.

The Ugly (Truth)

At the end of the day, what we have here is a one trick pony. It's amazing for home defense and will top my list for that purpose from now on, but for everything else you would want to do with a firearm (other than having it as a range toy) it falls short.

Despite the many, many drawbacks, the gun is still fun to shoot. So if you're looking for a range toy and can drop 2 grand without blinking an eye, then I think you'll like this gun. But if you're looking for a gun that will do more than satisfy your craving for a trendy niche gun, this is not the firearm you are looking for.

That said, I still want one. No one ever said that every rifle in your collection needs to have a purpose . . .

 

[ghost]

the tavor suit israel better due to the environment/battlefield they are in mostly urban. the bullpop has its advantage been easier to move in/out from vehicle and easier to fire in vehicle. for a traditional battlefield, the tavor doesn't provide any benefit. I fire tavor before, the trigger sucks almost 12lb pull, and suppressed has issue too. tavor did a pretty good marketing in the US, thats why alot people buy it. is it better than AK/m4, in different situation yes, but it also has disadvantage compare to M4 etc

there is a reason ppl in competition or 223 precision shooting still prefer AR. the ar is such module rifle where you can pop in a different upper under a minute for different situation. ar trigger is better which provide better accuracy. in a battlefield where engagement are in 100-400yrd, i don't think i would use tavor. but for house to house where engagement is less than 100yrd, get in/out of vehicle, the tavor has its advantages.

ppl pay $1800 on gun not gonna say it sucks

Gun Review: IWI TAVOR SAR - The Truth About Guns

First let me make something clear,no one is down grading AR here, definitely not projecting tar 21 as the ultimate assault rifle(as for being one,one has to have no disadvantage,down point or flaw)which is not true for a single assault rifle out there.You have to make compromise here and there,at the end you have to decide the main purpose for the rifle.Tar 21 being made to fight, perform the main purpose of good assault rifle well.It has its own share of advantages and disadvantage when compared with ar.But if you compare all the points in different areas and then make the final assessment, tar 21 will fair better than ar over all.

The Good

The TAVOR SAR (hereafter referred to as simply "the TAVOR") is exceedingly compact. It fits in places where only an SBR could previously go, including small trunks and briefcases. Which makes it much easier to sneak the gun in and out of your apartment building without getting the stink-eye from the neighbor with the Obama/Biden '12 sticker. It also makes the gun more maneuverable, an especially prized feature for close quarters-style fighting. In fact, for that reason alone, this might have sprung straight to the top of my recommendation list for home defense rifles.

I have to admit to spending a good half hour clearing my apartment with the rifle over and over again, and compared to my previous rifle of choice (300 BLK AR-15) it was delightfully sleek and unobtrusive. Having all the weight of the gun behind the pistol grip allowed me to free my support hand to open doors or hold a flashlight without ever really losing control of the rifle. For the first time, this gun allowed me to open a door and keep the rifle shouldered and ready to fire at the same time. I loved it.

The rifle's design, with its easy disassembly and modularity, is excellent in theory as well as practice.

Field stripping the gun for cleaning is easy as pie. One pin and the whole bolt and piston assembly slides free, opening the gun up for maintenance. It's a welcome change from the complicated dance of the AR-15 and its charging handle, which has thrown many a newbie for a loop when tearing the gun down for the first time. Definitely something that new and experienced shooters alike will appreciate.

With the push of a couple pins and the turn of a couple keys, the gun will readily convert from the current 5.56 NATO configuration to any other caliber that can fit in an AR-15 magazine well. According to the IWI reps, a .300 AAC Blackout conversion kit will be available within the year and a 9mm and 5.45×39 kit are already in production. It's nice to see a rifle that can be changed so radically with such little work. By comparison, the AR-15 requires specialized tools and more to get the barrels changed out. It's so daunting a task that I prefer to buy a new complete upper than to swap a barrel myself.

Moving forward on the gun, there are two things I want to point out as particularly excellent.

First, the forward-mounted charging handle. Not only is it non-reciprocating (averting the only complaint about the SCAR I have) so you don't bash your knuckles, but it falls readily to hand and is easy to operate. In short, it just works.

Speaking of "there when you need it," the thing just refuses to die. I used the worst ammunition I could find, the worst magazines I could muster (including some experimental models), and tried everything I could think of to make this gun jam. But no matter what I did, the TAVOR fired reliably every single time.

Bad (as pointed by you)

Trigger -it's heavy

Yes it is.But does it mean it is bad?The person in the video posted above mention this "the trigger is heavy but turns out to be a good one".It's heavy but a lot of that is due to the additional springs included to help force the trigger to reset even if the mechanism is full of sand (IWI overengineered the thing. Thoroughly). People have removed one of those springs and managed to get much more reasonable trigger weights out of them.

