BULLPUP FORUM

Bullpup Rifles (Auto & Semi-Auto Centerfire) => Kel-Tec RFB, RDB, M-43 => Topic started by: logan5 on November 30, 2015, 01:04:40 PM



Title: RDB thoughts?
Post by: logan5 on November 30, 2015, 01:04:40 PM
anyone compare it to the Tavor yet?  I'm expecting a better stock trigger, but are the ergos and functionality on par, better, or worse?  I know that's all subjective but it'll nice to see what people think.



Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: Frostburg on November 30, 2015, 03:29:24 PM
From the reviews I've seen, esp. on AR15.com,
the RDB is probably a cut above the Tavor.

It's lighter, more accurate, has a better trigger.
It seems to be very reliable.

The Tavor is supremely reliable, but isn't as
accurate, and doesn't have as good of a trigger.

From what I've been reading, the RDB might trump
the Tavor as a go to rifle.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: BullpupT on November 30, 2015, 03:45:06 PM
From the reviews I've seen, esp. on AR15.com,
the RDB is probably a cut above the Tavor.

It's lighter, more accurate, has a better trigger.
It seems to be very reliable.

The Tavor is supremely reliable, but isn't as
accurate, and doesn't have as good of a trigger.

From what I've been reading, the RDB might trump
the Tavor as a go to rifle.

Cut above a Tavor? I think not... it doesn't hold a candle to either the AUG or Tavor. The AUG and Tavor are the Cadillac's of the bullpup world.  Kel tec is well known for their horrible quality control and availability. I not making this stuff up. Do a little google search and see what kind of quality you actually get with a Kel tec. They are not Caddy's... they are more like Hyundai's. Sure Hyundai makes a luxury $40,000 car. That doesn't mean its worth 40k... its till a Hyundai! I would rather spend my money of a military tested and evolved weapon system "Cadillac" weapon system, than barely tested "Hyundai" system.

Is not as accurate? My Tavor is a 1moa gun all day long with good ammo. Mine shoots under one moa with Blackhills match 68gr and Federal gold medal as well. Lets remember everyone... its still a KelTech with ZERO field use. The Tavor and AUG have major time in the field and are dead nuts reliable. I am going to wait for more rounds down the RBD tube before buying one.

Weight? They basically weigh the same. The Tavor is 8.4lbs and the RBD is just under 8lbs.... not a huge difference. I know they list 7lbs as the RBD weight, but they aren't weighing the sights or empty mag in place. Manufactures do this a lot of times to make their weapons appear light. A set of back up sight will bring the RBD to within a few ounces of the Tavor. The Tavor is weighed from the factory with back up sights installed.
It is NOT more accurate than the Tavor... all the videos I have watch and all the reviews I have seen give it a 1.5moa / 2moa with match ammo. Its a 1/9 twist YUCK!!!

I don't understand where people are getting the idea that the Tavor isn't accurate. Nutnfacy, MAC, and others all have reported 1 MOA guns with good ammo. Heck mine shoots under 2moa with Wolf garbage. Its more accurate than my 16in AR Maine built Bushmaster.

The only thing hindering the Tavor's  accuracy for some people is its some what heavy trigger. Its lighter than FAL, and HK military triggers, but people still complain. I am still running the stock trigger with the spring still attached. I have several hundred rounds down range now. My trigger pull scale is showing 8.6lbs from the stock trigger. NOT BAD AT ALL for a military trigger. I have absolutely no problem shooting quarter size groups @100 yards out of my stock 18in Tavor. A drop in trigger kit will cost you under $300 with the right coupon. Once installed the Tavor turns into a tiny little sharpshooting machine. My buddy is running a Timney gen 2 trigger that feels better than my Rock River Arms 3.5# Match AR trigger I am running in my Bushy.

The AUG and Tavor are in a whole different league than the KelTec. We still haven't seen long term reliability issues with the RBD yet. Its still to new. The RFB is a hunting rifle NOT a military rifle. It doesn't have the service record or reliability record to back it up. I am hoping the RBD will be Keltec's first real reliable platform. Most of their other stuff has had issues in the past. I will never buy a kel tec handgun again... NEVER! I have bought 3 of their handguns over the years. Not one of them worked properly. I sent the first one back a couple times... still never worked reliably. I sold the other two because I didn't feel like waiting another 6 months for kel tec to fix them. I DO NOT see Kel tec's as serious go to weapons. They are more like range toys that I would never trust my life with. A quick google search of kel tec customer complaints will clearly illustrate my opinion.

I do have high hopes for the RBD. I am reserving full judgment until I see some serious round counts down the tube.. I hope the internals will hold up well. It doesn't have the record to compete with the AUG or Tavor. Comparing it to either is just silly until it proves itself over the next year. I also think it is silly not being able to access or even look into the chamber. How to you clear a double feed with a case stuck on top of another one? You need access to the chamber area PERIOD! The FS2000 has that silly door, but at least you can inspect your chamber. I see double feeds and the inability to clearly see into the chamber as the major Achilles heal of the platform.

Remember its not an IWI or Steyr, or Desert Tech... its a Kel tec... nough said!


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: BullpupT on November 30, 2015, 03:48:15 PM
duplicate... sorry


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: DR_PRP on November 30, 2015, 04:46:11 PM
I expect the RDB and the Tavor are almost the same for all practical purposes.

Insistence on firearms having undergone 20 years of combat, before being pronounced carry worthy, is the crutch of those who lack solid engineering judgement.

I'd want to see the IDF's complete Armorers Records for wear and replacement before proclaiming the Tavor's indestructibility.  Simply issuing the thing means next to nothing.

The Tavor's a great rifle. It's as reliable as I need it to be. I own one. It's my go to gun...But I'm not a fan boy and I don't lay awake at night agonizing over whether it weighs 4 oz more than the RDB, which from all accounts is going to turn out to be a fine example of the bullpup type as well.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: BullpupT on November 30, 2015, 04:55:16 PM
I expect the RDB and the Tavor are almost the same for all practical purposes.

Insistence on firearms having undergone 20 years of combat, before being pronounced carry worthy, is the crutch of those who lack solid engineering judgement.

I'd want to see the IDF's complete Armorers Records for wear and replacement before proclaiming the Tavor's indestructibility.  Simply issuing the thing means next to nothing.

The Tavor's a great rifle. It's as reliable as I need it to be. I own one. It's my go to gun...But I'm not a fan boy and I don't lay awake at night agonizing over whether it weighs 4 oz more than the RDB, which from all accounts is going to turn out to be a fine example of the bullpup type as well.


Solid engineering judgment? Dude its a Kel tec. Do you not know about Kel tec? I have been in the shooting sports for over 30 years. Kel tec is well known as a producer of sub par products. Seriously man... I do not need 20 years of service to approve a rifle. I doesn't hurt that the Tavor is fielded in this many countries...

The IDF isn't the only country using the Tavor. Here is a list...

Angola
 Azerbaijan
 Brazil
 Cameroon
 Chad
 Chile
 Colombia
 Ethiopia
 Georgia
 Guatemala
 Honduras
 India
Macedonia
Mexico
 Nepal
Nigeria
 Peru
 Philippines
 Portugal
 Thailand
 Turkey
 Ukraine
Vietnam
 United States

If a solid track record from all the countries doesn't convince you of the Tavor's reputation, I don't know what will. Put the kel tec into service and see how long it lasts. A good solid track record is something to be celebrated... not demonized.

 Comparing it to a IWI or Steyr is just plain silly. Kel tec is WELL KNOWN in the industry for guns that need to go back over and over again to get right. I am not making this stuff up, To say the RDB is on par with either the Tavor or AUG is the ludicrous. I know we both have our opinions, but do a search of issues with kel tech products compared to either IWI or Steyr and see what you come up with. The RDB isn't even is the same class. Its like comparing a Mercedes to a Hyundai. We don't have to agree, but the numbers clearly back up my statements.

The RDB is only in a few peoples hands. It hasn't been tested, I mean seriously tested by anyone else except for Kel tec itself. Its wayyyyyyyyyy to early to say the RDB is on par with the Tavor or AUG.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: DR_PRP on November 30, 2015, 07:39:36 PM
Every company turns out bad designs every now and then.

