BULLPUP FORUM

Bullpup Rifles (Auto & Semi-Auto Centerfire) => IWI Tavor & X-95 => Topic started by: Chairforce26 on May 04, 2017, 06:24:38 PM



Title: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: Chairforce26 on May 04, 2017, 06:24:38 PM
I see this fairly often from AUG owners and SAR owners.  I do know the X95 had some "accuracy issues" which seem to be resolved at this point.  I'm a proud X95 owner in FDE as of last month and I love everything about the gun.  I can understand to a certain extent why AUG owners may not like the X95 since those are really slick guns.  I was close to getting one because I like the push button barrel take down and the looks with the 3x integrated scope.  I don't get why AUG owners like their proprietary magazines so much though.  I'm sure 30 years ago they were the best 5.56 magazine around but in a world of Lancer magazines and Gen3 PMAGs I don't think that's exactly true today.  That's probably the #1 reason why I got an X95 rather than an AUG (but if I were made of money I'd have gotten both). 

Now I don't understand why some SAR owners crap on the X95.  That thing had the worst trigger ever unless you dropped $300 on a Giessele Super Sabra trigger.  The mag release wasn't great either it was pretty akward.  Some people may have preferred the looks but I dunno that seems too subjective.  It seems to me the only thing the SAR has over the X95 is that it shoots a little bit tighter groups and that's it.  This doesn't bother me because my MK12ish SPR ar15 can outshoot any Tavor so I don't expect my X95 to be a precise tack driver at 500 yards.  Just my thoughts.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: RadScorpius on May 04, 2017, 10:28:40 PM
Because it's new, also because it's pretty butched up compared to the TAR-21 and AUG, both of which are close to their military counterparts.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: Chairforce26 on May 04, 2017, 10:39:00 PM
Well I thought this was an improvement in some ways over the older IDF MTAR with the new side rails and panel covers.  I know it had to have a 16.5 inch barrel and thicker buttpad because of our stupid OAL regulations, but wasn't the IDF less than thrilled with those 13 inch barrels and going with longer 15 inch barrels on their X95s anyway?


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: RadScorpius on May 04, 2017, 10:47:17 PM
They did, but that long top rail and handguard are still pretty dumb of a modification.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: RadScorpius on May 04, 2017, 10:50:33 PM
You also have to keep in mind that the gun community is very emotional (yep, emotional), and tend to hold on to some social media celebrity's words as bible, when NutnFancy, Yeager, InRange and a few others claimed X95 is bad, everyone all the sudden "tried to shoot the one their friend's uncle's brother's buddy owns and hated it". It takes a while for the gun community to appropriate something after some initial bad press, the early poor accuracy batch didn't help the issue.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: Hivedr. on May 05, 2017, 12:50:35 AM
I see this fairly often from AUG owners and SAR owners.  I do know the X95 had some "accuracy issues" which seem to be resolved at this point.  I'm a proud X95 owner in FDE as of last month and I love everything about the gun.  I can understand to a certain extent why AUG owners may not like the X95 since those are really slick guns.  I was close to getting one because I like the push button barrel take down and the looks with the 3x integrated scope.  I don't get why AUG owners like their proprietary magazines so much though.  I'm sure 30 years ago they were the best 5.56 magazine around but in a world of Lancer magazines and Gen3 PMAGs I don't think that's exactly true today.  That's probably the #1 reason why I got an X95 rather than an AUG (but if I were made of money I'd have gotten both). 

Now I don't understand why some SAR owners crap on the X95.  That thing had the worst trigger ever unless you dropped $300 on a Giessele Super Sabra trigger.  The mag release wasn't great either it was
pretty akward.  Some people may have preferred the looks but I dunno that seems too subjective.  It seems to me the only thing the SAR has over the X95 is that it shoots a little bit tighter groups and that's it.  This doesn't bother me because my MK12ish SPR ar15 can outshoot any Tavor so I don't expect my X95 to be a precise tack driver at 500 yards.  Just my thoughts.

As a long time AUG owner (since mid 80s) a SAR owner since release and a X95 owner since release, I can say I love the X95 best. The AUG is a better rifle, but the X95 is a better fighting rifle. The SAR I keep simply because I still like the front end lines/look. That said I do like the "industrial" look of the X95 just a bit more. I also find the "from the factory" modularity of the X95 more appealing when compared to either the AUG or SAR.

Why do AUG guys love their mags you ask? Well its because they are the mags that set the standard of reliability in 5.56 cal. So much so it is easy to see why MAGPUL copied/adapted the design for the AR. Look at a MAGPUL Gen1 mag next to an original AUG mag from the 80s and early 90s ( long before MAGPUL even produced mags ) and you will see the striking design similarities. So much so it is obvious where MAGPUL got their inspiration.   

Accuracy? AUG wins over both the SAR and X95, but not by much. The AUG was designed to have a 1.5X optical sight and 20" "medium weight" barrel so as to maintain maximum bullet performance out to 500 or so meters, but in a smaller over all package then a conventional rifle lay out of the time. The SAR and X95 were designed with "light weight" ~14" barrels to maximum tight terrain maneuverability vs. "long range" bullet performance since most IDF engagements are well under 300 meters.

Running Aimpoints with 2moa dots I have seen no advantage in accuracy in the SAR over the X95. I do
not run magnified optics on my Tavors as I understand what and where they were designed to perform best. If one wants DMR/Sniper performance than one needs a rifle designed for that role. Neither the AUG, SAR or X95 are.

My .02



Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: Rastoff on May 05, 2017, 12:42:10 PM
...because it's pretty butched up compared to the TAR-21 and AUG, both of which are close to their military counterparts.
I think this is the largest contributing factor. I don't personally understand this phenomena, but a lot of people just have to have the exact same thing as the military. Hey, if that's your thing, fine. I just don't get the hate associated with making a rifle legal for the masses. It's a great gun and function always trumps form in my book.


