Colt M-16 family vs IMI Tavor family

[StarvingStudent47]

Since we've got a few people from the IDF around here, I was wondering what people's perspective on this issue is. I've heard a lot of contradictory info. Some people say the Tavors are far superior, but economics and tradition keep the IDF using Colts; other people have really criticized the IMI rifle.

Also, I don't know so much about the Tavor. Does it have some of the same problems that other bullpups do? (hard to switch shoulders because of where the casing ejects, etc?) Are there any areas where it really excels above an M-16?

Thoughts?

[kutter]

You can find some excellent info on the Tavor here:
http://www.isayeret.com/weapons/assault/tavor/guide.htm

[IDFM203]

From what I know, it’s simply to early to tell. That isayeret article is a bit old now. From what I know, the IMI released a newer and more updated tavor that was supposed to address some of the main concerns about bullpup weapons. There hasn’t been sufficient battlefield testing to fully say one thing or the other.

Just two months age the Idf officially announced that the army is completely switching over to the tavor (it in fact ordered over 15,000 of them as an initial order to be delivered to infantry units).

Now of course politics had something to do with it, but I hardly doubt also that the idf would be switching to a more expensive weapon if it weren’t a good one.

anyways just some thoughts..........

[thatguy96]

I'm sure there is a lot of bias in the IDF surrounding the simple fact that they're getting AR-15/M16 family members essentially free (leaving cash to **** around with them and mod them seven ways to Sunday) and have to pay full price for Tavors. It was up for debate for a long time whether the IDF was going to go for the Tavor at all simply because of the US military aid issue. I was actually quite surprised that they decided to buy them at all in the end, and I'm sure it will complement the weapons already in front-line service, not replace them.

As for actual physical and performance gripes one way or the other, I know nothing about the Tavor and have shot nothing based on the pattern, so I'm not even going to tackle a comparison...

[obd]

First of all, the onyl reason it is being adopted is because IMI needs a big boost from the Israeli government. Whats going on is domestic political bullcrap which is going to give the Israeli's a weapon they dont need or want. The bullpup design is generally flawed even though it has its benefits. Number one, the tavor has no backup iron sites in case the opticals fail, break, or get fogged up in cold, misty, rainy, or muddy conditions. Number two, the tavor is difficult or impossible to fire left handed and is not really so easily converted to do that. Also, is the middle of urban combat it is often necessary to switch the rifle to different shoulders as you go around left or right corners so you dont expose yourself to fire. Its called "cutting the pie" by American SWAT units (the most experienced urban warfare specialists in the world). Consider Israel and Gaza and West Bank= they are one HUGE urban environment. I sure as hell wouldnt want a bullpup in that territitory. MAybe the Jews are palnning to invade Russia?? :) Number three, despite what you see on games like Tom Clancy Raven Shield, it is damn near impossible to use beta C-mags and other "high cap" mags on bullpup designs. Also, magazine changes are far more awkward and slow than on conventional designs (not a good thing in combat). If you look at the latest most ultra modern weapons designs by nations with the MOST experience in designing small arms, they are no logner bull pups. The russian made An-94 Abakan, the Heckler and Kock G-36, etc.... are all conventional designs. The Israli's are some of the most experienced urban fighters around, but unfortunately their weapons choice is not being decided by the Army or police units, it is being decided by politicians who are being payed off by IMI which produces the Tavor. Im sorry, but thats wrong. Give the Israeli army what its want = The m-16a2 and especially the m4 SOPMOD variant with the QD 40mm grenade launcher. Nuthin works better in an urban place than a carbine with a "nade launcher" to clear those doors and windows of enemy snipers. Also works well for launching just past a corner and killing the guys around the corner with fragments!!!!

[IDFM203]

First of all, the onyl reason it is being adopted is because IMI needs a big boost from the Israeli government. Whats going on is domestic political bullcrap which is going to give the Israeli's a weapon they dont need or want. The bullpup design is generally flawed even though it has its benefits. Number one, the tavor has no backup iron sites in case the opticals fail, break, or get fogged up in cold, misty, rainy, or muddy conditions. Number two, the tavor is difficult or impossible to fire left handed and is not really so easily converted to do that. what you say is somewhat true. Of course politics plays into this. But I am still waiting judgment on the tavor. That’s because the first and second tavor defiantly had the problems that you just mentioned, though being that I am not in the military now, I haven’t seen the latest tavor which I heard addressed those problems. Also the newer taovr just recently entered service and hasn’t been fully battle tested yet so all judgments should really wait.


Listen the idf already had switched from the m16 to its own home produced wepon. The galil had switched from the m16 in the 80’s and was the standard infantry rifle until the early 90’. Now what happened was that the special forces didn’t like it and they switched back to the m16 and the rest of the idf followed suit.

The same will be with the tavor. If it is not a good weapon then they will switch back as was the case before when Israel had already produced its own (a lot say very good) weapon which a lot of militaries in fact use.

We just have to wait and see till a real judgment on the tavor can be made

Also, is the middle of urban combat it is often necessary to switch the rifle to different shoulders as you go around left or right corners so you dont expose yourself to fire. yes good point and believe me we know this well. again if it doesn’t meet those high standards then eventually Israel wont use it just like what happened with the galil

Its simply to early to tell if the tavor is better then the m4 or m16 or not.


Its called "cutting the pie" by American SWAT units (the most experienced urban warfare specialists in the world). I would have to disagree with that but this is not meant as a flame war or anything, just rather a friendly disagreement from one great military to another.

The Israli's are some of the most experienced urban fighters around, but unfortunately their weapons choice is not being decided by the Army or police units, it is being decided by politicians who are being payed off by IMI which produces the Tavor. while there is defiantly merit to what you are saying, it still doesn’t mean that the tavor is a bad weapon or that it is not better then the m4 (which I am not claiming to be, I am just saying that we don’t know yet).


The m-16a2 and especially the m4 SOPMOD variant with the QD 40mm grenade launcher. Nuthin works better in an urban place than a carbine with a "nade launcher" to clear those doors and windows of enemy snipers. Also works well for launching just past a corner and killing the guys around the corner with fragments!!!! amen to that!!! heck look at my screen name to have an idea of how positively I feel about the m16/m4 types of weapons especially the “nade launcher” (the “matolon” in Hebrew)

Shalom. :D

[Golani68]

Hi IDFM203

Have you had to chance to fire a tavor yet
as the paras are testing them

[IDFM203]

Hi IDFM203

Have you had to chance to fire a tavor yet
as the paras are testing themhi to you as well :D

No I have not fired that weapon. I am out of the military now.

From what I know and (and could say here on line with out circumventing OPSEC rules) a certain unit in “tzanchnim" (paratroopers) was the first to test it in training and then it went to “givati” unit for operational testing in gaza. now from what I explained before. that was the older tavor and not the improved one.