The H&K MP-7 has been adopted by at least 21 nation states, yet just last week, it's anemic 4.7mm round left the Colorado Springs Swat team screaming for M-14's to be brought in, because they were getting pounded by a 7.62x39 AK though walls. CSPD SWAT spent the better part of two hours getting their ass kicked because of..."Poor Engineering Judgement, coupled with Fanboyism and dangerously flawed Gun Board Conventional Wisdom's.

Now imagine what would of happened had they put those H&K Fan Boy Approved H&K MP-7's up against 6 ISIS Terrorists with AK's, willing to shoot though the walls of a Kindergarten instead of a Planned Parenthood. Engineering judgement matters more than brand name, reputation and even, well,  if the particular weapon's been adopted by 21 countries.

I've spent about 40 years doing this myself BT and honestly, after about twenty years over at Arfcom...I know the difference between actual mechanical knowledge and egotistical fan boy hype.

The market sometimes evolves beyond the so called "Gun Board Conventional Wisdom's", or at least faster than the "Gun Board Conventional Wisdom's" can catch up and adapt to new realities within the industry.

 20 years ago, Glock introduced a revolution, not simply with polymer, but more so in handgun reliability.  So much so, that an entire dogma sprang up, Glock Fan boys became something akin to a brainwashed Hari Krishna cult, of guys who's understanding of what made their gun go bang, extended no further than mindless regurgitation of 50,000 round torture tests and constant ego driven confirmation bias. While all around them, the handgun market evolved to the point that Glock like levels of reliability BECAME THE STANDARD. Now days there are a dozen polymer, striker fired pistols on the market, just as reliable and durable as the Glock.  Do the Glock fan boys understand, that their Gun Board Conventional Wisdom is 10 to 15 years out of date? For the most part...Nope. They go right on regurgitating the same old Gun Board Dogma's and Fanboyisms. Like one trick ponies wearing blinders. The one thing you can be certain of is they'll probably never learn a new trick or be able to comprehend that the circus has moved on.

I can't even begin to tell you how many times I've been screwed over by FN/Browning, Yet by your logic...I should judge the SCAR suspect because the Browning BDM had a myriad of problems. (I can name a few more FN/Browning debacles if need be.)  

You see, that's my point. We have to evaluate each design by it's engineering merits...Not simply because of some bias towards the manufactures performance a decade ago. Springfield Armory, Sig, S&W and Ruger are all examples of companies that had rough patches, where quality or design suffered, yet all of those companies have individual designs that are unquestionable gems of the firearms world. Simply condemning the RDB because it's a Kel-Tec is short sighted and...Well kind of lazy.

If you want the respect of your readers....Tell us where the current engineering fails. Not where Kel-Tec failed fifteen years.
ago.  

I spent a great deal of my life in the Automotive Parts Aftermarket. A place where one sort of develops a feel for over hyped engineering and engineering fail. So let me put your argument in simplified terms. "your telling me I shouldn't trust a 2016 Vette...Because General Motors once produced the Corvair."



Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: BullpupT on November 30, 2015, 08:49:59 PM
I see a flawed design. No access to the chamber, 1/9 twist, I'm not even sure it's cold hammer forged. Kel Tec hasn't a few bad designs, it's a quality control issue. Some of their designs are very innovative, yet they always seem to fall short.

I personally think you are nuts comparing FN or Browning to Kel Tec. Kel Tec is more like Charter Arms, Rossi, Taurus, ect.

They don't have the money, staff, or R&D to be in he same league as IMI/IWI, Steyr, FN, ect. To say they products are reliable, tested, or posses the same quality is fanboyism at its greatest.

It's a Kel Tec... Any serious shooter will understand what I am saying. Kel Tec'a reputation speaks for itself. The amount of guns that need to go back for repair is crazy. The several month wait is maddening! It has nothing to do with a few bad designs. It has more to do with several decades of shakey performance, constant buyer complaints, more than you average RMA rate. I'm not making this up... Do a little research!

I haven't ruled out buying an RBD. I'm just not a fanboy who will compare it to a platform that has been in service with dozens of countries over the course of a decade now! Saying the RBD is up to snuff with the Tavor or AUG is fanboyism at its greatest. How many have been tested? How many have been fielded? Let's just keep things in perspective. Even the new owners of the RBD are just learning about it.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: DR_PRP on November 30, 2015, 09:11:04 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3jek2PML1g (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3jek2PML1g)

I mean just look at that thing! How Tacticool can you get? What astounding marketing on H&K's part! What extensive Testing! It's even got the Larry Vickers seal of approval. (Just like FireClean) No wonder it's been adopted by 21 countries and the Colorado Springs Police Department SWAT Team.

Of course when it was confronted with a two way range, against a lone gunman with a $500 to $900 AK, who was determined enough to stay in the fight, instead of suiciding within 30 seconds of Police contact, and who utilized his ballistic penetration advantage by shooting though multiple walls....The much touted H&K MP-7 failed miserably.  CSPD Swat would of been better off with any of a host of long guns that sell for 25% of the price of the Ultra-Tacticool, Operator Approved and Endorsed H&K MP-7. Heck....They'd of probably been better off just dropping those tacticool MP-7's to their side and transitioning to their 9mm handguns, when the 7.62x39 started coming though two to six panels of sheet rock.

CSPD SWAT would probably even been better off with RDB's...Than those incredibly well tested and well marketed H&K MP-7's and the Tavor would of beat that H&K abortion as well...certainly in effectiveness, if not in Youtube Instructor Payola Marketing.



Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: BullpupT on December 01, 2015, 09:55:47 AM
At least the MP-7 worked every time you pull the trigger. The same cant be said for Kel tec products. Comparing HK to Kel tec is silly. The MP-7 is a superior design, although the round is a disappointment.  The You wont have to worry about broken parts, cheap easily broken wire type springs, lower quality polymer and plastics, ect.

You can keep defending Kel tec all you want. Decades of customer issues, guns sent back, poor QC are all back up by legit data. Look it up! Kel tec is not a quality arms manufacturer with millions of dollars for R&D like IMI, FN, HK, ect.

They are a small company that puts out fairly decent arms that belong on the range. They do not belong in the combat and I would never trust my life to.

There are first rate, second rate, and third rate companies.

1st rate
Accuracy International
Beneli
FN
HK
IMI
Steyr
Beretta
Colt
and others

2nd rate
Taurus
Kel tec
Charter Arms
Rossi
and others.

Third rate
Rave Arms
Hi Point
and a few others


You mustn't confuse commercial products with real military tested and approved products. I would never drop that kind of cash on a range toy. When you buy from 2nd rate companies expect second rate products. Sure Charter Arms, Rossi, and Kel tec make decent firearms. They have stood the test of time and produce enjoyable products, but they really aren't serious designs with millions of dollars of testing in freeze tanks, sand rooms.

 I have heard gross over exaggerations concerning the RDB. I watched on video with some SWAT tool stating he was shooting out to 1000 yards accurately with the RDB. I call BULL#$%@! Its a 5.56... I don't care what rifle you are shooting, the 5.56 is NOT a 1000 yard cartridge.

I am waiting for real testers to do some real tests with the RDB.  I'm not sure if the barrel is cold hammer forged .I don't even think the RDB is over the beach capable. Its way to early to classify the RDB with hi end systems from major players. Its a Kel Tec so it has some serious hurdles to jump before its can be considered a serious weapon system and not just a range toy. Again... this is only my opinion but I think the facts and history back me up. ;D


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: Frostburg on December 01, 2015, 11:42:33 AM
BullpupT, you should
go to AR15.com to read some of the user
reviews of the RDB over there, and a few of the
users over here.  Despite keltec's reputation, the RDB
seems to be a major breakthrough in their firearms line.

I'm not saying the Tavor isn't reliable. It's supremely reliable.
But most Tavor owners arn't getting 1moa out of their rifles. At least
not without considerable trigger time behind one. I've read most
folks get about on average, 1.5 or 2-3moa with the Tavor.  Your rifle
might be a sharpshooter, that's generally not the case.