Another factor is it's not what they have. So, to make themselves feel better, they try to find ways to say what they have is better than the new kid on the block. This is the way of the world and will never change.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: AlexTavor on May 05, 2017, 02:34:45 PM
Because it's new, also because it's pretty butched up compared to the TAR-21 and AUG, both of which are close to their military counterparts.

The Tar-21 is no closer to the military version then the x95. Both are semi auto in the IDF, both are in circulation, along with about 1000 other minor variation or Frankensteined rifle with parts from everywhere. Most of the variation comes in the hand guards, charging handles, and foregrips, otherwise they are all commonly found in the IDF regardless of Tar-21, mtar, x95, gtar, ctar, star. The only real difference between the civilian and the IDF is the trigger pack, even though the IDF uses semi only the fire control pack is still capable of select fire if it wasn't blocked.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: Chairforce26 on May 05, 2017, 03:51:29 PM
Wait you're saying IDF Tar-21s and MTARs aren't select-fire in the IDF?  That doesn't make any sense, even if you don't hardly ever use full-auto isn't it better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it?

Thanks for the comments so far.  I don't understand why people have to have exactly what the military has.  For example for AR15s there are widely available aftermarket parts like handguards, grips, barrels ect on civilian ARs that are much better than what 90% of what the military gets issued.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: AlexTavor on May 05, 2017, 04:13:28 PM
Wait you're saying IDF Tar-21s and MTARs aren't select-fire in the IDF?  That doesn't make any sense, even if you don't hardly ever use full-auto isn't it better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it?

Thanks for the comments so far.  I don't understand why people have to have exactly what the military has.  For example for AR15s there are widely available aftermarket parts like handguards, grips, barrels ect on civilian ARs that are much better than what 90% of what the military gets issued.

Correct IDF uses semi on their AR platforms, they do have select fire  but it's found on their LMG (ex. IMI NEGEV) platform for support rolls.

The x95 is available in select fire for promotional videos by IWI, but not what is in use by the IDF.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: BellatorInvictus on May 05, 2017, 07:47:25 PM
Being a person who thoroughly appreciates military-style clone rifles, I can give you a couple of my reasons. First, for the collectibility and historicity of the firearm. Same reason why people want WW2-style M1s and Vietnam-era M16s. Second, if something is milspec, you can rest assured it's going to be quality, functional stuff. Colt and FN rifles, IWI, PEQ-15s, Vicker's slings, KAC rails, etc. There's a reason the military doesn't admit all the different kinds of tacticool crap on the market. Your futuristic $90 ambi AR charging handle make look spiffy, but in the theatre of war, all its cool angles and sharp edges would cause it to get snagged, cut you, and do all sorts of other things neither you nor the entrepreneurial designer ever thought about.

De gustibus non est disputandum, but there is something to be said for the aesthetics of rifles as they were set up for real battle use. Personally, I'd take a simple 6920 M4gery with an ACOG over a Magpul-ified AR with lasers and sharks and whatnot.

Now if we can just get IWI to release those IDF-style front hand guards for the X95...


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: Chairforce26 on May 05, 2017, 10:41:59 PM
Being a person who thoroughly appreciates military-style clone rifles, I can give you a couple of my reasons. First, for the collectibility and historicity of the firearm. Same reason why people want WW2-style M1s and Vietnam-era M16s. Second, if something is milspec, you can rest assured it's going to be quality, functional stuff. Colt and FN rifles, IWI, PEQ-15s, Vicker's slings, KAC rails, etc. There's a reason the military doesn't admit all the different kinds of tacticool crap on the market. Your futuristic $90 ambi AR charging handle make look spiffy, but in the theatre of war, all its cool angles and sharp edges would cause it to get snagged, cut you, and do all sorts of other things neither you nor the entrepreneurial designer ever thought about.

De gustibus non est disputandum, but there is something to be said for the aesthetics of rifles as they were set up for real battle use. Personally, I'd take a simple 6920 M4gery with an ACOG over a Magpul-ified AR with lasers and sharks and whatnot.

Now if we can just get IWI to release those IDF-style front hand guards for the X95...


Yeah but PMAGs weren't issued for a long time and they were much better than STANAG.  Same with the Magpul CTR stocks.  They weren't adopted as a milspec standard but as a stock they were/are far superior to the regular M4 stock.  SF use them all the time.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: AlexTavor on May 06, 2017, 12:28:56 AM
Are P Mags that are in a STANAG 4179 pattern not considered STANAG?

I like the stainless steel mags from C Products Defense. They look at feel just like the aluminum USGI STANAG 4179 but don't get dented up as easily. They also drop free from the Tavor without needing sanding or shaving like some P Mags.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: BellatorInvictus on May 06, 2017, 12:36:45 AM
Chairforce: That's true--the PMAGs especially, even though those were not without their own issues (warped and broken feed lips). I'm still a fan of the aluminum mags, but I make a point of installing the Magpul followers in them. Lancer mags of course represent the best of both worlds.

By no means am I saying all aftermarket tactical accessories are junk--certainly some things are junk, but then there is good stuff that is fine for the range and home defense, but nevertheless is just not designed to hold up in battle. I'm into military weapons because they represent that ultimate level of toughness and reliability. If the military uses it, it's OK in my book.

The X95 always was and always will be primarily a military weapon. That's how I've always seen it in pictures and video, and so that's what looks right to me. I understand the practical advantage of having the longer hand guard, and let's face it, that version of the rifle isn't going away. All I ask is that IWI offer the ability to modify/upgrade it to look as close to its military counterpart as possible (which fortunately they've recently done by releasing the shorter furniture).


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: THX1138 on May 06, 2017, 10:47:42 AM
Wait you're saying IDF Tar-21s and MTARs aren't select-fire in the IDF?  That doesn't make any sense, even if you don't hardly ever use full-auto isn't it better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it?


The x95's the IDF issues are select fire models, but they don't use full auto because the controllability is so poor. That and full auto is a waste of ammo. IWI US once reported that the IDF actually locktights the selectors so they won't even go full auto.