I really don’t know to much about the improved one for again I am not in the military now.

[Golani68]

IDF m203

yes I know who used them first

Do not worry if you go back in
and we all have Tavors most unlikely
you can still put your matolon on one

Cheers and keep standing up for all of us

[IDFM203]

IDF m203

yes I know who used them first

Do not worry if you go back in
and we all have Tavors most unlikely
you can still put your matolon on one

Cheers and keep standing up for all of us

yeah I hear you :D

ps. did you get my PM ??

[REMOV]

First of all, the onyl reason it is being adopted is because IMI needs a big boost from the Israeli government. ...as the enemies of Tavor says ;)
Whats going on is domestic political bullcrap which is going to give the Israeli's a weapon they dont need or want. The Tavor is quite new design and it has better features than M16A1 rifles and carbines that Israel uses.
The bullpup design is generally flawed even though it has its benefits. Ekhm... I don't agree it isn't generally flawed.
Number one, the tavor has no backup iron sites in case the opticals fail, break, or get fogged up in cold, misty, rainy, or muddy conditions.Right, but modern optical sights are quite resistant to external conditions. And such situation is rare.
Number two, the tavor is difficult or impossible to fire left handed and is not really so easily converted to do that. Huh? The ejection ports are made on both sides of the weapon, and the right or the left side ejection can be selected by installing the bolt with the ejector mounted on the right or on the left, also charging handle slots are cut on the both sides of the gun housing, so it can be installed on both sides of the weapon.
Also, is the middle of urban combat it is often necessary to switch the rifle to different shoulders as you go around left or right corners so you dont expose yourself to fire. And to very fast moving the whole rifle - and bullpups design is unbeatable here. There more portable and better balanced than classic design assault rifle. Also in MOUT the gun lenght is very important factor, and again, here bullpup design rules here.
Number three, despite what you see on games like Tom Clancy Raven Shield, it is damn near impossible to use beta C-mags and other "high cap" mags on bullpup designs.Right, but also in classic design weapons such mags are rarely used.
Also, magazine changes are far more awkward and slow than on conventional designs (not a good thing in combat).Only when you lying down. The magazine change is also fast, but is made in different way.
If you look at the latest most ultra modern weapons designs by nations with the MOST experience in designing small arms, they are no logner bull pups. The MOST experience nation in designing small arms are Belgian (FN factories - they made Browning HP, FN FAL (over 90 countries around the world used this battle rifle), FNC, FN P90, FN F2000) - they created TWO new bullpup design - F2000 and P90. Only the Germans and based on their ideas (G36) Americans still stays at classic design. All new assault rifles (i.e. SAR-21, Tavor, F2000, new FA MAS, even Chinese developed bullpup rifles - QBZ-95), most of heavy sniper rifles are in bullpup desing. Also XM29. So...
The russian made An-94 Abakan, the Heckler and Kock G-36, etc.There is no "etc.". And Abakan is dead end in weapon designing, I don't think that this weapon will be widely used or manufactured. The only new assault rifle - it means made in 90s - in classic design is G36 (and it's American descendant - XM8).
... are all conventional designs. Really? Show me that assault rifles, ok? ;)
The Israli's are some of the most experienced urban fighters around, but unfortunately their weapons choice is not being decided by the Army or police units, it is being decided by politicians who are being payed off by IMI which produces the Tavor. No offence, but it's a bull****. The Tavor was designed and tested not by politicans but quite good gun designers, which were advised by experienced soldiers, so... the design is well-thought-out.
Give the Israeli army what its want = The m-16a2 and especially the m4 SOPMOD variant with the QD 40mm grenade launcher. Check MRBF of M4 and Tavor, ok? Also Tavor can be equiped with 40mm GL.

Eh, the world is a strange place, the Pole sells Israeli of choose Israeli weapon ;)

[IDFM203]

Hey good job there......I know that Israel sells a lot of military equipment as well as upgrades on existing stuff... I am just curious if the pols are going to buy this weapon?!?

I know that India is now buying it and a few others are waiting for more testing.

[Royal]

Its called "cutting the pie" by American SWAT units (the most experienced urban warfare specialists in the world).

I'm sorry but unless things have gone massivley down hill since I was last in the US of A and the bad ol' BBC ain't reporting it, there's no urban war going on in the USA.

SWAT are police and therefore, even in South Central LA, are subject to far tighter ROE than militaries.

IMHO the most experienced urban warfare specialists are either the Russians or the IDF, we Brits are getting rusty, as things in the Province are pretty quiet ;)

And I'm sorry, but I still think changing shoulders in OBUA/MOUT is strictly for the Rambo impressionists.

[REMOV]

I know that Israel sells a lot of military equipment as well as upgrades on existing stuff... I am just curious if the pols are going to buy this weapon?!?Tavor? I don't think so, we have our own rifles factories, and developes own models of assault rifles. But a new model of Polish heavy sniper rifle (called WKW) is in bullpup design, and there are also some ideas to convert wz.96 Beryl to bullpup design ;)

http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/bullpup/weapon/bin-bin21/_wz.96Beryl.jpg
http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/bullpup/weapon/bin-bin21/_BIN-21(300)BW.jpg

[REMOV]

IMHO the most experienced urban warfare specialists are either the Russians (...)Hmm... but they have a little bit unacceptable technique of MOUT. Their receipe for success in urabn operation is massive use of heavy rockets and artillery with lots of Mi-24 and Su-25 ;)

[Royal]

IMHO the most experienced urban warfare specialists are either the Russians (...)Hmm... but they have a little bit unacceptable technique of MOUT. Their receipe for success in urabn operation is massive use of heavy rockets and artillery with lots of Mi-24 and Su-25 ;)

I never said the best, I just said the most experienced ;)

[REMOV]

I never said the best, I just said the most experienced ;)I really don't know, that after their attack such terrain may be still called "urban" and not for example "lunar landscape" ;)

[rob]

First of all, the onyl reason it is being adopted is because IMI needs a big boost from the Israeli government. ...as the enemies of Tavor says ;)
well the m4 was adopted before and many where delivered, then out of nowhere imi says they need the project for its doors to say open and boom they have a contract.