Of all the end user reviews of the RDB, reports are generally about moa,
or slightly less or more.  There are already a handful of reviews which compare
the RDB as being a notch more accurate than the Tavor.

As for your insinuation that keltec gun's are low quality which need
to be constantly sent back for repairs.  This doesn't seem to be the case
for the RDB.  There are already people with hundreds of rounds out of the box
with zero failures. Some with a few thousand rounds. Some of these people
on this forum and ar15.com.   Several hundred rounds out of the box, with no failures,
and no lube?  That's a test many military M4/M16s would fail.

Every single person who's reported their impression state that the
rifle appears to be solid and of quality construction. You can talk about
past history all you want, you can't really argue with current RDB owner
experience.  Yes, the rifle is still new and needs more time out in the wild,
but it's already exceeded most expectations in accuracy and reliability.
It's accuracy is already being demonstrated as slightly better than the Tavor,
several hundred or even thousands of rounds through it without failure.  These
are reports that are hard to argue against.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: BullpupT on December 01, 2015, 01:50:02 PM
BullpupT, you should
go to AR15.com to read some of the user
reviews of the RDB over there, and a few of the
users over here.  Despite keltec's reputation, the RDB
seems to be a major breakthrough in their firearms line.

I'm not saying the Tavor isn't reliable. It's supremely reliable.
But most Tavor owners arn't getting 1moa out of their rifles. At least
not without considerable trigger time behind one. I've read most
folks get about on average, 1.5 or 2-3moa with the Tavor.  Your rifle
might be a sharpshooter, that's generally not the case.

Of all the end user reviews of the RDB, reports are generally about moa,
or slightly less or more.  There are already a handful of reviews which compare
the RDB as being a notch more accurate than the Tavor.

As for your insinuation that keltec gun's are low quality which need
to be constantly sent back for repairs.  This doesn't seem to be the case
for the RDB.  There are already people with hundreds of rounds out of the box
with zero failures. Some with a few thousand rounds. Some of these people
on this forum and ar15.com.   Several hundred rounds out of the box, with no failures,
and no lube?  That's a test many military M4/M16s would fail.

Every single person who's reported their impression state that the
rifle appears to be solid and of quality construction. You can talk about
past history all you want, you can't really argue with current RDB owner
experience.  Yes, the rifle is still new and needs more time out in the wild,
but it's already exceeded most expectations in accuracy and reliability.
It's accuracy is already being demonstrated as slightly better than the Tavor,
several hundred or even thousands of rounds through it without failure.  These
are reports that are hard to argue against.

Thanks for the information. I will be checking out AR15.com to read the reviews. Truth be told, I probably am being a little harsh on the RBD. It's hard for me to get over my past experience with Kel Tec. I will need to do more research on the RBD before I generalize about its attribute.

I truly and honestly hope his design is a winner. I want Kel Tec to prove itself once and for all.
The few things I don't like about it really aren't deal breakers. I'm not crazy about the 1/9 twist, non captive takedown pins, front heaviness, tiny/short top rail, most of all NO Access to the chamber without take down. Double feeds can happen even if the gun is 100%. Magazines seem to have a huge influence on double feeds. A stuck case on top of a live round jammed in the chamber area can be difficult to clear without the ability to atleast see what's going on.

I can overlook those things if the RDB turns out to be as reliable as we all hope. I still can't get straight answers about major issues though...

My two BIG questions have to do with whether or not the barrel is cold hammer forged. This is a HUGE deal for me especially when you consider the price of admission.

Is it over the beach capable? Another HUGE deal for a combat weapon.

I am on my way over to AR15 to check it out.

Oh... Concerning the accuracy of my Tavor. I guess I got really lucky. My 18inch RD model is a frigging tack driver. My buddy has a 16.5 OD green version. I seem to get about .5 MOA greater accuracy out of mine. Maybe it's the factory compensator stabilizing the harmonics of the barrel? Maybe I got a super nice barrel? I don't know why it is, but I am happy I got a really good one.

I appreciate your statements and I will continue to research the RBD.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: m796rider on December 01, 2015, 04:40:26 PM
Thanks for the information. I will be checking out AR15.com to read the reviews. Truth be told, I probably am being a little harsh on the RBD. It's hard for me to get over my past experience with Kel Tec. I will need to do more research on the RBD before I generalize about its attribute.

I truly and honestly hope his design is a winner. I want Kel Tec to prove itself once and for all.
The few things I don't like about it really aren't deal breakers. I'm not crazy about the 1/9 twist, non captive takedown pins, front heaviness, tiny/short top rail, most of all NO Access to the chamber without take down. Double feeds can happen even if the gun is 100%. Magazines seem to have a huge influence on double feeds. A stuck case on top of a live round jammed in the chamber area can be difficult to clear without the ability to atleast see what's going on.

I can overlook those things if the RDB turns out to be as reliable as we all hope. I still can't get straight answers about major issues though...

My two BIG questions have to do with whether or not the barrel is cold hammer forged. This is a HUGE deal for me especially when you consider the price of admission.

Is it over the beach capable? Another HUGE deal for a combat weapon.

I am on my way over to AR15 to check it out.

Oh... Concerning the accuracy of my Tavor. I guess I got really lucky. My 18inch RD model is a frigging tack driver. My buddy has a 16.5 OD green version. I seem to get about .5 MOA greater accuracy out of mine. Maybe it's the factory compensator stabilizing the harmonics of the barrel? Maybe I got a super nice barrel? I don't know why it is, but I am happy I got a really good one.

I appreciate your statements and I will continue to research the RBD.

There is an ongoing Q&A about the RDB with the Kel Tec rep on thektog.org:

http://www.thektog.org/forum/f119/rdb-questions-answered-264644/ (http://www.thektog.org/forum/f119/rdb-questions-answered-264644/)

There's some good info there, well worth the (quick) read.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: Frostburg on December 01, 2015, 04:50:32 PM
Here's a thread with a few guys discussing their
RDBs.

https://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_43/453235_Keltec_RDB_Range_Review__OP_Updated_11_22_2015_Update_on_Page_3.html

https://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_43/454097_Is_the_Keltec_RDB_s_construction_as_cobby_as_it_looks_.html

Also, there are a few youtube reviews of the production version RDB.
One by hankstrange and another by Tactical Existence.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: BullpupT on December 01, 2015, 06:14:55 PM
Great links guys, thanks!


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: signkutter on December 03, 2015, 08:47:11 PM
I induced a few misfeeds by covering up the ejection port and messing with the gas settings. I had a few double feeds and jammed  round/brass. I didnt have to take the weapon apart at all. The way the bolt has to travel over a HUGE ejection port one it gets past the magazine doest allow for a situation where the round/brass has anywhere to go but down. Drop the mag and the mag well is directly under the chamber with a thin wall of metal and plastic forming the wall of the magazine well right behind it. If the Brass/round didnt fall out when ther mag was dropped (90% of the time) , it dropped when the bolt was cycled to the rear over the  massive ejection port.

I could not induce an impingement on this gun, I don't know if its even possible with the way it is designed.

The barrel is 4140 melonite inside and out.  Sure..it isn't mil-spec...but neither is melonite/nitriding and it has turned out well for glocks and AR Precision barrels over the long haul.  CHF manufacturing makes for good barrel as the process requires a huge investment for consistently good and cheaper  production costs... but CHF wear qualities are at best theoretical in a semi-auto weapon. I have found that a quality barrel made out of proper materials is just as accurate as a well made CHF barrel.  I have AR Precision barrels, a Smith and Wesson Barrel both melonite finish, one is a 1/8 twist, both are MOA shooters.

As far as the 1/9 twist goes, it is good from any weight 40g to 70g. I don't consider this a detriment as modern ballistics have made for some devastatingly effective 5.56/.223 rounds in these weights. If a 1/7 twist is a must, you will be glad to hear that the initial production of  RDB's were 1/9 twist and all new production is 1/7 twist ( as per Kel-Tec reps


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: BullpupT on December 03, 2015, 09:40:08 PM
Thank you for real feed back. The 1/9 twist isn't a super deal killer either. I have a 1/9 AR that's pretty darn accurate. Future runs will be in 1/7 from what I have read.