One can easily modify trigger by themselves (by removing extra spring) and bring down the trigger weight around ar .

Range- accuracy long ranges

This i will hand it down to you .AR has better accuracy in long ranges,but this does not mean tar 21(18 inch barrel) fails at long ranges,it is still effective at long ranges just that ar is better at it,but you can easily bring down a target at 500 yards with tar 21,most of the modern battle particularly special forces firefight happens anywhere to the range of 300 yards where it is quite effective.See tar 21 at 500 yards in rain.


Suppressed problems-Yes it is a major issue to some but then for some it does not seem so.I cannot find much detail about it so i guess have to hand it to you.Though i guess there is some replacement ejection port cover being provided which seem to tackle this issue.

Only good as a range toy-Yes but for whom ?civilians ,who can go in a precision firing competition (but this rifle was not made for that),cannot go to hunting (at long ranges yes there are far more better rifle made for that),can go to firefight-(this is the main purpose for which this rifle was created but being civilian i do not think you can make use of it)

Price- This is a point from my side .As i feel it is a bit overpriced,to be frank if it has to be made as cheap as an ar than i think you feel see a lot more of it than the traditional AR.


So in the end tar 21 is a compact,reliable rifle which has good ergonomics along with good weight distribution which make it a lot easier to handle.It has very good accuracy upto 300m and reasonably accurate at much longer ranges .It's not an precision rifle,its an assault rifle meant for battle where you know all the shooting is based on reflex action(where tar 21 excels due to its weight distribution and ergonomics),m4 maybe better at long ranges but then you cannot set the limit for ur firefight in a battle.You would have to face any situation in a battle ,and hence a weapon which excel overall in most of the situation is a better choice.

Good marketing tactics-Tavor is being used by "military" special forces of Azerbaijan,Brazil,Colombia,Georgia,Guatemala,India ,Philippines,Portugal,Thailand and Ukraine .If all of these just bought some uber expensive junk just based on marketing (without any trials and inspection and handling)than god save all.

The person who is featured in the video above have borrowed tar from someone ,so no he has not paid for it.Plus "Tar 21 SUCKS" you will find people all over the world who share similar thought for one or the other product.The main factor which decide reputation about the product is whether the people that hold such thought are in minority or majority.And my friend i have to say you are in minority as far as it goes for tar 21.

note*- I am having problem in posting in the forum so was not able to properly highlight and underline important points.So please excuse for the poor presentation.

 

[s002wjh]

No one said tavor is bad, but when compare to its competitor its not better. In term reliability AK has superp track record, in term of accuracy AR is better. Unless you hit man-size target 3-400yrd at the range, then Tavor can do that, but in a situation where enemy is covered, and you only has time to peek and aim, tavor accuracy goes down alot. Tavor was meant for CQB, that suit israel really well since all their combat are taken place in urban environment, taking tavor out/in of vehicle, shoot inside vehicle is better than AK/AR (except with ar that has CQB profile). tavor can be made better by upgrading its trigger, the factory trigger just sucks, the one i shot has creep/long take up and 12ib trigger pull (yes a heavy trigger is bad).

there are countries use tavor, than there are countries use AK/AR for their SF, so its a wash.

Modern AR is significantly reliable than some the older AR, some company goes beyond mil-spec. Tavor has the advantage of been a CQB and still keep 16" barrel, but they really need to upgrade the trigger to make it accurate. Nothing they can do about the gas blowback though. At the end it just depends on your battlefield. for ALL kinds of battlefield, the AR is very versatile, change the upper from SPR to CQB under a min.
For the price though you can get 2 mil-spec AR, is it twice better than AR, NO. The advantage of tavor is CQB with 16-18" barrel, but due to its trigger, its hard to get consistent group 2-400yrd. Now if they upgrade the trigger then its much better rifle


oh btw the video you show, the guy has a upgraded trigger. if you shoot precision rifle long enough, then you know for accuracy is barrel, trigger, ergonomic/length of pull etc.

 

[ghost]

No one said tavor is bad, but when compare to its competitor its not better. In term reliability AK has superp track record, in term of accuracy AR is better. Unless you hit man-size target 3-400yrd at the range, then Tavor can do that, but in a situation where enemy is covered, and you only has time to peek and aim, tavor accuracy goes down alot. Tavor was meant for CQB, that suit israel really well since all their combat are taken place in urban environment, taking tavor out/in of vehicle, shoot inside vehicle is better than AK/AR (except with ar that has CQB profile). tavor can be made better by upgrading its trigger, the factory trigger just sucks, the one i shot has creep/long take up and 12ib trigger pull (yes a heavy trigger is bad).

there are countries use tavor, than there are countries use AK/AR for their SF, so its a wash.