Whats going on is domestic political bullcrap which is going to give the Israeli's a weapon they dont need or want. The Tavor is quite new design and it has better features than M16A1 rifles and carbines that Israel uses.
No, it has different features, if you feel they are better then good for you, but that dont make them better. (now i am in no way claiming the m4 is better)
The bullpup design is generally flawed even though it has its benefits. Ekhm... I don't agree it isn't generally flawed. i agree with remov on this one.
Number one, the tavor has no backup iron sites in case the opticals fail, break, or get fogged up in cold, misty, rainy, or muddy conditions.Right, but modern optical sights are quite resistant to external conditions. And such situation is rare. but most standard optical sights on rifles are cheaply made, and i know some people that have had factory g36 sights fog up on them.(mounted on a sl8 of course)
Number two, the tavor is difficult or impossible to fire left handed and is not really so easily converted to do that. Huh? The ejection ports are made on both sides of the weapon, and the right or the left side ejection can be selected by installing the bolt with the ejector mounted on the right or on the left, also charging handle slots are cut on the both sides of the gun housing, so it can be installed on both sides of the weapon. no arguement there
Also, is the middle of urban combat it is often necessary to switch the rifle to different shoulders as you go around left or right corners so you dont expose yourself to fire. And to very fast moving the whole rifle - and bullpups design is unbeatable here. There more portable and better balanced than classic design assault rifle. Also in MOUT the gun lenght is very important factor, and again, here bullpup design rules here. Enter the short berral carbine. fire around right and left corners, light, manuverable, and fast mag changes.
Number three, despite what you see on games like Tom Clancy Raven Shield, it is damn near impossible to use beta C-mags and other "high cap" mags on bullpup designs.Right, but also in classic design weapons such mags are rarely used. dont see a problem as there arent really used as remov said.
Also, magazine changes are far more awkward and slow than on conventional designs (not a good thing in combat).Only when you lying down. The magazine change is also fast, but is made in different way. no matter what there is more movement involved with a mag change on a bullpup.
The russian made An-94 Abakan, the Heckler and Kock G-36, etc.There is no "etc.". And Abakan is dead end in weapon designing, I don't think that this weapon will be widely used or manufactured. The only new assault rifle - it means made in 90s - in classic design is G36 (and it's American descendant - XM8). i know of another clasic design weapon being released in the next year. also i think south korea came out with something, and the rob arm rav02. new bullpups off the to pof my head was the chinese one and the fn2000 maybe some ak conversions as well. so it is about the same.
The Israli's are some of the most experienced urban fighters around, but unfortunately their weapons choice is not being decided by the Army or police units, it is being decided by politicians who are being payed off by IMI which produces the Tavor. No offence, but it's a bull****. The Tavor was designed and tested not by politicans but quite good gun designers, which were advised by experienced soldiers, so... the design is well-thought-out. but acording to someone within the idf, he would quickly take the m4. so it may have been a good effort, but they where happy and used to what they had and wherent really calling out for a change.
Give the Israeli army what its want = The m-16a2 and especially the m4 SOPMOD variant with the QD 40mm grenade launcher. Check MRBF of M4 and Tavor, ok? Also Tavor can be equiped with 40mm GL. okay so you want people to check how a weapon did in some test? that means little to me personally, the g36, passed with fling colors on a tourture test, but now hk is giving everyone new oprods because old ones where breaking. time is the ultimate test, and you can't speed up time for some test.


i guess the point of this was to point out that two people can look at exacly the same thing and see completely different things. neighter is wrong, and not nessisarly right, just different, because of this if someone asks me how i would design a weapon, it might be the oposite of what some else might come up with. so a weapon vs another weapon is a little stupid because opinions will vary.

[IDFM203]

Just a couple of responses………..

well the m4 was adopted before and many where delivered, then out of nowhere imi says they need the project for its doors to say open and boom they have a contract. well that’s not exactly true. The tavor project was started over ten years ago so this is nothing out of the blue. Secondly it takes time to make improvements and to do proper testing and when the IMI announced it, it was close to that level.

Listen of course politics played a part, but so does politics play a part in every country and their perspective arms industries including the U.S. and its decisions to buy colt weapons are other ones.. Just because politics plays a part doesn’t mean that the tavor is not a good weapon or that it is automatically not better then the m4 (which I am not saying)

Like I said before. The newer version of the tavor was recently released and I think all judgments needs to wait.

but acording to someone within the idf, he would quickly take the m4. so it may have been a good effort, but they where happy and used to what they had and wherent really calling out for a change. true. Listen I was in the idf and so I can corroborate this sentence. Now with that said. I think it’s important for Israel to try to become militarily independent in case of future politcs. I am not saying anything is going to happen but it is important especially with the dangers that Israel has to face, it must try to not take any chances.

Secondly like I said before “Listen the idf already had switched from the m16 to its own home produced weapon. The galil had switched from the m16 in the 80’s and was the standard infantry rifle until the early 90’. Now what happened was that the special forces didn’t like it and they switched back to the m16 and the rest of the idf followed suit.

The same will be with the tavor. If it is not a good weapon then they will switch back as was the case before when Israel had already produced its own (a lot say very good) weapon which a lot of militaries in fact use.

We just have to wait and see till a real judgment on the tavor can be made”

The weapon is so new we really have to wait further. Heck when the m16 came out it took twenty years for it to be really liked.

Already there are clear advantages from the tavor over the m16/m4 varientas.

This is from the website Israeli-weapons.com
"The Tavor would be useful anywhere where close quarters battle is the rule, and from vehicles," said Charles Cutshaw, firearms editor at Jane's International Defense Review Magazine. It has large vents to prevent dust clogs and sights allowing the shooter to aim with both eyes open. The Tavor spells the end, locally, of the M-16, a staple assault rifle supplied to Israel since the early 1970s as part of Washington's annual defense grants. The M-16 has drawn complaints. Designed for Vietnam-style tropics, it jams frequently in the desert”

shalom :D

[REMOV]

well the m4 was adopted before and many where delivered, then out of nowhere imi says they need the project for its doors to say open and boom they have a contract.In my opinion you mixed up M653 with M4. The M4 wasn't adopted by Cahal, the M16A1 and M653 (M16A1 carbine) were. So...
No, it has different features, if you feel they are better then good for you, but that dont make them better. Check MRBF of Tavor and Israeli M16A1.
but most standard optical sights on rifles are cheaply made, and i know some people that have had factory g36 sights fog up on them.In such case you'll change optics before the first fight. And if they are so cheap why don't take two or three, just in case? ;)
Enter the short berral carbine. Hey, bullpup is short itself with long barrel. That's more universal, right?
fire around right and left cornersThis doesn't matter.
light, manuverable, and fast mag changesAnd if you said enemy at 350m you're helpless in the face of distance, while with the same length (and often weight) bullpup design with longer barrel you have capability to defend yourself.
no matter what there is more movement involved with a mag change on a bullpup. Only when you're not trained ;) Only difference is you put magazine rear.
know of another clasic design weapon being released in the next year. also i think south korea came out with something, and the rob arm rav02. new bullpups off the to pof my head was the chinese one and the fn2000 maybe some ak conversions as well. so it is about the same.Ekhm... new SAR-21 from Singapore, new Iranian Khaybar, Russian A-91, OC-14 Groza, new France FA MAS model and those only assault rifles. And what new assault rifle despite of XM8 (maybe) will be released next year? And the RAV02 MC is one of hundred American weapons which never come to mass production.
but acording to someone within the idf, he would quickly take the m4. so it may have been a good effort, but they where happy and used to what they had and wherent really calling out for a change. They had M653s not M4s. Right, those basically very similar models, but Tavor is a new quality - this is weapon designed by Israelis for Israelis. And, you know, the argument "but acording to someone within the idf" is not convicting at all. It's just one person opinion.
okay so you want people to check how a weapon did in some test? Sure. That's why M16 beats M14 (hmm... with a little help of his friends) and the SPIW.
that means little to me personally, the g36, passed with fling colors on a tourture test, but now hk is giving everyone new oprods because old ones where breaking. time is the ultimate test, and you can't speed up time for some test.With those system of thinking humans will not introduces any new technology, because the old one is tested and abilities of the new one are unknown. Only option is such case are tests. Lots of tests. In those tests M249 was selected, Negev, Galil... and also ATGM Spike in my country ;)