The barrel sounds ok too. I was worried about at button rifled barrel. 4140mis acceptable but just barely. 4150 would increase service life. There have been reports of AK's with 4140 steel barrels wearing prematurely. Checkout Robskie on YouTube... AK Operators channel for more info.

Melonite is great, it's the same thing as Glocks Tenifer, just a different name. My stainless E series 1911 is coated in Melonite. It's rock hard... Still wish the barrel was at least 4150 steel. Again not a deal breaker.

Great info!


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: signkutter on December 03, 2015, 10:03:35 PM
Thank you for real feed back. The 1/9 twist isn't a super deal killer either. I have a 1/9 AR that's pretty darn accurate. Future runs will be in 1/7 from what I have read.

The barrel sounds ok too. I was worried about at button rifled barrel. 4140mis acceptable but just barely. 4150 would increase service life. There have been reports of AK's with 4140 steel barrels wearing prematurely. Checkout Robskie on YouTube... AK Operators channel for more info.

Melonite is great, it's the same thing as Glocks Tenifer, just a different name. My stainless E series 1911 is coated in Melonite. It's rock hard... Still wish the barrel was at least 4150 steel. Again not a deal breaker.

Great info!

Glad to help.  I also wish the barrel was 4150 simply because it was specified by engineers with a lot more detailed know-how than my meagre layman knowledge provides, but i also take into consideration that a great majority of civilian semi-autos have used 4140 steel for many years and many AK's don't  Chrome line the barrels.  One thing I am curious about is how  Nitriding/melonite/tenifer treatment ...(which provides a harder surface that is a surface treatment of the barrel as opposed to a coating applied to the surface of the barrel steel) will effect the durability/longevity of this RDB barrel... remains to be seen.

So far I am about 1200 rounds through this RDB with no cleaning and a bit over half of those rounds suppressed. At the 1200ish round mark though I did have to increase gas flow when I fired the rifle unsuppressed and I couldn't resist squirting a shot of WD-40 in the chamber and bolt.  Still real happy with the performance of this weapon. I do not doubt that it is possible to get MOA out of this gun with the right ammo weight/brand. I just haven't found it yet.  I don't doubt at all that I could get MOA if I had a reloader friend develop a load for this barrel, I just can get up the will to bother as **2.0 MOA is better than I have been able to get out of my AUG with any ammo.

**edited for accuracy measurement.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: Bennanias on December 17, 2015, 09:37:16 PM
I received my RDB two days ago. Aside from having to increase the gas, it wasn't functioning out of the box, I have noticed a few uncomfortable problems and wanted to know if anyone else was having these.

To charge it, you will ram your hand into the side of your optic. I was running an eotech, which has a rather wide and sharp base. The rail seems to have very little space above the charging handle.

At first, it was very hard to tell if my mag was empty or if I had a jam. Since I increase the gas this isnt an issue.

I have noticed that the charging handle will dislodge itself from being in the forward position once the mag is empty, bouncing around without any tension on it.

I didn't know this, but there are actually two positions that the bolt will lock back. When you use the charging handle to lock it, the bolt is very far back and past the ejection port. However, when you lock the bolt back using the bolt release, just behind the mag release, the bolt covers the ejection port, ie farther forward than if you used the charging handle to lock it back. Per the inrange review, if they had the bolt locked back with the bolt release position, I believe this would have prevented mud from getting into it. On the other hand, if it was locked farther back using the charging handle, this would have let mud get into the actual bolt face. Side note, the bolt release behind the mag release I have found to be very, very heavy, 10+ pounds with little purchase.

Lastly, after I had gotten the gas reliable and did some mag dumps, I noticed that the take down pins, particular those in the front, get very hot. So hot that i actually have a small burn. I think it is somehow transferring heat from the barrel. That said, I am putting a vertical grip on it as soon as possible.

That said, if anyone with a production rdb is having these same critiques please let me know.

Some of the pre production RDB's had complaints of accidentally dropping mags on due to the release. My rdb actually has a rather stiff release, so I can't imagine even with gloves accidentally pressing it without knowing.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: signkutter on December 18, 2015, 07:35:36 AM
I received my RDB two days ago. Aside from having to increase the gas, it wasn't functioning out of the box, I have noticed a few uncomfortable problems and wanted to know if anyone else was having these.

To charge it, you will ram your hand into the side of your optic. I was running an eotech, which has a rather wide and sharp base. The rail seems to have very little space above the charging handle.

At first, it was very hard to tell if my mag was empty or if I had a jam. Since I increase the gas this isnt an issue.

I have noticed that the charging handle will dislodge itself from being in the forward position once the mag is empty, bouncing around without any tension on it.

I didn't know this, but there are actually two positions that the bolt will lock back. When you use the charging handle to lock it, the bolt is very far back and past the ejection port. However, when you lock the bolt back using the bolt release, just behind the mag release, the bolt covers the ejection port, ie farther forward than if you used the charging handle to lock it back. Per the inrange review, if they had the bolt locked back with the bolt release position, I believe this would have prevented mud from getting into it. On the other hand, if it was locked farther back using the charging handle, this would have let mud get into the actual bolt face. Side note, the bolt release behind the mag release I have found to be very, very heavy, 10+ pounds with little purchase.

Lastly, after I had gotten the gas reliable and did some mag dumps, I noticed that the take down pins, particular those in the front, get very hot. So hot that i actually have a small burn. I think it is somehow transferring heat from the barrel. That said, I am putting a vertical grip on it as soon as possible.

That said, if anyone with a production rdb is having these same critiques please let me know.

Some of the pre production RDB's had complaints of accidentally dropping mags on due to the release. My rdb actually has a rather stiff release, so I can't imagine even with gloves accidentally pressing it without knowing.
I tried my Eotech but i didnt like the cheek weld I got with it... I am used to using an underhanded grip on the charging handle from using my AUG so I never did rack my knuckles with any mount or optic i have tried.   Didnt have any problems with mag drops in any position. Ditto on the pins getting hot. My accuracy with this gun has settled into 2.0 moa, I got a a group here and there to 1.5 moa ...but not enough to have been luck.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: Frostburg on December 25, 2015, 11:26:48 PM
Ok, so I have a question for any RDB owners
since it's been some time since it's come out,
and you guys probably have considerable time behind the rifle.
I'm trying to ask around and get a good consensus of RDB owner's
opinions regarding this rifle.

Would you recommend this rifle for "serious" use?

I have read about the RDBs merits, and it seems to
me to be a serious contender as a serious rifle.

It's lightweight. I would rather hump a lighter rifle over longer distances,
It has good handling characteristics, seems to be reasonably accurate, at least more so
than the Tavor. Reasonably reliable, maybe not Tavor durable, but more so than many
ARs which are kept for serious use.

I have not handled the RDB, but based on what I've read thus far, I see
no reason why a person wouldn't want to depend their life on this rifle,
even if that means "running to the hills" with it.

What are your thoughts, and can you offer reasons why?


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: Snapperhead363 on December 25, 2015, 11:38:38 PM
So far I have 600+ rounds through mine. No issues unsuppressed or suppressed,steel cased or brass. I haven't put it "head to head" against my Tavor. I like them both and I'd probably grab whichever is closest.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: odie64 on December 27, 2015, 10:11:58 PM
I am running n Eotech XPS3  on my RFB. I installed the Kel Tec oversized charging handled have the optic mounted at the front of the picatinny rail.  I have no interference problems.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: Frostburg on December 30, 2015, 06:47:31 PM
I am running n Eotech XPS3  on my RFB. I installed the Kel Tec oversized charging handled have the optic mounted at the front of the picatinny rail.  I have no interference problems.

Do you mean RFB or RDB?


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: odie64 on December 30, 2015, 07:14:58 PM
RFB sorry I was Tired and thought  it was RFB and Not RDB. I have a RFB


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: tf2addict on January 30, 2016, 11:57:08 PM
From the reviews I've seen, esp. on AR15.com,
the RDB is probably a cut above the Tavor.