Title: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: Screwball on May 06, 2017, 11:03:17 AM
IWI US once reported that the IDF actually locktights the selectors so they won't even go full auto.

So, they Loctite the safety off? That doesn't seem accurate... likely someone trying to make a rifle seem more like what the Israelis are running.

In regards to the X95, I'm sure it is a good rifle. However, with state and federal firearms laws, it really doesn't get to utilize the benefits it originally brought to the table with compactness. Not necessarily the guns fault, but if I'm buying a bullpup, which seems more appealing when you look at them being similar length but one more expensive. Unless the benefits of the X95 appeal to you, or you really like Israeli weapons, there isn't a huge argument to go with it over the SAR.

I don't know whether there were or were not issues with the X95's accuracy, but I decided on the SAR before I got to that consideration.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: THX1138 on May 06, 2017, 11:13:10 AM

So, they Loctite the safety off? That doesn't seem accurate... likely someone trying to make a rifle seem more like what the Israelis are running.


https://youtu.be/P7aN8dc846U?t=6m11s (https://youtu.be/P7aN8dc846U?t=6m11s)


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: Hivedr. on May 06, 2017, 01:57:17 PM
I find it interesting why folks need so badly to have their X95 look like the IDF issue one. I find the current LE/Mil version to short/cramped (I am used to short SMGs), now add that ugly IDF round overly short hand guard that folks want, really, it screams lack of design imagination and modularity. If the civilian X95 had kept the IDF round hand guard I would have stayed with both my SARs as they are at least sexy looking when compared to the ugly IDF issue round hand guard X95.

I like a the blocky industrial look of the civilian X95 with it's slightly longer more versatile hand guard. Sure it does not have the sexy lines of a SAR or AUG, it is more like a power tool right out of a dirty machine shop, but I find that refreshing.


 

     


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: AlexTavor on May 06, 2017, 02:53:03 PM
Wait you're saying IDF Tar-21s and MTARs aren't select-fire in the IDF?  That doesn't make any sense, even if you don't hardly ever use full-auto isn't it better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it?


The x95's the IDF issues are select fire models, but they don't use full auto because the controllability is so poor. That and full auto is a waste of ammo. IWI US once reported that the IDF actually locktights the selectors so they won't even go full auto.

That is 100% not true. The plastic body is semi and safe only, the IDF does not issue AR platforms in select fire. There is no locktite on the safety selector since it would affect the operation of the safety.

Like I said earlier the fire control pack is capable of select fire, but the rifle itself is not unless modifications are completed. If you saw a select fire Tavor it 100% was not IDF


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: AlexTavor on May 06, 2017, 02:59:10 PM

So, they Loctite the safety off? That doesn't seem accurate... likely someone trying to make a rifle seem more like what the Israelis are running.


https://youtu.be/P7aN8dc846U?t=6m11s (https://youtu.be/P7aN8dc846U?t=6m11s)


That video is bulls***. That old man is clearly has never been to Israel and also has no idea what he's talking about (notice the people laughing at him and repeating his locktite story). There is no locktite on the safety selector, the plastic body itself is semi or safe only.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: BellatorInvictus on May 06, 2017, 04:26:42 PM
There's nothing ugly about the IDF-issue X95 and its rounded hand guard. It's a rugged, badass looking military gun.

The civvie X95 had its front hand guard almost doubled in length. It isn't a minor change--it makes the firearm look totally off compared to its original design. Don't even get me started on the giant pencil-eraser butt pad. That thing is as uncomfortable as it is awkward looking. There's a reason IWI finally decided to release the short furniture after initially having no intention of doing that--enough people made their interest in it known. And from those who have installed the shorter butt pad, I've only heard how it improves the handling, balance, and feel of the weapon. That's because that is how the gun was originally designed to be.

I don't get why people wouldn't want the military style X95. If the X95 is too cramped for you, get the SAR. If you like the US long version of the X95, good for you. Have fun with that.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: RadScorpius on May 06, 2017, 04:42:30 PM
There's nothing ugly about the IDF-issue X95 and its rounded hand guard. It's a rugged, badass looking military gun.

The civvie X95 had its front hand guard almost doubled in length. It isn't a minor change--it makes the firearm look totally off compared to its original design. Don't even get me started on the giant pencil-eraser butt pad. That thing is as uncomfortable as it is awkward looking. There's a reason IWI finally decided to release the short furniture after initially having no intention of doing that--enough people made their interest in it known. And from those who have installed the shorter butt pad, I've only heard how it improves the handling, balance, and feel of the weapon. That's because that is how the gun was originally designed to be.

I don't get why people wouldn't want the military style X95. If the X95 is too cramped for you, get the SAR. If you like the US long version of the X95, good for you. Have fun with that.

I sure want the older round handguard X95s for my collection, it keeps the outline straight, even with 18"barrel they look good too.

(http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/X95_extended_barrel.jpg)


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: THX1138 on May 06, 2017, 04:50:53 PM
That video is bulls***. That old man is clearly has never been to Israel and also has no idea what he's talking about (notice the people laughing at him and repeating his locktite story). There is no locktite on the safety selector, the plastic body itself is semi or safe only.

That old man is Michael Kassnar, VP of sales & marketing at IWI US. He was also the predominant force that ultimately led to IWI setting up here in the states. I guess he's just telling stories and spreading disinformation to get the internet experts riled up...


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: RadScorpius on May 06, 2017, 05:00:45 PM
Tim from Military Arms Channel has also mentioned that some ISF units have semi auto only Tavor and X95s, mostly reserve units.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?lect
Post by: AlexTavor on May 06, 2017, 05:17:14 PM
It doesn't matter who he is, he is still wrong. Just because he's a VP of North American sales doesn't mean he knows anything about the mil spec.