...and now time for some philosophical discussions...
i guess the point of this was to point out that two people can look at exacly the same thing and see completely different things. neighter is wrong, and not nessisarly right, just different, because of this if someone asks me how i would design a weapon, it might be the oposite of what some else might come up with.So we cannot argue at all? And if one of us have right, then what? How you check this out? ;)
so a weapon vs another weapon is a little stupid because opinions will vary.That's why one's try to convinced somebody else - to change his mind ;)

[IDFM203]

As you can tell from my prior posts we are in agreement for the most part. I just have to disagree with one thing you wrote.


well the m4 was adopted before and many where delivered, then out of nowhere imi says they need the project for its doors to say open and boom they have a contract.In my opinion you mixed up M653 with M4. The M4 wasn't adopted by Cahal, the M16A1 and M653 (M16A1 carbine) were. So...
First of all it’s Tzahal (not Cahal) and this statement is not true.

The idf did in fact switch over to the m4. This started happening about 4 years ago and now most (not all) front line infantry troops are equipped with m4’s.

[StarvingStudent47]

The "traditional assault rifle vs bullpup" debate seems to be as stubborn and heated as debating politics, but this is way more interesting to read :)

Keep it up, people. I'm learning tons here.

[thatguy96]

Quote:
fire around right and left corners
This doesn't matter.
Really, says who? And are we forgetting about the southpaw population? Small as they may be, I still think its nicer not to have to learn to shoot from my right shoulder.

[IDFM203]

I know that Israel sells a lot of military equipment as well as upgrades on existing stuff... I am just curious if the pols are going to buy this weapon?!?Tavor? I don't think so, we have our own rifles factories, and developes own models of assault rifles. But a new model of Polish heavy sniper rifle (called WKW) is in bullpup design, and there are also some ideas to convert wz.96 Beryl to bullpup design ;)

http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/bullpup/weapon/bin-bin21/_wz.96Beryl.jpg
http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/bullpup/weapon/bin-bin21/_BIN-21(300)BW.jpgWell now I am not so sure about your answer. First of all, Poland does buy weapons from Israel, so it is not crazy to think that they are also buying the tavor.

Secondly, if they are not buying it then perhaps they are copying it?!?
I checked out the website that you have here (as your personal website)and I found this pic of the tavor. Now I don’t understand polish so perhaps you can explain to me what the article says as well as what is the tavor doing in that site.

Oh and hers the pic……..

http://www.militech.sownet.gliwice.pl/bullpup/_tavor_parts.jpg

[perdurabo]

Well REMOVs page is about bullpups and tavor is there as an example :) and this pic explains where is the trigger and stuff ;)

Poland is buying from Israel only weapons that cannot produce/invent it self like we don't have AT misailes so we bought Spike technology:) we have AA misailes (Grom) so we don't buy Stingers or Striela :) also Israel is great at modernising exsoviet equipment so when we wanna upgrade smth we ask few firms for their offers and take the best:)
now Mi24 and SU22 programes are going and IAI or Elbit (??) sent their offers to PL gov.

[IDFM203]

Well REMOVs page is about bullpups and tavor is there as an example :) and this pic explains where is the trigger and stuff ;)

Poland is buying from Israel only weapons that cannot produce/invent it self like we don't have AT misailes so we bought Spike technology:) we have AA misailes (Grom) so we don't buy Stingers or Striela :) also Israel is great at modernising exsoviet equipment so when we wanna upgrade smth we ask few firms for their offers and take the best:)
now Mi24 and SU22 programes are going and IAI or Elbit (??) sent their offers to PL gov.yeah I couldnt say it any better. when you want the best, you guys go to the best. right? ;) :D :D

[perdurabo]

well Mi24 and MiG29 will be prabably upgraded with ROSOBRONEXPORT or directly with Mi and MiG but Su22 prabably with Elbit :) best offer from whole world if Israeli offer is the best it wins if no it lose:)
(sory for my bad english but i don't use it often)

[Raistlin]

Number one, the tavor has no backup iron sites in case the opticals fail, break, or get fogged up in cold, misty, rainy, or muddy conditions.
Actually, I have this video of a Tavor presentation in some military expo/show and there were flipping out iron sights.

Number two, the tavor is difficult or impossible to fire left handed and is not really so easily converted to do that.
I remember someone on the forums saying that IMI went great deals to make the block switching as easy and fast as possible. I think the time mentioned was below 30 seconds.

[bayul]

any ideas whats going to happen with the m4's and m16a3's that get replaced by the tavor?

and for the Israelies, you think the officers are going to pick up micro tavors for the 'wasach'; like the mekutzrars or micro uzi's now?
my money is that they will keep it, for some reason the older something is the cooler it is in the idf

[Mark Sman]

The proof will be when its issued, The only thing that would twek me is the lake of a simple iron site backup. Doesn't have to be much, just something.

Also, as I posted before, the thg looks like it would be damn akward when low. The 30 rounder sticks way the heck beneath the weapon.

Of course going prone is not so much an issue in urban combat. I would just like to see a pic of someone using the 30 rounder prone on flat ground to see what it looks like.

Too bad bottom eject isn't really an option with the piping hot 5.56 cases.

[Raistlin]

The only thing that would twek me is the lake of a simple iron site backup. Doesn't have to be much, just something.
Read my previous post. I can send you the video if you want.

I would just like to see a pic of someone using the 30 rounder prone on flat ground to see what it looks like.
You should ask Pretorian (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/profile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=2636). I believe he had the chance to do it.

[ogukuo72]

Good thread. The proof of the pudding is in the tasting. Until the Tavor is used operationally for an extended period, there's no way so see how it really performs, or if it offers signifcant advantages over the M16.

In Singapore, we're slowly switching over to the SAR21, and reactions have been mixed. Some disliked the placement of the magazine, which makes magazine change much slower.