It's lighter, more accurate, has a better trigger.
It seems to be very reliable.

The Tavor is supremely reliable, but isn't as
accurate, and doesn't have as good of a trigger.

From what I've been reading, the RDB might trump
the Tavor as a go to rifle.

Where did you the idea that the Tavor is less accurate?  From what I've read the RDB is barely a 3 MOA gun.  And the stock Tavor trigger can always be improved.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: Aeneas2020 on January 31, 2016, 03:24:41 PM
I guess i'll jump in here seeing as it's my review on ar15.com.

First let me say that I am a huge tavor fan and no the RDB will not be replacing my tavor any time soon.

Let me also say, prior to the RDB, I loathed Kel-Tec and actively tried to dissuade people from buying their products. However I am also a huge bullpup guy so when I saw the RDB i decided to roll the dice.

Do I think the RDB is a better rifle? No I don't....it's lighter, has a better stock trigger and has been nothing but reliable for me in the 3 months i've owned one.

The guys at in range did a good mud test on it. I've only done some through the woods testing but I haven't had any stoppages. I did have to adjust my gas settings to cycle steel cased ammo but other than that it has been a trooper.

I can only speak from my own personal experience but the RDB has proved to be more accurate than my tavor. I am running a TAV-D trigger in my Tavor and I can get 2-3" groups. I am probably about .5" better with the RDB. I an effort to be fair I have always taken them out side by side and shot them with the same ammo, optics etc. It could be that the RDB just works better for my shooting from a bench or prone, but like I said I have been getting better groups with the RDB.

I will also say that the rifle doesn't feel flimsy or like some of the other, frankly questionable, products I have seem from Kel tec, so for whatever that is worth it is a check mark in my book. The rifle feels solid and well made.

NOW

Having said all of that if I had to pick one i would still take the Tavor (I said all of these things in my prelim review). Why? The short answer is total ruggedness, proven history and the fact that the rifle feels like I could throw it off a cliff and it wouldn't miss a beat. My tavor is the equivalent of my dog in terms of rifles. It will always be my best rifle buddy and my go to but the RDB is a serious contender.

Sorry for the rambling post. The review i posted on the other site is more technical and objective. In any case those my thoughts.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: signkutter on January 31, 2016, 09:39:35 PM
From the reviews I've seen, esp. on AR15.com,
the RDB is probably a cut above the Tavor.

It's lighter, more accurate, has a better trigger.
It seems to be very reliable.

The Tavor is supremely reliable, but isn't as
accurate, and doesn't have as good of a trigger.

From what I've been reading, the RDB might trump
the Tavor as a go to rifle.

Where did you the idea that the Tavor is less accurate?  From what I've read the RDB is barely a 3 MOA gun.  And the stock Tavor trigger can always be improved.

Not true. I can get 2 MOA out of my RDB if I am careful to keep weight off the handguard when shooting prone. The best I have done with a Tavor is about 3 moa. With an AUG, I would get 2.5 moa. The guys on In-Range shot the RDB all wrong and thus couldn't get a good group, not that 3 moa is terrible for a semi-auto non free-float barrel with a pencil profile, that is actually decent. They also did a ridiculous mud test that even stops AK's ( surprisingly the AR15 does great in the same test)...so I don't hold that "caught in mudslide test" against the RDB

The only thing that would give pause in choosing an RDB over a Tavor as a long term SHTF gun is the availability of replacement parts and aftermarket support.  I have found the RDB to be a better performer in every aspect of  actual shooting performance over the Tavor and the AUG.  These reasons are why:

1. Better trigger than either the Tavor or the AUG (the Tavor can match the trigger with a $350 upgrade)
2. Way better suppression host than either the Tavor or the AUG ( much less gas face and more quiet)
3. RDB is slimmer and lighter than the Tavor or the AUG
4. The RDB is considerably cheaper than the AUG or the Tavor


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: tf2addict on February 05, 2016, 03:29:55 AM
Every review I've seen so far shows 2.5 to 3 MOA for the RDB.  I think the beats that.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: Aeneas2020 on February 06, 2016, 02:01:38 PM
Every review I've seen so far shows 2.5 to 3 MOA for the RDB.  I think the beats that.

I assume you meant I think the Tavor beats that? Like i said i've done accuracy testing with both and i've posted reviews. I even summarized above. If you are ever in NE and want to shoot the two side by side be my guest.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: signkutter on February 07, 2016, 01:29:49 PM
Every review I've seen so far shows 2.5 to 3 MOA for the RDB.  I think the beats that.

Wrong. At best...the tavor can match the RDB in accuracy.... and that is only after an expensive trigger upgrade. The Tavor is a solid and reliable weapon but people seem to exaggerate the capabilities of it in order to validate their choice of weapon.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: SHORT-N-SASSY on June 04, 2016, 03:15:42 AM
. . . The review i posted on the other site is more technical and objective. In any case those my thoughts.

A worthwhile read:
(http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_43/453235_Keltec_RDB_Review__Final_Update_Page_6____Details_on_Pages_1_and_3.html (http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_43/453235_Keltec_RDB_Review__Final_Update_Page_6____Details_on_Pages_1_and_3.html))

(http://i63.tinypic.com/f9dv6s.jpg)
(http://i63.tinypic.com/3585tee.jpg)





Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: HBeretta on November 04, 2016, 01:37:33 AM
So i've got about a 500 rnds through mine and thought i'd share my thoughts in comparison to other bullpups i've shot and own.  I realize there seems to be ongoing debate about kel-tec's reputation and quality of products.  fortunately, thus far (*knocks on wood), i have yet to experience issues with regard to functionality and quality; notice i've left out reliability as i have yet to even break in the gun.  to start, i'll just go ahead and say it, i'm impressed with the gun.  the salt bath nitriding on the barrel is extremely well done.  it's much nicer than my fs2000 manganese phosphate finish(parkerized) CHF/CL barrel which typically goes dull due to heat and lack of lubrication.  i mean i basically dip the end of my fs2000 in lube after a range session, well not really but you get the point.  anyway, this attention to quality appears to carry over to other facets of the gun, from the pattern on the handguard and grip to the retractable charging handle that cycles smoothly when chambering a round to locking the bolt open.  the rubberized stock face is a nice touch if you're used to budget ARs that don't include a stock buffer and instead have hard textured plastic digging into your shoulder.  long story short the rifle appears to have above average build quality.  the gun also breaks down easily by just removing two pins.  all you remove is the bolt carrier assembly which basically is an all in one gas piston, bolt assembly and recoil spring.  it's so simple to clean and doesn't take much...you basically scrub the bolt and carrier with solvent then lightly oil bolt and sides of carrier that slide back and forth inside receiver brackets and that's it.  although, i've shot 500 rnds in my gun it's still super clean and have only cleaned the bore after each range session.  before this post gets ridiculously long i'll try to be brief and concise from here on out.  the more you handle the gun to more you realize it's more ergonomic and comfortable to handle than fs2000, tavor and steyr aug.  simply put it just feels better to shoulder and is very balanced and light.  i'm not criticizing the fs2000, tavor or steyr aug as i feel they're all comfortable.  but, for me, the rdb stands out slightly with regard to comfort and feel.  the way the gun recoils was a little odd to me at first due to the way the gun ejects casings.  recoil is slight but does feel different from the others, but you get used to it.  when it comes to accuracy it seems to be king currently.  at 100yds i was getting about 1.5-2" groups if not better from bench support and sandbag.  i'd read it was accurate but was curious to see for myself and was happy  with results.  another nice touch is how gas is pushed out the bottom of the weapon no matter how quick you're burning through mags.  the tavor and fs2000 will gas me out on occasion with a quick indoor range session...not terrible but enough to pause to let the gas clear.  not the case with the rdb.  i forgot to mention i tinkered with the gas nut when i unboxed the gun and didn't get a chance to check the gas setting from factory.  i did have the intention to adjust myself but did reach out to kel-tec for recommended setting.  they mentioned that 3 clicks from full gas or turned all the way to the right is the universal setting.  this proved to be the case when first firing the weapon with 55gr federal.  when set properly you should see a minor dent on the mouth of the casing as specified in the manual.  i then adjusted 5 clicks out from 3 to 8 on the gas knob and immediately got an ejection failure, round fired just fine.  clearing this was easy and problem free as i just removed the magazine and cycled the charging handle ejecting the casing easily; no disassembly required.  i reverted back to setting 4 which ejected the casings fine along with the casing being dent free.  i went back to setting 3 to match manual specifications.  so obviously, no gas adjustments were needed out of the box in my case using 55gr federal.  other likes include the mag release that was never an issue or in the way nor did i accidentally bump.  pmag gen 2 & 3 mags ran flawlessly as well along with usgi mags - aluminum and steel.  Oh, the stock 5lb trigger easily better than the others.  Of final note...kel-tec's customer service has been sensational as they've answered every question I've had within the same day.  So, should you all abandon your bullpups for the rdb?...no. is it the best bullpup i've handled with reliability remaining to be seen?...definitely yes.          