Modern AR is significantly reliable than some the older AR, some company goes beyond mil-spec. Tavor has the advantage of been a CQB and still keep 16" barrel, but they really need to upgrade the trigger to make it accurate. Nothing they can do about the gas blowback though. At the end it just depends on your battlefield. for ALL kinds of battlefield, the AR is very versatile, change the upper from SPR to CQB under a min.
For the price though you can get 2 mil-spec AR, is it twice better than AR, NO. The advantage of tavor is CQB with 16-18" barrel, but due to its trigger, its hard to get consistent group 2-400yrd. Now if they upgrade the trigger then its much better rifle


oh btw the video you show, the guy has a upgraded trigger. if you shoot precision rifle long enough, then you know for accuracy is barrel, trigger, ergonomic/length of pull etc.

By pointing out countries that use tavor ,i wanted to show you that tar 21 is not just a mere marketing gimmick,as you pointed out.

It's good that you mention ak ,basically tar 21 combines the reliability of ak with accuracy of ar.


Regarding ur doubts about trigger



Tavor fired at 600 +yards accurately,used for hunting ,and shooting while on move



Now what do you consider as cqb, at ranges of 300 to 400 yards it's quite effective .Again i repeat the accuracy is good which will turn to excellent with regular training on it,do not expect outstanding.

 

[s002wjh]

By pointing out countries that use tavor ,i wanted to show you that tar 21 is not just a mere marketing gimmick,as you pointed out.

It's good that you mention ak ,basically tar 21 combines the reliability of ak with accuracy of ar.


Regarding ur doubts about trigger



Tavor fired at 600 +yards accurately,used for hunting ,and shooting while on move



Now what do you consider as cqb, at ranges of 300 to 400 yards it's quite effective .Again i repeat the accuracy is good which will turn to excellent with regular training on it,do not expect outstanding.

i didn't say tavor is a gimmtrick, tavor is a capable weapon, but its not better or worse than ar/ak.

its very good CQB weapon, as for reliability AK still supreme, accuracy/trigger AR is better.

factory tavor has a really bad trigger, and IDF doesn't seem going to upgraded it anytime soon. the video shows the guy replace factory trigger with a aftermarket one, even then it still can't compete with AR trigger, thats due to nature of bullup design, there is link/rod in bullpup design. also is india SF gonna get these trigger? doesnt seem like it.

I consider CQB <200yrd.

also you only search ppl who like tavor, but disregarding ppl who has issue with it. also 600yrd is for target shooting. if i can sit on my bench and aim all day long, i can fire mosin nagant to 600 yard and further with good scope. its consistency, can it hit 1 moa with 5 shot group for most tavor?
if its more accurate than AR why competition pro still use AR.
as i state previous you can hate target at 300-400yrd, but its not as accurate as AR.

oh i say again Tavor is a good rifle, just not as good as everybody claim to be, which is beat AK/AR in its strong pts.
SOCOM still use M4 type platform for 5.56, even though scar16 exist.

 

[ghost]

i didn't say tavor is a gimmtrick, tavor is a capable weapon, but its not better or worse than ar/ak.

its very good CQB weapon, as for reliability AK still supreme, accuracy/trigger AR is better.

factory tavor has a really bad trigger, and IDF doesn't seem going to upgraded it anytime soon. the video shows the guy replace factory trigger with a aftermarket one, even then it still can't compete with AR trigger, thats due to nature of bullup design, there is link/rod in bullpup design. also is india SF gonna get these trigger? doesnt seem like it.

I consider CQB <200yrd.

also you only search ppl who like tavor, but disregarding ppl who has issue with it. also 600yrd is for target shooting. if i can sit on my bench and aim all day long, i can fire mosin nagant to 600 yard and further with good scope. its consistency, can it hit 1 moa with 5 shot group for most tavor?
if its more accurate than AR why competition pro still use AR.
as i state previous you can hate target at 300-400yrd, but its not as accurate as AR.

oh i say again Tavor is a good rifle, just not as good as everybody claim to be, which is beat AK/AR in its strong pts.
SOCOM still use M4 type platform for 5.56, even though scar16 exist.

You have not watched this video,i suggest you do now.As it is shown over here ,you need to to just remove an extra pin(of the orginal trigger ) and u will get a trigger similar to an ar.So no need to buy new one.It also refers to the link you previously provided,so please do watch it.

Now m4 is a good rifle ,i agree.Tavor is a good rifle ,you agree.So basically the whole argument is about which one is better.To tell you the truth this depends very much on personal preference of shooter,some prefer m4 over tavor while some are big fan of tar.There are endless debate over internet regarding this, and all remain inconclusive.