But the main dislike is the push button safety on top of the trigger guard (too awkwardly placed) and the selector push button behind the magazine (too difficult to reach and requires one hand to be taken off the rifle).

The Steyr AUG-like sight is also disliked by some for it is difficult to see the sight reticle under certain light conditions. The circle is also not good for aiming at 300 metres, and the tiny centre dot is very hard to see against a dark target. I can personally attest to this and would prefer the old iron sights on an M16.

On the other hand, the positive features are its short length, more secure magazine catch, and built-in LAM.

The awkward placement of the magazine is shared by Tavor, but other than that, the Tavor has better design features. I believe it has a thumb selector/safety switch. This is the most convenient format amongst the bull-pups.

The Tavor's reflex sight/LAM combination sight is also a good feature, and one which I wished we had chosen for the SAR21. With the Steyr-Aug type sight and the built-in LAM on the handguard, the SAR21 is NOT a light weapon.

Compared to other bull-pup designs (except maybe the very very new FN2000), the Tavor is not bad at all. I would say to the Israelis - give it a chance. You may like it.

[Tony Williams]

I don't quite understand the magazine change issue. I have watched British troops changing mags with the bullpup SA80, and they are very fast indeed - I doubt that they would be any faster with a traditional layout. Of course, troops used to a traditional design are likely to be slow to adapt at first.

One British soldier, back from Iraq, tells me that the SA80 magazine position is popular because troops spend much time riding around in open vehicles with guns ready, and magazine changing is much easier with a bullpup as the mags are more 'inboard' the vehicle when firing.

The key advantage of a bullpup, it seems to me, is that you get the best of both worlds; a compact weapon for urban fighting, with a full-length barrel for long-range effectiveness. Yes, I know the XM8 has quick-change barrels of different lengths, but who wants to carry around extra barrels and keep switching around as the range varies?

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and discussion
forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)

[dannyc]

why is it slower to change a mag with a bullpup weapon then a conventional style weapon?

ive used the steyr for about 5 years now and have never thought that my mag changes were troublesome. i should probably get some m16 time up ;)

interesting thread

[ogukuo72]

Both of you won't be far wrong - especially if troops had been trained on the bull-pups right from the start. If you use an M16 right from the start, you'll feel the difference.

When I first joined the Army as a recruit more than fourteen years ago, the M16 was standard issue. It was standard issue for my national service and for the reservist training. I guess I kind of got use to the M16 system.

To me, it's very convenient. I use my right (firing) hand index finger to push the magazine catch button to dump a mag while I go for the spare mag with my left hand. Slam that spare mag in, and slap the bolt catch with the heel of my palm, and I'm ready to go.

For the SAR21, the magazine catch design was like the Steyr AUG. I had to press upwards with my left hand thumb and pull out the used magazine, then go for a spare one. On the plus side, this is a more secure method for holding the magazine. We no longer have to contend with accidentally dumped magazines while cutting our way through the jungle.

On the SAR21, there's no bolt catch, so we have to actuate the cocking handle to bring the bolt to battery after loading the fresh mag. Unfortunately, on the SAR21, this is a folding catch like that of the G36. So we have to unfold the catch before pulling it back. Again, this slows down the process.

All these may be less of a problem with the SA80 and Steyr AUG. First, the SA80 uses M16 type magazines and catch system, making it easy to quickly dump the magazine. A soldier can collect the fresh mag first, dump the old one with a push of the thumb and slip in the fresh one. The Steyr will probably have the same 'problem' as the SAR21.

On the other hand, both the SA80's cocking handle is on the right side, which means the soldier will either have to lift his head off the stock and reach over with his left hand to bring the bolt back to battery, or take his firing hand off the pistol grip to pull back the handle. The Steyr system is much better. It's like that of a HK MP5. You slam back the cocking handle with the palm of your left hand, and you're good to go.

So, in balance, even though a well trained soldier can probably perform a magazine change quickly enough on the SA80 or Steyr AUG, none of the three bull-pups mentioned here is really as ergonomical and well thought out in terms of magazine change and return to battery process as the old M16.

[IDFM203]

The proof will be when its issued, The only thing that would twek me is the lake of a simple iron site backup. Doesn't have to be much, just something.

Well actually the newer ones do have a back up iron sight attached to the weapon.

In fact I believe there are TWO backup iron sights on the Tavor!!

The second one is on the Israeli made ITL Multipurpose Aiming Reflex Sight (MARS) (http://www.isayeret.com/optics/mars/mars.htm)

http://www.isayeret.com/optics/mars/mars-alone-2.jpg

http://www.isayeret.com/optics/mars/mars-alone.jpg
MARS from the end user view. Note the fixed 3-dots emergency iron sights on top of the device

Btw speaking of the Tavor, this is a old thread and I recall when I first posted on this thread it was before there were pics of the newer Tavor that I had mentioned, well here are three pics of it and a link for more pics of it (and other great Israeli military products) that were featured at the low intensity conflict conference that was held in Tel Aviv.

For that link which was brought here by the member called pretorian669 (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/profile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=2636), click Here (http://community.webshots.com/album/128362914fTBGOf)

For three pics that I took from that site, click the next three links.
http://community.webshots.com/photo/128362914/128370461mlnNwx
http://community.webshots.com/photo/128362914/128370521RBQaRC
http://community.webshots.com/photo/128362914/128370394hTIpIq

Shalom :D

[oldsoak]

On the SA80 there is a bolt hold open device which locks the bolt back after the last round has been fired. You roll the gun over to the right, take off the magazine, insert a fresh mag, release the bolt hold open device and you are ready to go again.

[Raistlin]

First of all, I found the picture with front the iron sight

http://community.webshots.com/s/image4/4/39/88/70643988AlOhps_ph.jpg

and back one (to the left of the mars, adjacent to it):

http://community.webshots.com/s/image4/4/43/70/70644370tAialu_ph.jpg

They both flip out. And, as IDFM mentioned, there's even another backup sight.

[Tony Williams]

On the SA80 there is a bolt hold open device which locks the bolt back after the last round has been fired. You roll the gun over to the right, take off the magazine, insert a fresh mag, release the bolt hold open device and you are ready to go again.

I've never really understood why so many modern military rifles DON'T have a bolt hold-open - it seems like a major fault to me.

I also don't see why the bolt shouldn't close automatically when a fresh magazine is inserted, just as it does with some pistols. This would speed up reloading even more.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and Discussion forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)

[oldsoak]

I suspect that the reason why the bolt is designed not to close automatically is
a ) to reduce the possibility of a misfeed - Were the bolt to automatically go forward on inserting a fresh magazine it might do so before the mag is properly in.
b) in the event of stoppages, one of the drills is to pull back the bolt, engage the hold open device and look into the chamber while the magazine is still fitted. Automatic closing on insertion of a fresh magazine would not allow engaging the hold open device if you know what I mean.