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: BullpupT on November 04, 2016, 08:21:44 AM
Not sure where people are getting 3 MOA out of the standard Tavor. The X95 maybe, but most testers including Nut n fancy, MAC, Hank Strange, and dozens of other testers on youtube get 1-1.5 MOA with match ammo out of their standard Tavors.

The videos and live fire presentationa are there to watch on youtube. The X95 seems like a 3moa gun according to most testers, but the Tavor has always been a 1-1.5 moa gun with match ammo and a 2- 2.5moa gun with crap ammo. That seems to be what 90% of shooters who test and post live results are getting, even with the horrible stock trigger.

I know both my 18 in and 16 in barrel both shoot MOA/MOA +.25 with Blackhills match and federal match ammo. I never get under 2.5 moa even with wolf ammo. I do get the occasional flyer with the cheap stuff, but I think that has more to do with quality control of the ammo... not the rifle.

To be fair the RDB is one of Kel tec's better designs. I always said it was worth it at the $1000-1100 price range. It doesn't have enough quality made components to go for much more than that. Its a great range gun for around a grand. I wouldn't stake my life on it but that's just my opinion after being exposed to Kel tec products over the years.

Kel Tec has some of the best and brightest within their RD and design department. They seem to be lacking in QC, materials, and stock availability (seems to be improving). I hope everyone that bought and RDB has good luck with it. I am glad it fits certain people better than other systems. It should stand on its own merits. I have a hard time when people compare it to battle proven and tested systems that have been put through the ringer.

The Tavor and other state owned firearm companies have millions of dollars at hand to test and create the cream of the crop. IWI probably spent more developing the Tavor than the entire Kel Tec company is worth... State run companies have the time and money to create perfection. A commercial gun can compete with these state run factories, but the expense and time is hardly worth it. They rely on money coming in from product sold, not tax money from its citizens to have enough capital to bring these rifles into existence.

 I think its silly to compare the two, but that's just my opinion. One is a battle proven, state designed, serving in over 25 nations weapon system. The other is a newly released, barely tested, commercial made rifle from a small boutique type company. I wish everyone the best with their RDB's. I will not be buying one, although I cant wait to shoot one once someone shows up at my range with one.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: HBeretta on November 04, 2016, 01:09:58 PM
bullpupT you have valid points but i disagree with your assertion regarding comparisons hinged on state run factories and service history.  new products are rolled out all the time from various companies.  likewise, desert tech is on the cusp of rolling out their new mdr bullpup without prior service history nor the financial backing an outfit like IWI has.  will it be compared to battle proven bullpups like the aug and tavor and the likes?  absolutely!  i'm not sure why you have this notion that substantially smaller companies without gov't contracts or notoriety can't produce a superior product and that it's absurd to make comparisons.

that's not to say i don't share your notion that I'd be more trusting of new product releases from IWI or FNH because of the service history and legacy.  

but to your points...i based my accuracy on 55gr federal and not match.  tavor groups were good 2-2.5" which seems to be the trend with fs2000 and aug.  actually, got the worst groups with aug despite all the accuracy talk...at least with 55gr federal anyway.  it wasn't drastic but rdb seemed to edge them slightly for me.  now do i feel equal triggers would level the playing field?...yes.  of course, i'm making stock trigger comparisons.  will any of this matter if the SHTF and you likely won't have a bench and bag to get this type of accuracy?...no!

elaborate more on the quality made components on the rdb?  what do you feel is cheap on it?  the nitrided barrel is nice and there's definitely ongoing debate regarding wear vs chrome lined barrels.  moreover, HK and glock nitride as well.  i was surprised at the quality.  the rest of the gun appears fine to me.  does the tavor feel like it has the best rugged polymer of all the bullpups...yes.   i actually like the textured polymer of the tavor over the x95.  i mean if there's a cheaper feeling gun of the bullpups it's the steyr aug.

where are you located man?...i'll let you shoot mine.    

  


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: BullpupT on November 04, 2016, 02:49:01 PM
bullpupT you have valid points but i disagree with your assertion regarding comparisons hinged on state run factories and service history.  new products are rolled out all the time from various companies.  likewise, desert tech is on the cusp of rolling out their new mdr bullpup without prior service history nor the financial backing an outfit like IWI has.  will it be compared to battle proven bullpups like the aug and tavor and the likes?  absolutely!  i'm not sure why you have this notion that substantially smaller companies without gov't contracts or notoriety can't produce a superior product and that it's absurd to make comparisons.

that's not to say i don't share your notion that I'd be more trusting of new product releases from IWI or FNH because of the service history and legacy.  

but to your points...i based my accuracy on 55gr federal and not match.  tavor groups were good 2-2.5" which seems to be the trend with fs2000 and aug.  actually, got the worst groups with aug despite all the accuracy talk...at least with 55gr federal anyway.  it wasn't drastic but rdb seemed to edge them slightly for me.  now do i feel equal triggers would level the playing field?...yes.  of course, i'm making stock trigger comparisons.  will any of this matter if the SHTF and you likely won't have a bench and bag to get this type of accuracy?...no!

elaborate more on the quality made components on the rdb?  what do you feel is cheap on it?  the nitrided barrel is nice and there's definitely ongoing debate regarding wear vs chrome lined barrels.  moreover, HK and glock nitride as well.  i was surprised at the quality.  the rest of the gun appears fine to me.  does the tavor feel like it has the best rugged polymer of all the bullpups...yes.   i actually like the textured polymer of the tavor over the x95.  i mean if there's a cheaper feeling gun of the bullpups it's the steyr aug.

where are you located man?...i'll let you shoot mine.    

  

My main gripe with the RDB is its barrel. It is a quality barrel but it isn't a cold hammer forged barrel. I cant stress enough how much tougher and longer lasting a cold hammer forged barrel is. The RDB's barrel is a $100 barrel if that. A cold hammer forged barrel like the Tavor will run you around $500! Do a little research on how cold hammer forged barrels are made. Its an amazing process... sure inexpensive barrels can be accurate, but their accuracy over time is greatly reduced. You might get a couple thousand rounds down the barrel before the chamber, lands and groves, ect start to wear away with a standard chrome lined barrel. A cold hammer forged barrel will last tens of thousands of rounds. The difference in barrels is night and day. The RDB might be more accurate out of the box, but do some testing after 5000 rounds. I am sure the Tavor will still group like it was new. The RDB barrel isn't even 4150 steel, its cheap 4140 steel that doesn't go more than 5k rounds without wear. 4150 steel is cheaper than cold hammer forging... the could of atleast used 4150. 4140 is a cheaper steel meant for them to make more money off of you.

I also do not like the polymer Kel Tec uses. I find it soft and easily torn at the seems. Their sonic welds are also suspect. This has been my experience with their handguns. I am not sure if they are using a different polymer now, but the polymer I am familiar with from Kel tec is sorely lacking. I also don't like how difficult it is to disassemble. I like having absolute access to the chamber area. The RDB's chamber is hard to access due to its ejection port design. The tavor opens wide up with one simple push pin. You can pull the bolt carrier out and reinsert it in under 5 seconds if emergency access is needed. The side ejection port on the Tavor also makes the chamber easy to access, much more so than the RDB

I agree with you on the stock trigger of the Tavor. I think it hampers a lot of shooters. New Tavors have better triggers, but a Geissile units all the difference in the world. I seriously have a bench rest style trigger in my Tavor... 3.75lbs with a solid second stage wall. The reset is almost unbelievable... double and triple taps on target are sooooo easy now.