The only reason select fire cannot be activated is since the safety is Safe/semi only. To convert the IDF to select fire the pin that the thumb switch is connect to nerds to be replaced with the select fire pin that had the correct cut outs that move the transfer bar into the proper location.

Over my 2 years in the IDF you I have never seen any FA tavors in any unit. So it's not unit specific, only the light and heavy machine guns are FA.

The hand guards also vary widely depending on the generation of tavor issued. Anything can be found from the round ones people seem fond of here, the one that is found on the civi Sar/tar-22, and I'm sure after a few years the current quad rail found on the civi x95. When a new variant is issued IDF does not retire all old version. You can find anything, and beyond that you can find Frankenstein rifles with parts from many version.

From my understanding of the thick but pad found on the civi x95 it was to meet government requierments for OAL not because they wanted to keep the thin pad from the civi market. We have access to the thin pad and the pistol grips but this could vary jurisdiction by jurisdiction. For mass production to keep it simple they ship in a certain configuration and where legal you can add the parts that fit your style.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: Hox013 on May 06, 2017, 09:01:59 PM
My take on mil-spec:

Equipment that meets the minimum set standards, produced by the lowest bidder.

Mil-spec is not always the best available equipment.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: BellatorInvictus on May 06, 2017, 11:13:55 PM
Mil-spec:

Equipment that meets minimum set standards upon which your life depends, produced by the lowest bidder.

Produced by the lower bidder is just how business works. Don't you think the companies that design the aftermarket parts look to contract with the lowest bidding producers they can as well? That's how profits are made, or in the case of the government, budgets are met.

Sure, there may be some superior products out there, but milspec is still milspec. It's the standard. The litmus test. If a product has that NSN number seal-of-approval, you can probably trust it with your life.

Take the ACOG for example. There are lots of 4x scopes on the market. Why didn't the military go with something cheaper, from a lower bidder? Because they needed something they could confidently take to hell and back.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: dimitry on May 07, 2017, 10:57:53 AM
That video is bulls***. That old man is clearly has never been to Israel and also has no idea what he's talking about (notice the people laughing at him and repeating his locktite story). There is no locktite on the safety selector, the plastic body itself is semi or safe only.

That old man is Michael Kassnar, VP of sales & marketing at IWI US. He was also the predominant force that ultimately led to IWI setting up here in the states. I guess he's just telling stories and spreading disinformation to get the internet experts riled up...
He's an expert in the civilian fire-arms industry, with decades of experience, and obviously a brilliant manager (given the success of IWI US under his stewardship).

But that doesn't mean he knows about what the situation is with military customers in other countries, like the Israeli army.  



Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: BellatorInvictus on May 07, 2017, 12:33:15 PM
How would loctiting the safeties even work? Loctite is used for holding screws in place. Unless they completely disabled the function of the safety with it (still not sure how that would work), I don't see how they could have prevented it from going to the third position with just loctite. They'd have to install the semi-only selector.

I have lots of IDF reference photos with Tavors and X95s that don't even have the auto marking on the plastic frame. The trigger packs may be full auto in these for convenience, so the selectors must be the part that keeps things semi-auto.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: RadScorpius on May 07, 2017, 12:58:30 PM
How would loctiting the safeties even work? Loctite is used for holding screws in place. Unless they completely disabled the function of the safety with it (still not sure how that would work), I don't see how they could have prevented it from going to the third position with just loctite. They'd have to install the semi-only selector.

I have lots of IDF reference photos with Tavors and X95s that don't even have the auto marking on the plastic frame. The trigger packs may be full auto in these for convenience, so the selectors must be the part that keeps things semi-auto.

Post them up int the X95 in the wild thread, I want to see them.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: BellatorInvictus on May 07, 2017, 04:50:45 PM
RadScorpius--In my post with pics about the X95L, none of them have the A marking--just S and R. If you look closely you can tell. I'll post another one there that I have of the standard IDF X95 SBR with no full auto marking.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: AlexTavor on May 07, 2017, 06:04:20 PM
Here's the new x95 quad rail hand guard in IDF service. Just a matter of time till it's in wide spread use. Slowly as older models go out of service they will be replaced. The round guards being the oldest, followed by the tar-21/sar style guard, to the current quad rail. Having used both the old round guards and the new one on my personal x95 that I got in March I don't see why anyone would want the old version. The new top rails are much nicer since they are essentially monolithic and offer unlimited optic configurations, can mount and optic, and still have plenty of room to add IR, night vision, magnification vs the old stepped top rail with limited space and useless top rail on top of the round grip. It's like comparing the M4 to the M4A1 which were also very common in the IDF, the m4a1 was much more desirable vs the m4 with the loop.

The quad rail on this rifle is the short version which is also an available part that can be ordered for the civi version. With an 18.5" barrel the short quad rail guard would look off though.

There is and never was a full auto Tavor of any generation in IDF service, F/A is exclusive to LMG's like the Negev, or heavy's like the M2.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: Hox013 on May 07, 2017, 07:08:21 PM
Mil-spec:

Equipment that meets minimum set standards upon which your life depends, produced by the lowest bidder.

Produced by the lower bidder is just how business works. Don't you think the companies that design the aftermarket parts look to contract with the lowest bidding producers they can as well? That's how profits are made, or in the case of the government, budgets are met.

Sure, there may be some superior products out there, but milspec is still milspec. It's the standard. The litmus test. If a product has that NSN number seal-of-approval, you can probably trust it with your life.


Take the ACOG for example. There are lots of 4x scopes on the market. Why didn't the military go with something cheaper, from a lower bidder? Because they needed something they could confidently take to hell and back.


Sure, and I agree with that. I'm merely saying that just because the military has it, doesn't mean there isn't something better or on par available. But I agree if the military adopted it, it's going to be gtg for civilian and LEO use.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: BellatorInvictus on May 07, 2017, 11:31:56 PM
AlexTavor--just curious, since you're in the IDF, what is their rationale for not having full auto on their Tavors/X95s?