[ogukuo72]

On the SA80 there is a bolt hold open device which locks the bolt back after the last round has been fired. You roll the gun over to the right, take off the magazine, insert a fresh mag, release the bolt hold open device and you are ready to go again.

The SA80 has a bolt catch? That's news to me.

BTW, the only rifle that I know of that automatically trips the bolt forward after it has been reloaded is the Garand. Supposedly, a sore thumb was a common GI injury, but with proper training, loading can be very fast.

The Garand system does seem to offer some advantages. The feeding system would probably be more reliable as it depends on powerful main springs in the rifle, and not seperate springs in the magazines themselves.

The user does not have to worry about accidentally dumped magazines.

The 8-round enbloc clips are easy to carry (it seems that the GI would carry them anywhere, in cartridge belts, bandoleers <sic?>, pockets, even clipped to rifle slings) and can be prepacked way before the action. It is not a good idea to load and store magazines for long periods of time before they are used. I am sure those of us who had been through military service could remember long hours at the range or live fire area, loading magazines from carboard boxes of 50 cartridges for the entire company.

For the modern day civilian shooter, this rifle may not be bad for home defence. The ammo can be kept seperate from the gun, enhancing safety. Ammo can be kept for long periods of time without having to worry about keeping magazine springs under compression for too long. Yet, when needed, the clip can be dumped into the rifle quickly and you have 8 rounds in the gun almost instantly.

[crazyman]

ok random question, just educating myself. how do bullpup rifles account for lefthanded shooters like myself?

[Tony Williams]

ok random question, just educating myself. how do bullpup rifles account for lefthanded shooters like myself?

Most of them can be switched around for left-handers with a couple of minutes work (the British SA80 is one exception). The FN F2000 works equal well for right and left-handers with no changes necessary (it ejects the spent cases forwards).

Tony Williams

[Michael RVR]

Yep exactly.

On the AUG for example, you get a new bolt (or may be able to alter the old one, i'm not sure), which has the ejector stud on the opposite side, and then essentially move the cover from the left side over to the right side.

[ogukuo72]

Seriously, can someone who knows about the SA80 address the issue of the bolt catch.

I know that it has a bolt catch that holds the bolt carrier back after the last round, but I don't think there's a catch on the outside of the rifle (like the M16's) that you can press to return the bolt to battery. I believe that you have to pull back on the bolt handle to disengage the bolt catch.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[rob]

there is a botton on the left side, it looks kind of like a shot selector and is green. if i am not mistaken that is the bolt hold open.

[Hydro]

there is a botton on the left side, it looks kind of like a shot selector and is green. if i am not mistaken that is the bolt hold open.

Indeed, it's a small button on the left hand side that can be pushed down to release the bolt carrier. On the right hand side is a small catch that is pushed down with the index finger when the cocking handle is retracted, and that holds the bolt carrier to the rear.

[oldsoak]

Here you go, hope this helps - page 5 shows the bolt release

http://www.smallarmsreview.com/pdf/sa80.pdf

[gilgoul]

First of all, the onyl reason it is being adopted is because IMI needs a big boost from the Israeli government. Whats going on is domestic political bullcrap which is going to give the Israeli's a weapon they dont need or want. The bullpup design is generally flawed even though it has its benefits. Number one, the tavor has no backup iron sites in case the opticals fail, break, or get fogged up in cold, misty, rainy, or muddy conditions. Number two, the tavor is difficult or impossible to fire left handed and is not really so easily converted to do that. Also, is the middle of urban combat it is often necessary to switch the rifle to different shoulders as you go around left or right corners so you dont expose yourself to fire. Its called "cutting the pie" by American SWAT units (the most experienced urban warfare specialists in the world). Consider Israel and Gaza and West Bank= they are one HUGE urban environment. I sure as hell wouldnt want a bullpup in that territitory. MAybe the Jews are palnning to invade Russia?? :) Number three, despite what you see on games like Tom Clancy Raven Shield, it is damn near impossible to use beta C-mags and other "high cap" mags on bullpup designs. Also, magazine changes are far more awkward and slow than on conventional designs (not a good thing in combat). If you look at the latest most ultra modern weapons designs by nations with the MOST experience in designing small arms, they are no logner bull pups. The russian made An-94 Abakan, the Heckler and Kock G-36, etc.... are all conventional designs. The Israli's are some of the most experienced urban fighters around, but unfortunately their weapons choice is not being decided by the Army or police units, it is being decided by politicians who are being payed off by IMI which produces the Tavor. Im sorry, but thats wrong. Give the Israeli army what its want = The m-16a2 and especially the m4 SOPMOD variant with the QD 40mm grenade launcher. Nuthin works better in an urban place than a carbine with a "nade launcher" to clear those doors and windows of enemy snipers. Also works well for launching just past a corner and killing the guys around the corner with fragments!!!!


Obd, you know the respect i have for you, but this time your theory is flawed on more than one account.
I have the chance to serve with people far more experienced and professionals than I will ever be, and the interest raised by the Tavor is no small, maybe not because of it`s inner qualities, but also because of the serious flaws of the m16 family.
The micro galil still has it`s fans in those units, because they are reliable and good.
As for changing the shoulder, let`s leave to ceasar what`s belongs to ceasar, maybe the super SWATS and some very specialized unit can spend the time and the ammos to train a right handed to shoot efficiently left with his assault rifle, but the technic is definitely not for every infantry soldier, and brings more odds for confusion.
different schools are batling on this subject, and even if i`m a in theory supoprter of the cutting pie, I tend to believe in experience, that seems to say "keep things simple, as much as possible, the bad guys are complicating your life enough'
TO come back on the TAvor, i heard the same complains than i heard about the FAMAS, it heats fast, you get smkoe raising over your eyes, it tends to go sky high when shooting auto, etc, etc.
I know for having shot the FAMAS intensively that the those defects, if true, are seriously exagerated, and if the handling of the weapon is somewhat different, every ine can get his mark on, and for the comon infantry soldier, the score is going up because of better internal balance, longer barrel in a shorter weapon and so on.
As for MAG changing, it`s only a question of release and lock button or lever that should be close to the pistol grip, therefore allowing a quick release while the weapon on target.

[Mark Sman]

Thats fine for a backup iron site. Doesn't have to be much, just something.

Any luck with pics of someone prone on flate ground and a thirty rounder?

I want to see it because it may not be that akward. It just seems like it would be.

As I said before, prone on flat ground is no that much of a concern for a fighting weapon in urban environment. I'm just curious.