If you are in states or canada ,then i suggest get hold of three people, one who is madly in love with and owns tar 21,another an m4 lover and same goes for ak.Then do a proper comparison trial of all the three rifles ,cover each and every detail, right from accuracy at 50,200 and 600 yards to handling,reflex shooting,ergonomics and all other factors.Do a detail test on all the three rifle and then post the video. it would be great if you can do this:thumb:just keep in mind all the three guys operating rifles should be pro and fan of the weapon they are representing to keep it unbiased and fair.:thumb:

 

[s002wjh]

You have not watched this video,i suggest you do now.As it is shown over here ,you need to to just remove an extra pin(of the orginal trigger ) and u will get a trigger similar to an ar.So no need to buy new one.It also refers to the link you previously provided,so please do watch it.

Now m4 is a good rifle ,i agree.Tavor is a good rifle ,you agree.So basically the whole argument is about which one is better.To tell you the truth this depends very much on personal preference of shooter,some prefer m4 over tavor while some are big fan of tar.There are endless debate over internet regarding this, and all remain inconclusive.

If you are in states or canada ,then i suggest get hold of three people, one who is madly in love with and owns tar 21,another an m4 lover and same goes for ak.Then do a proper comparison trial of all the three rifles ,cover each and every detail, right from accuracy at 50,200 and 600 yards to handling,reflex shooting,ergonomics and all other factors.Do a detail test on all the three rifle and then post the video. it would be great if you can do this:thumb:just keep in mind all the three guys operating rifles should be pro and fan of the weapon they are representing to keep it unbiased and fair.:thumb:

yes i watch the video month ago, i'm subscriber of his channel. there are alot issue of modifing tavor trigger, some people has issue afterward. also its not recommended by the company to modify the trigger. like i said I shot tavor before, the accuracy is not as good as AR and trigger is too heavy, thats given thats the flaw of tavor compare to AR, but its advantage is CQB, rapid acquisition etc. each has own pros and cons.

here is another video escape to 40:45 for his take on 200yrd+

 

[ghost]

yes i watch the video month ago, i'm subscriber of his channel. there are alot issue of modifing tavor trigger, some people has issue afterward. also its not recommended by the company to modify the trigger. like i said I shot tavor before, the accuracy is not as good as AR and trigger is too heavy, thats given thats the flaw of tavor compare to AR, but its advantage is CQB, rapid acquisition etc. each has own pros and cons.

here is another video escape to 40:45 for his take on 200yrd+

Basically he says the same thing ,which i have mentioned previously.That ar is better at long ranges .But please make a comparison chart of each and every feature of assault rifles,i am sure tavor would prevail over m4 overall.Trigger is not that bad for forces ,it is heavy but still good and not such an issue for forces and some people quite liked it.But beside trigger,accuracy at long ranges and maybe suppressed fire issue (which i am not quite sure about)tar scores over ar on every other points.

Beside tar ,have you ever fired cz bren 805,sig 556 ,arx 160 or galil ace .If yes ,would like to know how would you rate these rifles.

 

[s002wjh]

fire sig 556 before, personally i like brand such as BCM noveske LMT.

the tavor is good CQB, reliability i would say better than colt ar, but not sure when it compare to BCM LMT noveske ars cause those usually are above mil-spec and bit high end ar.
i like tavor side charge handle compare to ar, but when i fire from weak side i do get more gas, kind hate that, but thats the design of bullpop, not much can do about it.
if tavor can upgrade their trigger into a crisp clean trigger than thats big improvement. and i can see that give better accuracy at long range.
tavor rail is short so you can't mount a rifle scope and a thermal/nighvision in front of it. but its not meant for SPR type rifle anyway
also for catastrophic failure a bullpop is more danger than a traditional rifle, but its pretty rare to happen. i read somewhere one for reason US didn't adopt bullpop is due to this, not sure true or not.

now scar 17H thats something I like

 

[Immanuel]

Indeed love the SCAR, both the mk16 & mk17 are great, pity they are not in the competition, they could have easily won this competition, perhaps the most reliable rifles on the market right now.

Along with the FNX .45 great combo

 

[JBH22]

Scrap all this futuristic crap like Beretta X-4 etc. Go for Russian reliable and rugged guns. I believe it is suitable for Indian conditions and the average Infantry.

 

[Hari Sud]

Any of these rifles if made in India will be alright. Otherwise INSAS is good enough. Some fool of a general who may have retired need to be penalized for following American theories of smaller bullet as opposed to 7.62 mm standard bullet. Now his successors without admitting an error are pushing the nation into a major upgrade of this nicely working rifle. They quote only old references of rifle not performing in -60 degrees in Siachen. Or the quote are quality problems which can be easily fixed without finding faults.

Do not listen to the arms dealers. They come to India to sell by proving everything defective in Indian hands.

Battles are fought with guts and glory not with colt or Bereta, or Galil or many other rifles under consideration.

Save the money to be expended on replacing INSAS rifles. Instead buy the God of The War - Artillery.