I agree that the newer quad rail hand guard is more practical. I really like it a lot--the X95 in the pic you posted with the 40mm launcher looks amazing. Honestly, I like the newer hand guard design more, but I also really like the older design. Even though the round hand guard doesn't have as many features, I just like the look of the earlier X95s. It's like people who are into retro rifles. Sure an XM177 carbine isn't as practical or even as cool looking as an M4 with KAC rails, but it has its own charm and collectibility factor. So I'd like to have both, truth be told. Hurray for IWI for at least making the newer ones available.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: Rastoff on May 08, 2017, 12:10:49 AM
...if something is milspec, you can rest assured it's going to be quality, functional stuff.
With a statement like this I can only assume you've never actually been in or worked for the military. Lots of people use the term "Mil Spec" without actually knowing what the spec really is. Not everything the military has is good. There's lots of garbage foisted on our military members and they pay the ultimate price.

Further, just because it's the least expensive doesn't mean it gets selected. A lower bidder must beat any other bid by more than 15% to ensure being selected. Also, just because they beat the price doesn't mean they'll be selected. Quality is a factor, but the end user doesn't always get a chance to be part of the selection process.

Further still, the military asks for salient specifications. If the requisitioner knows what he's doing, those specs can be quite detailed and specific. If they don't know what they're doing, and there's more of those, you never know what you'll get. For example, in the original Jeep specifications there was a requirement for the vehicle to be light enough for 4 people to be able to lift it out of a ditch. Willies simply ignored this requirement and still got the contract. Now the Jeep turned out to be a good one. The Bradley fighting vehicle; not so much.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: RadScorpius on May 08, 2017, 12:49:12 AM
The real problem with sh*ty stuff in the military how old and over used they are, and the replacement parts can come from any low bidding supplier.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: AlexTavor on May 08, 2017, 01:56:54 AM
AlexTavor--just curious, since you're in the IDF, what is their rationale for not having full auto on their Tavors/X95s?

I agree that the newer quad rail hand guard is more practical. I really like it a lot--the X95 in the pic you posted with the 40mm launcher looks amazing. Honestly, I like the newer hand guard design more, but I also really like the older design. Even though the round hand guard doesn't have as many features, I just like the look of the earlier X95s. It's like people who are into retro rifles. Sure an XM177 carbine isn't as practical or even as cool looking as an M4 with KAC rails, but it has its own charm and collectibility factor. So I'd like to have both, truth be told. Hurray for IWI for at least making the newer ones available.

The rational behind semi only for the rifles is not explicitly explained. You need to keep in mind where and who the enemy is, the primary role is defensive in a counter-terrorism nature. Rifles are the most common weapon that can be found in the city. Unleashing full auto fire in the middle of a city that is inaccurate can lead to many unintended consequences. Another consideration is weight while carrying ammunition, and certainly budgets also play a role. For a planned offensive operation there will be soldiers equipped with LMG's for support fire and LMG's are much more effective at completing this task. Its a complex question with many things to consider since its not exactly like fighting a well equipped and organized foreign military force. Full auto fire will do nothing to stop a rocket fired from Gaza or a suicide bomb. I'm a duel citizen of Canada and Israel, military service is mandatory even though I was born in Canada and live in Canada. It was my sort of my "choice" to apply for citizenship but my parents did have a lot to do with this since otherwise I would've preferred to join the Canadian Forces. I joined at 18 and returned at 20, I'm 30 now so what I've said could be slightly out of date by 10 years.

If you're looking for a Tavor with a military pedigree the Israeli produced X95 is the clear winner compared to the IWI subsidiary produced SAR-21 that was made in America and brought a slew of "unique" changes at the time it was released. The SAR did not look like any in service Tavor due to those changes.

 Since I'm in Canada its less clear cut since we received the made in Israel TAR-21 but over the years it received some of the "unique" changes found on the SAR like going to the full top rail that visually differentiated it from an IDF issue. With these changes to the TAR-21 the X95 is the only visually correct Tavor for sale if looking for an IDF clone (minus the charging handle, buttplate)


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: Major54 on May 08, 2017, 03:18:57 AM
Here's the new x95 quad rail hand guard in IDF service. Just a matter of time till it's in wide spread use. Slowly as older models go out of service they will be replaced. The round guards being the oldest, followed by the tar-21/sar style guard, to the current quad rail. Having used both the old round guards and the new one on my personal x95 that I got in March I don't see why anyone would want the old version. The new top rails are much nicer since they are essentially monolithic and offer unlimited optic configurations, can mount and optic, and still have plenty of room to add IR, night vision, magnification vs the old stepped top rail with limited space and useless top rail on top of the round grip. It's like comparing the M4 to the M4A1 which were also very common in the IDF, the m4a1 was much more desirable vs the m4 with the loop.

The quad rail on this rifle is the short version which is also an available part that can be ordered for the civi version. With an 18.5" barrel the short quad rail guard would look off though.

There is and never was a full auto Tavor of any generation in IDF service, F/A is exclusive to LMG's like the Negev, or heavy's like the M2.

I'm certainly not disputing your claim as I have never been in the IDF but you may want to revisit your picture attached to the post I quoted. If you expand the picture listed as an IDF service Tavor, you can clearly see the "A", "R" and "S" selector settings on the gun.

Maybe a special services branch using them? Not contradicting your information but genuinely curious. Thanks.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: AlexTavor on May 08, 2017, 04:13:24 AM
major54

That's a picture from google images to demonstrate the new generation grip on a clear example of a military weapon since it has a grenade launcher which wouldn't be available to the civilian market. I don't know the source and the circumstances behind the image.

IWI does have select fire tavors, It's most likely from a product demonstration for military customers demonstrating the newest Tavor available and a good indication of what we will see in the future as old rifles are replaced. On closer inspection the person holding the rifle does not appear to be from the IDF since I don't recognize the plate carrier, helmet, or uniform. I'm 10 years out of the loop so equipment could've changed but it looks like someone demonstrating a military product for potential military customers. Tavors are exported and equip several nations armed forces.