[astarbucks]

Obd, you know the respect i have for you, but this time your theory is flawed on more than one account.
I have the chance to serve with people far more experienced and professionals than I will ever be, and the interest raised by the Tavor is no small, maybe not because of it`s inner qualities, but also because of the serious flaws of the m16 family.
The micro galil still has it`s fans in those units, because they are reliable and good.
As for changing the shoulder, let`s leave to ceasar what`s belongs to ceasar, maybe the super SWATS and some very specialized unit can spend the time and the ammos to train a right handed to shoot efficiently left with his assault rifle, but the technic is definitely not for every infantry soldier, and brings more odds for confusion.
different schools are batling on this subject, and even if i`m a in theory supoprter of the cutting pie, I tend to believe in experience, that seems to say "keep things simple, as much as possible, the bad guys are complicating your life enough'
TO come back on the TAvor, i heard the same complains than i heard about the FAMAS, it heats fast, you get smkoe raising over your eyes, it tends to go sky high when shooting auto, etc, etc.
I know for having shot the FAMAS intensively that the those defects, if true, are seriously exagerated, and if the handling of the weapon is somewhat different, every ine can get his mark on, and for the comon infantry soldier, the score is going up because of better internal balance, longer barrel in a shorter weapon and so on.
As for MAG changing, it`s only a question of release and lock button or lever that should be close to the pistol grip, therefore allowing a quick release while the weapon on target.


Obd, you know the respect i have for you, but this time your theory is flawed on more than one account.
I have the chance to serve with people far more experienced and professionals than I will ever be, and the interest raised by the Tavor is no small, maybe not because of it`s inner qualities, but also because of the serious flaws of the m16 family.
The micro galil still has it`s fans in those units, because they are reliable and good.
As for changing the shoulder, let`s leave to ceasar what`s belongs to ceasar, maybe the super SWATS and some very specialized unit can spend the time and the ammos to train a right handed to shoot efficiently left with his assault rifle, but the technic is definitely not for every infantry soldier, and brings more odds for confusion.
different schools are batling on this subject, and even if i`m a in theory supoprter of the cutting pie, I tend to believe in experience, that seems to say "keep things simple, as much as possible, the bad guys are complicating your life enough'
TO come back on the TAvor, i heard the same complains than i heard about the FAMAS, it heats fast, you get smkoe raising over your eyes, it tends to go sky high when shooting auto, etc, etc.
I know for having shot the FAMAS intensively that the those defects, if true, are seriously exagerated, and if the handling of the weapon is somewhat different, every ine can get his mark on, and for the comon infantry soldier, the score is going up because of better internal balance, longer barrel in a shorter weapon and so on.
As for MAG changing, it`s only a question of release and lock button or lever that should be close to the pistol grip, therefore allowing a quick release while the weapon on target.




OBD, I believe your comments about bullpups & shooting with both hands are quite off the mark. Firstly, the master hand/eye issue already pointed out by many others. How many ppl are so naturally ambidextrous? My dad writes with his right hand and plays tennis with his left, but even he wouldn't be able to manage a rifle like u mentioned. SWAT/SOCOMM folks are not mutants genetically bred in labs. They are very much like u & me but just highly specialised trained.

Furthermore, how many SWATS use rifles that can support what you mentioned? Only the FN90 & FN 2000 allow shooting with the left eye without blinding the right. Other so-called ambidextrous rifles would require re-configuring the ejection port, which even if easy, is hardly the stuff to perform in the midst of a firefight! Ever been in CQB/FIBUA (fighting in built up areas) exercises & had a spent cartridge ricochet off a wall and hit your hand or face? Ouch.

-------------------

On a wholly separate note & without reference to anybody…

I do concur with gilgoul on bullpups. They are the way forward... & that's coming from one who was trained to use the M16 for years in the army. I've shot the SAR-21 & the benefits of a bullpup are tremendous.

Yet putting aside everything else, there are only 2 things that matter in a rifle... reliability and projectile lethality. AKA, being able to fire whenever needed and hitting with deadly force. AKA, the AK-47 (pun unintended though convenient).

Given the state of today's technology, the 1st is most simply achieved by using modern propellants and gas-piston mechanisms. No-brainer. The AK-47 has been doing that for umpteenth years.

The 2nd is met perfectly by the bullpup which detractors refuse to admit due to old school stubborness. Its called BARREL LENGTH!

Whatever overall length of the weapon, the bullpup offers 25-30% greater barrel length compared to traditional layout rifles. Accuracy, range & projectile power improves markedly as a result - whatever projectile/propellant/ergonomics/optics used!

I’m so sick & tired of folks who whine and moan about “Oh, I’m not used to it… I don’t like it… its too difficult…its too unusual… I can’t this or that”. They ought to shut up, re-train and get on with the serious business. Although we’re trained to call it our wives in the army, the rifle is not your masturbation device for you to derive pleasure rubbing, lubing & operating its parts. Its like the Nikon camera users who moan that their lenses & camera bodies give them a smoother ergonomic feel when the specifications are crap.

The reason why your American soldiers are dying with substandard rifles is because the M4 is precisely that – crap. It’s a CARBINE for bloody sakes… get it? It’s a compromised pea-shooter lacking range, power nor accuracy. All because of the magic word – BARREL LENGTH! Or the lack thereof.

It’s the reason why the urban legend “I shot the guy 3-4 times but he just got up and ran off” crap came about. No mention of distance, red mist or medical evidence – the shooter missed pure & simple! That’s what happens under combat stress with a shortened rifle barrel. Just like putting margarine in your car tank, but complaining about the engine. But let’s face it, if it happened to us, we probably wouldn’t admit missing a critical shot either.

It’s also how that “let’s go 6.8mm Grendel” crap came about… ppl think a bigger round will solve all problems. Notice how no evidence could be found that the 5.56mm lacks lethality if landed on the torso within the prescribed shooting range? Notice how armed forces using the bullpups NEVER complain about 5.56mm lethality??

The 5.56mm was invented for a 20” barrel. Get that right. Whatever projectile weight or barrel rifling twists used, give the round (& its projectile’s base surface area) the 20” it deserves.

On that count alone, bullpups are the only way forward. But they offer way more than just the sacrosanct lethality.

Ergonomics are way better & saves lives. Being more compact, troops get in/out of vehicles much faster. CQB is much better too for daily house to house searches (a soldier’s nightmare). Bullpups are easier to keep pointed forwards not upwards when going around walls, corridors and doors. Meaning you shoot the other guy first b4 he shoots u. All that while retaining the full 5.56mm kinetic energy.

The trite moaning about ease of magazine change is also ridiculous. There’s no difficulty unless u’re a retard whose brain cannot be retrained. In fact I find the wrist forms a natural guide to the magazine well, the same way the Uzi uses the hand as an instinctive guide. If I can reload an M16 in total darkness by stuffing a magazine into the emptiness of the space in front of my right hand, I sure can do a bullpup magazine more easily. It’s a matter of how you practice & make correlational mental linkages!