I also prefer a self adjusting long stroke gas piston. It's the type of gas system is used on AK's and its one of the reasons for its legendary reliability. The long stroke gas system doesn't need adjusting even when using a suppressor. Not sure how the RDB works with suppressors or with different powder charges. The RDB might require a gas adjustment which takes time and energy. A Tavor is always ready to go with any ammo or suppressed. Its long stroke design is the pinnacle of reliability.

I am glad Kel Tec used the Tavor style mag release, but its to close to the shooters hand compared with the Tavor. The Tavor drops mags much more intuitively due to the distance required to release the mag. I understand what you are saying about good products coming from commercial companies, but the RDB will never be tested for service anywhere or by anyone. Its just not considered a serious infantry bullpup by any nation.  I am sure the MDR will be tested when its released. There are Governments already looking at the design according to desert tech (rumor I read maybe true). The RDB isn't a military tough and tested design. Its a commercial produced and tested product. The reason I bring up military trials is because major faults are always found when doing these tests. Parts, reliability, and other things become exposed in those tests. The RDB hasn't proven itself in that arena and it never will because no military in the world would run a Kel Tec as the go to gun.

 I could keep going on with other points but this post is getting long... I am glad you like your RDB and I wish you all the luck in the world with it! ;D


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: Frostburg on November 04, 2016, 03:47:44 PM
Can't a private entity run a govt. mil-spec (NATO) test on the RDB?

I wonder what the result would be.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: BullpupT on November 04, 2016, 04:46:38 PM
Can't a private entity run a govt. mil-spec (NATO) test on the RDB?

I wonder what the result would be.

Someone could... it would be nice to see what the procedures/tests are. They would need to spend a whole bunch on ammo. The field trials would be difficult because state run facilities issue it to a number of troops for testing. One RDB going through the test isn't a good benchmark. A half dozen to a dozen RDB's going through the tests would give a better picture of the rifles capabilities and limitations. I would be interested in seeing one test. It's more realistic than expecting to shell out money for a dozen guns and 500,000 rounds of ammo


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: Frostburg on November 04, 2016, 09:46:20 PM
 It would be cool if someone did. Even better, it would be cool if a company like bravo Company or noveske were to make their own copy of the RDB. Then, we would have the great platform of the rifle coupled with good quality construction and materials and a cold hammer forged barrel.  Then it would surely beat out every other bull pup on the market!   :)


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: HBeretta on November 05, 2016, 09:36:06 PM
bullpupT you have valid points but i disagree with your assertion regarding comparisons hinged on state run factories and service history.  new products are rolled out all the time from various companies.  likewise, desert tech is on the cusp of rolling out their new mdr bullpup without prior service history nor the financial backing an outfit like IWI has.  will it be compared to battle proven bullpups like the aug and tavor and the likes?  absolutely!  i'm not sure why you have this notion that substantially smaller companies without gov't contracts or notoriety can't produce a superior product and that it's absurd to make comparisons.

that's not to say i don't share your notion that I'd be more trusting of new product releases from IWI or FNH because of the service history and legacy.  

but to your points...i based my accuracy on 55gr federal and not match.  tavor groups were good 2-2.5" which seems to be the trend with fs2000 and aug.  actually, got the worst groups with aug despite all the accuracy talk...at least with 55gr federal anyway.  it wasn't drastic but rdb seemed to edge them slightly for me.  now do i feel equal triggers would level the playing field?...yes.  of course, i'm making stock trigger comparisons.  will any of this matter if the SHTF and you likely won't have a bench and bag to get this type of accuracy?...no!

elaborate more on the quality made components on the rdb?  what do you feel is cheap on it?  the nitrided barrel is nice and there's definitely ongoing debate regarding wear vs chrome lined barrels.  moreover, HK and glock nitride as well.  i was surprised at the quality.  the rest of the gun appears fine to me.  does the tavor feel like it has the best rugged polymer of all the bullpups...yes.   i actually like the textured polymer of the tavor over the x95.  i mean if there's a cheaper feeling gun of the bullpups it's the steyr aug.

where are you located man?...i'll let you shoot mine.    

  

My main gripe with the RDB is its barrel. It is a quality barrel but it isn't a cold hammer forged barrel. I cant stress enough how much tougher and longer lasting a cold hammer forged barrel is. The RDB's barrel is a $100 barrel if that. A cold hammer forged barrel like the Tavor will run you around $500! Do a little research on how cold hammer forged barrels are made. Its an amazing process... sure inexpensive barrels can be accurate, but their accuracy over time is greatly reduced. You might get a couple thousand rounds down the barrel before the chamber, lands and groves, ect start to wear away with a standard chrome lined barrel. A cold hammer forged barrel will last tens of thousands of rounds. The difference in barrels is night and day. The RDB might be more accurate out of the box, but do some testing after 5000 rounds. I am sure the Tavor will still group like it was new. The RDB barrel isn't even 4150 steel, its cheap 4140 steel that doesn't go more than 5k rounds without wear. 4150 steel is cheaper than cold hammer forging... the could of atleast used 4150. 4140 is a cheaper steel meant for them to make more money off of you.

I also do not like the polymer Kel Tec uses. I find it soft and easily torn at the seems. Their sonic welds are also suspect. This has been my experience with their handguns. I am not sure if they are using a different polymer now, but the polymer I am familiar with from Kel tec is sorely lacking. I also don't like how difficult it is to disassemble. I like having absolute access to the chamber area. The RDB's chamber is hard to access due to its ejection port design. The tavor opens wide up with one simple push pin. You can pull the bolt carrier out and reinsert it in under 5 seconds if emergency access is needed. The side ejection port on the Tavor also makes the chamber easy to access, much more so than the RDB

I agree with you on the stock trigger of the Tavor. I think it hampers a lot of shooters. New Tavors have better triggers, but a Geissile units all the difference in the world. I seriously have a bench rest style trigger in my Tavor... 3.75lbs with a solid second stage wall. The reset is almost unbelievable... double and triple taps on target are sooooo easy now.

I also prefer a self adjusting long stroke gas piston. It's the type of gas system is used on AK's and its one of the reasons for its legendary reliability. The long stroke gas system doesn't need adjusting even when using a suppressor. Not sure how the RDB works with suppressors or with different powder charges. The RDB might require a gas adjustment which takes time and energy. A Tavor is always ready to go with any ammo or suppressed. Its long stroke design is the pinnacle of reliability.

I am glad Kel Tec used the Tavor style mag release, but its to close to the shooters hand compared with the Tavor. The Tavor drops mags much more intuitively due to the distance required to release the mag. I understand what you are saying about good products coming from commercial companies, but the RDB will never be tested for service anywhere or by anyone. Its just not considered a serious infantry bullpup by any nation.  I am sure the MDR will be tested when its released. There are Governments already looking at the design according to desert tech (rumor I read maybe true). The RDB isn't a military tough and tested design. Its a commercial produced and tested product. The reason I bring up military trials is because major faults are always found when doing these tests. Parts, reliability, and other things become exposed in those tests. The RDB hasn't proven itself in that arena and it never will because no military in the world would run a Kel Tec as the go to gun.