Other then the rifle being a military product with the new x95 style grip there is nothing else I could confirm other then it being shot most likely in Israel due to S/R/A markings vs S/F/A.

Special forces could be a possibility, it's hard to see the shoulder patch and the uniform under the plate carrier. First thing I noticed zooming in was how clean everything was, all the equipment looks brand new, gloves, even the sticker on the ear pro is not worn. Either he is the luckiest soldier out there with all the fresh gear, or it's more then likely a IWI demonstration so fresh gear makes for nicer pictures.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: Major54 on May 08, 2017, 05:12:09 AM
major54

That's a picture from google images to demonstrate the new generation grip on a clear example of a military weapon since it has a grenade launcher which wouldn't be available to the civilian market. I don't know the source and the circumstances behind the image.

IWI does have select fire tavors, It's most likely from a product demonstration for military customers demonstrating the newest Tavor available and a good indication of what we will see in the future as old rifles are replaced. On closer inspection the person holding the rifle does not appear to be from the IDF since I don't recognize the plate carrier, helmet, or uniform. I'm 10 years out of the loop so equipment could've changed but it looks like someone demonstrating a military product for potential military

customers. Tavors are exported and equip several nations armed forces.

Other then the rifle being a military product with the new x95 style grip there is nothing else I could confirm other then it being shot most likely in Israel due to S/R/A markings vs S/F/A.

Special forces could be a possibility, it's hard to see the shoulder patch and the uniform under the plate carrier. First thing I noticed zooming in was how clean everything was, all the equipment looks brand new, gloves, even the sticker on the ear pro is not worn. Either he is the luckiest soldier out there with all the fresh gear, or it's more then likely a IWI demonstration so fresh gear makes for nicer pictures.

Just to be clear, I wasn't trying to call anyone out. As IDF, you would know better about the semi vs. FA than anyone in this chat. I only wanted to get your feedback since it did have a select fire picture. I do appreciate your responding.

I make no apologies to anyone of my lifelong support of Israel and its forces that defend it. The last eight years were hard to watch as the previous administration didn't hold the traditional regard and support for Israel as has always been expected from the US. As the IDF has proven time and again, it will stand and fight the whole world if need be.

I wanted to make sure you got to respond though since the IDF use of semi has been much discussed. I was only in military service a couple of years and that was in a non-combat era and agree that the photo has to be a demo or as you say, the luckiest soldier in any army. It's always better though to hear it from one who serves or has served there than from someone like myself. ;)

I was still a boy but vividly recall following the Six Day War in 1967 in amazement as Israel decisively defeated all sides against her. I know this is a gun forum but you cannot separate it's legendary history from the weapons it uses and has used. Whether it is popular to say that is a reason why I choose Tavor and Galil matters not to me. It is simply the truth for me.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: AlexTavor on May 08, 2017, 06:25:39 AM
major54

That's a picture from google images to demonstrate the new generation grip on a clear example of a military weapon since it has a grenade launcher which wouldn't be available to the civilian market. I don't know the source and the circumstances behind the image.

IWI does have select fire tavors, It's most likely from a product demonstration for military customers demonstrating the newest Tavor available and a good indication of what we will see in the future as old rifles are replaced. On closer inspection the person holding the rifle does not appear to be from the IDF since I don't recognize the plate carrier, helmet, or uniform. I'm 10 years out of the loop so equipment could've changed but it looks like someone demonstrating a military product for potential military

customers. Tavors are exported and equip several nations armed forces.

Other then the rifle being a military product with the new x95 style grip there is nothing else I could confirm other then it being shot most likely in Israel due to S/R/A markings vs S/F/A.

Special forces could be a possibility, it's hard to see the shoulder patch and the uniform under the plate carrier. First thing I noticed zooming in was how clean everything was, all the equipment looks brand new, gloves, even the sticker on the ear pro is not worn. Either he is the luckiest soldier out there with all the fresh gear, or it's more then likely a IWI demonstration so fresh gear makes for nicer pictures.

Just to be clear, I wasn't trying to call anyone out. As IDF, you would know better about the semi vs. FA than anyone in this chat. I only wanted to get your feedback since it did have a select fire picture. I do appreciate your responding.

I make no apologies to anyone of my lifelong support of Israel and its forces that defend it. The last eight years were hard to watch as the previous administration didn't hold the traditional regard and support for Israel as has always been expected from the US. As the IDF has proven time and again, it will stand and fight the whole world if need be.

I wanted to make sure you got to respond though since the IDF use of semi has been much discussed. I was only in military service a couple of years and that was in a non-combat era and agree that the photo has to be a demo or as you say, the luckiest soldier in any army. It's always better though to hear it from one who serves or has served there than from someone like myself. ;)

I was still a boy but vividly recall following the Six Day War in 1967 in amazement as Israel decisively defeated all sides against her. I know this is a gun forum but you cannot separate it's legendary history from the weapons it uses and has used. Whether it is popular to say that is a reason why I choose Tavor and Galil matters not to me. It is simply the truth for me.

Yeah the rifle is 100% a military product but the person holding it is almost 100% not military, but more likely former military. Judging by the Agilite plate carrier and helmet good chance its a former IDF soldier since Agilite is ran by former IDF and US forces veterans.

The image is a very good indication of the the future of the military issue Tavor though. Sadly once in the hands of the IDF it will most likely be in a semi auto form. As far as debate on if the IDF uses select on AR platforms, there really is no debate since they don't.

The hasabara surrounding the 6 day war leaves me with mixed feelings. The North American version is much less flattering resulting in the sinking of the USS liberty, the death of many allied American sailors and almost dropping a nuclear bomb. I think we have a very different mindset in north america which makes it difficult to adjust and left me with lots more mixed feelings. This could also be a mix of adjusting to new surroundings and cultural shock but adjusting was very difficult for me. I think the Canadian Forces would've been a much better fit, and something Ive still been considering the past few years.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: THX1138 on May 08, 2017, 10:50:20 AM
He's an expert in the civilian fire-arms industry, with decades of experience, and obviously a brilliant manager (given the success of IWI US under his stewardship).