The Brits in Iraq love their bullpup SA80s because firing from within cramped vehicles is so much easier and reloading is a breeze too since the loading hand does not need to reach as far away from the body into harms way.

The other trite moan is about the weight distribution. They say traditional rifles which are front heavy aid accurate fire by reducing muzzle rise. That’s the old-school-dumb-ass-swing-the-sledgehammer approach. Its like saying give a car a more comfortable ride by making it as heavy as possible (sprung vs unsprung weight). But the smarter way is to improve the suspension, damping, weight distribution, balance, chasis strength etc.

Bullpups’ shorter length means that for every given barrel length, the muzzle is closer to the body, which means that the torque and twist acting on the shoulder is not as pronounced. The supporting hand is also nearer the muzzle and able to exert greater control. Given the inherently in-line layout of most bullpups, recoil can be just as good if not better controlled. Its all physics and moments.

Considering that assault rifles are regarded as weapon systems capable of mounting grenade launchers, laser illuminators, tactical lights et al, traditional rifles become too ridiculously front heavy once you pile it on. U end up with the Hollywood phallic symbol rifles like the XM8. They are too unbalanced and must be supported 2 handed at all times. Notice how bullpups, once shoulder slung are basically held one handed? Rifles are a pain to carry and wear, which is 99.9% of the time. They are useful only during that brief moment when u pull the trigger. It’s the comfort that leads to less fatigue which leads to better performance during that 0.1% of the time that counts.

While earlier bullpups like the SA80 & FAMAS tends to be rear heavy, modern ones like the SAR-21 have a center of gravity directly on the pistol grip, which makes it a joy to hold & fire accurately.

Some cite the traditional rifle layout as offering advantages of more varied magazine choice. In practice, C-Mags will never be standard issue anyway, given how expensive (& unreliable) they are. It also goes against all good military training regarding making every shot count. Not to mention the logistics strain of replenishing rounds to the troops. While an adjustable butt stock offers advantages for body armour / winter clothing use, well-designed bullpups (with piccatiny rail mounted optical sights) offer great comfort for a suitably wide range of soldier sizes anyway, while offering all the advantages spelt out above.

Perhaps this explains why the XM8 has been such a fiasco. Congress wasn’t stupid in calling it an unnecessary and expensive toy not worth the marginal benefits. Its basically a gas-pistoned rifle with Hollywood style makeover and nothing else. Different configurations & interchangeable parts? All modern bullpups from the STEYR, FAMAS, SA80, Tavor, SAR-21 already do that. In fact, its so desperate to justify itself, they probably tried to shave ounces off the overall weight by using thinner/poorer polymer that promptly overheats and melts. Polymers are no longer new in gun design, rule of diminishing returns apply. So much so the Marines do not want it. Even the FN SCAR doesn’t impress me much – a mere rehash of existing gas-piston designs.

If the troops in Iraq need more reliable weapons, then issue drop-in replacement gas-piston upper receivers for every M16s & be done with it. Relatively cost effective & quick with no retraining needed. But if a more compact weapon is needed, the M4 or any other traditional rifle with a sawed off barrel is not it! The shorter barrel & gas tube increases the rate of fire and places huge stress on the internal mechanisms, not to mention worsening accuracy further beyond barrel length issues.. For a better weapon all round, the most of the modern armed forces have already gone bullpup – numerous military thinkers and independent analyses round the world can’t be all wrong at once.

[Ezekiel25:17]

Talk about asshole.

[HOLLiS]

Talk about asshole.


LOL, after reading his post, I feel so inadequate. really don't have anything to say. Maybe I'll go and finish building my AK74, I just need a bigger rock to do the final adjustments.

[Robbee]

Longest first post ever! (dug up a 3 year old thread, too.)

The reason why your American soldiers are dying with substandard rifles is because the M4 is precisely that – crap. It’s a CARBINE for bloody sakes… get it? It’s a compromised pea-shooter lacking range, power nor accuracy. All because of the magic word – BARREL LENGTH! Or the lack thereof.

Any source on this?

[CheekyQuim]

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=113557

[Hydro]

I was actually cheering on his bullpup defence though.

[Sabre]

I think that bloke has been saving up since 2004 on that.

Someone really ought to pop round his and see if he hasn't popped an artery or something....:|

[astarbucks]

Talk about asshole.

Talk about jerk with nothing cerebral to add.

[astarbucks]

I think that bloke has been saving up since 2004 on that.

Someone really ought to pop round his and see if he hasn't popped an artery or something....:|

Recommend u find something better to do. Dun worry, I never hang around forums where forumers do not seem to have substantial knowledge.

[HOLLiS]

Talk about jerk with nothing cerebral to add.


Humm, I think you just proved Ezekiel's point.

[Jµµso]

Barrel Length!!!1111

[Sabre]

^ DON'T!!!!

That just might catch on.....;)

[Briggs]

I think that bloke has been saving up since 2004 on that.

Someone really ought to pop round his and see if he hasn't popped an artery or something....:|

Do we have to check for an artery or is it ok if we check if his head is still attached to the rest of his body? rofl

[HOLLiS]

Barrel Length!!!1111


I have just the ticket, (been shown before)

BARREL LENGTH!!!

http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k226/Hollis6475/1818Dolled.jpg

[Ed the bumbling fool]

American SWAT units (the most experienced urban warfare specialists in the world).

That might be considered a bit of a bold statement, are you suggesting American police are operating in an environment similar to Grozny or Beirut. or are you taking a rather extended view of america being the worlds policeman?? either way its Bollocks
:bash:

[Young-kiwi]

I have just the ticket, (been shown before)

BARREL LENGTH!!!

http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k226/Hollis6475/1818Dolled.jpg

A man's gun in a man's calibre .58
I'd prefer breach loading, like a .577 snider, much better than that poodle shooting round the army switched to, the .450 Martini-Henry. :bash:

[Sabre]

I was messing about with at recently repatriated snider-enfield a while back. Nice rifle, bloody long though! Definitely a 'Barrel length!!!!!111' contender! :lol:

[Briggs]

Look at it from the bright side...the longer the barrel, the closer you can get to the enemy, the less aiming skills you need to shoot him... Hmm, would be handier if you could bend the barrel and fire...

[HOLLiS]

A man's gun in a man's calibre .58
I'd prefer breach loading, like a .577 snider, much better than that poodle shooting round the army switched to, the .450 Martini-Henry. :bash:


Actually it is a 1818 Springfield in .69 Caliber. It was covnerted in 1842 to cap lock, then rifled for the Civil War. It was THE assualt weapon at the time.

Sniders are better, the was some other during the late 1850's and early 1860's that were pretty innovated.

It is my oldest shooter.

[California Joe]

I still love that pic Hollis. But I'm afraid it gives my .45 cal flinter a bit of an inferiority complex, even though it has a 42 inch barrel. :)

[foxtrot023]

ed. nevermind