But that doesn't mean he knows about what the situation is with military customers in other countries, like the Israeli army.  

How would loctiting the safeties even work? Loctite is used for holding screws in place. Unless they completely disabled the function of the safety with it (still not sure how that would work), I don't see how they could have prevented it from going to the third position with just loctite. They'd have to install the semi-only selector.

I have lots of IDF reference photos with Tavors and X95s that don't even have the auto marking on the plastic frame. The trigger packs may be full auto in these for convenience, so the selectors must be the part that keeps things semi-auto.


I'm not going to defend the details of what he said. I only shared it mainly to re-enforce the fact that IDF doesn't use full auto on their Tavor/x95. He could very well be off with his terminology/details. I don't see why would he completely make it up though. The man works directly with IWI Israel and guys that were in the IDF that now work for IWI. I really didn't put a whole lot of thought into how exactly it would work, and certainly the info AlexTavor has posted sounds much better. Maybe it was only a here and there thing until they ironed out a more appropriate method. In order for that to work I would assume that the Israeli method of carry would be in play, which is full mag, empty chamber, selector (permanently) on semi mode. Just a theory.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: BellatorInvictus on May 08, 2017, 11:35:53 AM
AlexTavor--I totally believe you about the ARs in the IDF not being full auto, but I would like to point out that in many pictures you can find online, it's clear that the receivers have auto sears installed in them. I imagine that the IDF simply installed semi selectors, leaving the auto sears in place?

It makes sense that you wouldn't want full auto in the middle of a city in order to reduce collateral damage. I've been to Israel and went to Jerusalem multiple times--I can imagine why they wouldn't want full auto there, especially in a place like the Old City. Our US forces used burst fire on the M16A4s and M4s in order to improve controllability and reduce excessive ammo loss, but still, in the end the verdict was that full auto was the way to go, and hence the M4A1. Different situations though, obviously.

Regarding milspec, I stand by what I said that milspec is an indication of reliable equipment. My point about it was mainly focused towards the AR aftermarket and random, flashy parts that are produced which have not been tested or approved. The reason this came up was because some were saying they couldn't understand why certain people just had to have military style rifle clones or equipment, because many of us around here have been very vocal about our distaste for the US civvie X95, and how we'd prefer something closer to what the IDF actually uses. Milspec means that a product has to meet a certain level of quality in general (the goal IS to keep soldiers alive, even if poor decisions are made from time to time), and also that there is an aesthetic appreciation for military weapons, as well as a historical, collectibility factor involved as well.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: AlexTavor on May 08, 2017, 03:28:04 PM
BellatorInvictus

They do have a full auto sear since the fire control pack is capable of select fire. The method of limiting the rifle to semi by changing the selector pin was also the theory I used on the first page when locktite on the safety story came up. I don't know if its actually how it's done, but I do know the safety was not glued in place with locktite since it can rotate freely. The only way I can think of is swapping the pin since that pins rotation is what limits the movement of the trigger transfer linkage. By pin I mean the barrel that is in between the safety selector and indicator, don't know what the actual name of the part is.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: BellatorInvictus on May 08, 2017, 05:15:51 PM
AlexTavor--I know exactly what you're talking about. I used to have an X95 and completely disassembled it at one point out of curiosity. The safety selector is composed of those plastic lever pieces and the inner steel selector cylinder itself. The only way to make it reliably semi-auto would be to replace that cylinder part of the selector with the semi-only variant.

When you had an X95, was it set up like this? It seems that a lot of the IDF X95s are just marked S and R--like they were only ever intended to be semi-auto as built from the factory (in spite of having full auto trigger packs nonetheless).

I'm still curious about the IDF M4s and M16s with the obvious auto sears. It seems likely that they would just replace the auto safeties with semi-only versions in those as well.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: AlexTavor on May 08, 2017, 06:16:16 PM
Other then a field strip, we do not do complete disassemblies. Someone working in the armoury would have a better idea of the specifics. Externally the plastic body of the tavor has the markings of S/R. I think the reasoning behind using the select fire control pack is to have the possibility to upgrade to select fire for minimal cost. Replacing the pin would be much cheaper then replacing the whole fire control pack, plastic body and pin.

There could be more behind it since there's a slight variation between the selector lever positions between civi/idf Tavors. Its a very slight change and hard to notice without experiencing both and having your muscle memory say WTF when touching the civi version. The fire position is at a slightly different angle then my Canadian civi Tavors where fire is found at 12 o'clock, on my IDF issue it had fire at the 9-10 o'clock position. So with the variation in position there is also the possibility that the IDF would need only to replace the plastic body and leave everything else the same. The new plastic body would allow the lever travel further so the selector can travel beyond 10 o'clock and reach approx 2 o'clock position where the A would be on a select fire. I don't know if R being at 10 o'clock is for every single IDF tavor of every generation or if this varies by model and generation. The position could also just be cosmetic to make it more erogonomic to put the weapon on safe, which is much harder to activate when the lever is pointing at 12.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: Verfed on May 11, 2017, 08:17:58 PM
As far as debate on if the IDF uses select on AR platforms, there really is no debate since they don't.

What do you mean by AR platforms? Because if you mean M16s, I never saw an M16 in the IDF that wasn't select fire. I was issued one, everyone I saw was.

(and I don't think the USS Liberty was sunk)


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: AlexTavor on May 11, 2017, 10:07:37 PM
As far as debate on if the IDF uses select on AR platforms, there really is no debate since they don't.

What do you mean by AR platforms? Because if you mean M16s, I never saw an M16 in the IDF that wasn't select fire. I was issued one, everyone I saw was.

(and I don't think the USS Liberty was sunk)

By AR(assault rifle) I mean the various platforms of the tavor assault rifle since we were talking about the x95/sar 21. I haven't really seen any m16 during my time but there were m4's lots in the airforce who worked on with the iron dome were issued m4


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: BellatorInvictus on May 12, 2017, 09:38:20 AM
AlexTavor--ah ok, that makes more sense. For us US folks, AR instantly means AR-15. So the IDF M16s and M4s, made by Colt in the USA, are full-auto select fire. It's only the IDF Tavors and X95s which leave that option out.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: AlexTavor on May 12, 2017, 10:35:44 PM
I dont know much about the M16, I'm a  little to young for that. Most were converted into M4's what seems like a long time ago considering the condition they were in. Either way you are discouraged/prohibited from using FA, whether you will get in s*** for it is a different story. Following basic and depending on your personal skills and aptitudes there is advanced training for automatic gunner but that is now departing from assault rifles and moving into the Negev.

The AR in TAR is assault rifle. Even though in North America basically every gun enthusiast frowns on the usage of that "bad word" and will say sporting rifle. Assault rifles are FA blah blah blah, these are sporting rifles :D


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: BellatorInvictus on May 13, 2017, 01:14:55 AM
Oh I unapologetically and quite proudly call them assault rifles. The U.S. constitution protects the right of the people to keep and bear military weapons--not just "sporting" rifles. Gun enthusiasts being afraid to call an assault rifle--full auto or semi--what it is, is a huge victory for the freedom-hating anti-2nd amendment liberals.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: RadScorpius on May 13, 2017, 01:29:42 AM
It's complete BS that we can't use the term assault rifles out of politically correct reasons.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: Chairforce26 on May 19, 2017, 12:29:06 PM
Finally got out to shoot my X95 yesterday and it's awsome.  I do like its compactness and it doesn't seem to have much recoil at all.  Its not as accurate as an AR15 which was to be expected but decent enough.  Now I fired several shots in rapid succession, probably about 15 shots with 1/2 a second between them and was surprised how hot the thing got.  There was quite a bit of smoke rising from the barrel through the handguard obstructing the sight.  No wonder the Israelis don't shoot them full-auto.  The gun would either melt or you'd burn ypur hand off.


Title: Re:
Post by: Hit Factor on May 20, 2017, 12:42:09 AM
I believe that AR means automatic rifle in reference to the rifle designed by Eugene Stoner. Assault rifle, I have heard, is a relatively newer term coined by either the media or antigun coalitions.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: Razvedka on May 20, 2017, 01:04:00 AM
You're thinking of 'assault weapon'.


Title: Re:
Post by: Hivedr. on May 20, 2017, 01:30:20 AM
I believe that AR means automatic rifle in reference to the rifle designed by Eugene Stoner. Assault rifle, I have heard, is a relatively newer term coined by either the media or antigun coalitions.

No, AR stands for Armilite Rifle which is the company Eugene Stoner worked for when the rifle was designed. Ironically Armilite was a California based company and some the early rifles are even stamped HollyWood Ca. Buts that's when California was a Republican state and the arsenal for the U.S. Cold War efforts.  

Assault rifle has its roots in NAZI Germany. The term has been around long before the media went full tilt liberal.

"Historical knowledge is your friend and the enemy of the Liberal". Me


Title: Re:
Post by: xpdchief on May 20, 2017, 08:15:25 AM
I believe that AR means automatic rifle in reference to the rifle designed by Eugene Stoner. Assault rifle, I have heard, is a relatively newer term coined by either the media or antigun coalitions.

No, AR stands for Armilite Rifle which is the company Eugene Stoner worked for when the rifle was designed. Ironically Armilite was a California based company and some the early rifles are even stamped HollyWood Ca. Buts that's when California was a Republican state and the arsenal for the U.S. Cold War efforts.  

Assault rifle has its roots in NAZI Germany. The term has been around long before the media went full tilt liberal.

"Historical knowledge is your friend and the enemy of the Liberal". Me

Correct! 


Title: Re:
Post by: Hit Factor on May 20, 2017, 08:17:07 AM
I stand corrected, twice.


Title: Re: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Post by: TNC on May 20, 2017, 11:35:00 AM
You also have to keep in mind that the gun community is very emotional (yep, emotional), and tend to hold on to some social media celebrity's words as bible, when NutnFancy, Yeager, InRange and a few others claimed X95 is bad, everyone all the sudden "tried to shoot the one their friend's uncle's brother's buddy owns and hated it". It takes a while for the gun community to appropriate something after some initial bad press, the early poor accuracy batch didn't help the issue.

Well, I disagree vehemently that as a gun owner I am emotional.  I am a calm, discerning, and analytical person who is a supreme authority on all matters concerning guns.  You on the other hand are a hand-wringing, whining, scurrilous dog who goes around trying to dictate your foolish opinions on others...especially when my opinions are obviously highly superior.  I use logic and not emotions to confirm that I am always right and you are wrong.  Those who question my observations are fools and don't even deserve my keyboard time...but...my magnanimous and philanthropic sense of awareness and pity on my fellow gun owners allows me to share my wealth of knowledge and insight.  I hate people like you who would question my choices and commentary.  I sob into my pillow at night because of people like you who would trample on my obviously superior choices in guns and components when it's very apparent that you know nothing.  Again...I am not emotional!...I'm not emotional!...I'm not!...I'm not!, damn it! ;)

But seriously, the differences between the SAR and X95 are so subtle that I don't think they're much different than how one AR15 can differ from another with a simple handguard, buttstock, or grip change.  These are more subtle visual and ergonomic tuning issues to better suit one person or situation a little better with a healthy dose of preference thrown in for good measure.  And of course, as already mentioned, there is that "newer is better" syndrome that may or may not actually bring some new ground breaking technology to the market.  There may be another factor at play between the SAR and X95.  Everyone knows that if you put an "X" in the title name of a product, that probably gains two or three marketing points right out of the box whether the product is superior or not. ;D