 I could keep going on with other points but this post is getting long... I am glad you like your RDB and I wish you all the luck in the world with it! ;D

not sure what you're expecting with regard to the polymer.  you're just used to your tavor.  i do feel the tavor polymer is the best of the bullpups with regard to how rugged it feels and the texture.  as mentioned previously i prefer it over the x95 as well.  if i had to rank them i'd go tavor, x95, rdb, fs2000 then AUG.  you want to talk about a cheap feeling bullpup...the aug feels cheap.  likewise, i like my fs2000 but it does feel like cheap plastic but it's not; it certainly holds up to wear pretty well.  

also, not sure if you'd consider c-sog service but they've adopted the kel-tec line...rdb, rfb and ksg.  i think kel-tec is moving in the right direction.  quality control may be suspect but it seems their customer support is doing what's necessary to take care of their customers.

again, the rdb feels like a quality gun.  so does the rfb and ksg.  i can't speak about their handguns, but from what i've handled...nothing to really complain about.  i bought my rdb brand new for $999+tax.  obviously i went in first to handle the gun to be sure about the purchase.  it's light, build quality seems solid.  now that i've dressed up the gun i'm really happy with it.

oh, regarding suppression...it's suppresses very well.  no gas adjustment needed.  no it's not a long stroke gas system then again your ar15s are short stroke.  i'll have to side with you though...i'd prefer a long stroke system as it has less components an is more reliable.  that's not to say short stroke systems are lemons, but if i had to choose...  at least the upside to a short stroke is the less felt recoil.  the rdb does feel smoother while shooting...not saying the tavor feels horrible as it's a smooth shooter as well but the rdb feels a little more refined in this area.

also, the mag release on the rdb is ideal.  not sure what you've read or vids showing pre-production guns where it's bumped when shooting etc...  i'm 5'11 195lbs with medium to large hands and didn't have issues.  i like the tavor mag release but it's not as nice as the rdb.  it is slightly further back and it works fine and was curious about the rdb mag release...  really though...they're both ideal.  bolt release though...tavor wins.

i know not all polymer mags drop free on the tavor and appears to have carried over to the x95 as well...the rdb seems to be more diverse in this department.  personally, this wouldn't be a gripe on my end...most mags are cheap and i'm not too concerned with it.

anyway, with each new bullpup release, comparisons are made from one to the next.  accuracy seems to take precedence followed by the usual...ergonomics, reliability, build quality etc...  for me as long as i can hit steel from 100 yds consistently i'm happy.

so should you give the rdb a try?  yes.  will i be buying a tavor next?  absolutely!      


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: HBeretta on December 22, 2016, 01:59:13 PM

Do I think the RDB is a better rifle? No I don't....it's lighter, has a better stock trigger and has been nothing but reliable for me in the 3 months i've owned one.

I can only speak from my own personal experience but the RDB has proved to be more accurate than my tavor. I am running a TAV-D trigger in my Tavor and I can get 2-3" groups. I am probably about .5" better with the RDB. I an effort to be fair I have always taken them out side by side and shot them with the same ammo, optics etc. It could be that the RDB just works better for my shooting from a bench or prone, but like I said I have been getting better groups with the RDB.

I will also say that the rifle doesn't feel flimsy or like some of the other, frankly questionable, products I have seem from Kel tec, so for whatever that is worth it is a check mark in my book. The rifle feels solid and well made.

NOW

Having said all of that if I had to pick one i would still take the Tavor (I said all of these things in my prelim review). Why? The short answer is total ruggedness, proven history and the fact that the rifle feels like I could throw it off a cliff and it wouldn't miss a beat. My tavor is the equivalent of my dog in terms of rifles. It will always be my best rifle buddy and my go to but the RDB is a serious contender.


lol...so let me get this straight...it's lighter, more accurate, better trigger and hasn't malfunctioned on you at all and actually praise the build quality...what WOULD it take for it to be a better rifle?  again, it's been reliable, it's more accurate, better trigger etc...in your words.  

actually, i'm commenting here because of your insight to build quality.  i always laugh when i read, "...it feels like cheap plastic" etc...or many will assume it's the same polymer kel-tec has been rolling out since day one.  i only have experience with the RDB and in comparison to other bullpups on the market...the polymer certainly doesn't lack.  you could nitpick all the bullpup offerings if it came down to it.  the fs2000 and steyr feel cheaper in build by comparison.  the x95 doesn't feel like the be all end all either with the front polymer rail covers and that cheap feeling plastic nub for a charging handle.  another item to note is the barrel finish on the rdb which feels and looks better than my fs2000.  i don't have to oil it each and every time to prevent it from fading or discoloring from long range sessions everytime; it has a nicer finish and stands up to heat well...guess i'll take nitriding over manganese phosphating any day.  so for those wondering about the RDB's build quality in terms of feel...it feels just like all the other bullpups on the market which are...HARDENED PLASTICS!!  i'm sorry but it's laughable when i read those comments.

i've shot all the major players on the market...fs2000, steyr aug, tavor, x95 & rdb and own a couple of them.  i'm currently working on getting an x95 next.  with that said...the rdb is the smoothest shooting, best feeling, lightest and most accurate of the bunch out of the box.  i agree with complaints of quality control from kel-tec but at this point other companies should be grateful for this because if the rdb was battle tested and proven...well on the other hand, if that were the case the RDB couldn't be had for $900-1000 in local gun shops either.

if you're a bullpup fan and feel hesitant about the rdb...don't be because it runs like a ferrari minus the typical bullpup price tag.  yeah it may break down on you or not and it does come with a lifetime warranty and the best customer service in the industry.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: Frostburg on December 23, 2016, 06:51:06 PM
I agree with this. I'm currently on winter break, so I have time to put some more rounds downrange this month. But honestly, besides a combat track record, I can perceive no significant advantages that the Tavor has over the RDB.  I really wish keltec would raise the bar on their quality control, or that another manufacturer would produce a clone with identical specs, but superior materials and construction.
Honestly, such a rifle would be revolutionary.  It would be the best 5.56  fighting rifle, imo.
I really wish I could pay extra money for a deluxe model of the RDB, that is exactly the same, design wise, but has better quality control and materials. That would certainly be my go-to rifle, without any hesitation.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: HBeretta on January 13, 2017, 02:40:04 AM
i agree with quality control and i realize a lot of hands are involved in assembling the rifles.  i believe they're running 3 shifts over at kel-tec in trying to keep up with demand from what i've read.  i'm not sure what you're comparing it to with regard to materials.  i mean the receiver is sheet steel to protect against a bad load and the polymer on the gun is zytel polymer which expands and doesn't crack.  my fs2000 which is an fn product doesn't offer this fail safe as the entire gun is polymer minus the bolt assembly.  again, the polymer on the RDB is better and overall i feel the quality of the rifle is fine and fits right in with it's competitors. 

i mean are you comparing it to your gold standard rifle?  if so, i'm curious as to what rifle it is.  or are you drawing comparisons with other competing bullpups?  again, i'm satisfied with the RDB's build quality but quality control could improve. 


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: Frostburg on January 13, 2017, 03:13:39 AM
You know, like high quality polymers and metal alloys like those found in the Tavor or Steyr AUG or
SCAR. I would like to have an RDB made with the same specs, but utilizing those rifle's materials and quality control and fitting.  That would be amazing.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: HBeretta on January 13, 2017, 08:10:16 PM
You know, like high quality polymers and metal alloys like those found in the Tavor or Steyr AUG or
SCAR. I would like to have an RDB made with the same specs, but utilizing those rifle's materials and quality control and fitting.  That would be amazing.

i actually like the rdb polymer...feels tough and rigid along with knowing it's zytel polymer.  steyr aug doesn't impress me polymer wise and the charging handle is pretty terrible and cheap feeling...middle of the pack for me or as you'd expect with a bullpup rifle.  the tavor and x95 though i would have to agree slightly.  the subtle texturing is a nice touch and appears to lead the pack regarding polymer quality.  there are cheaper feeling polymers out there ie fs2000 or entry level ar15s etc...  i'm completely satifsfied with the RDB as a product especially in comparison to the competition with regard to quality and price.

the scar is the cream of the crop but when i pick it up i'm not "floored" by the build quality but can tell it's precise and above average especially the integrated sights.  now when i shoot the SCAR though...that does blow me away how light the recoil is on the light and heavy.  likewise, the RDB blew me away how it shoots like a .22.

i did get a chance to install a 3-9 power on my RDB recently and was getting sub MOA groups more than expected at 100yds albeit not by much.  i didn't have my sharpie on me and went with a group so didn't get a chance to take my time and get photos down but will and will post here when i get a chance.  reminds me of the link below - gentleman was getting 1" groups and averaged 1.5".  i averaged 1.7" when i documented accuracy.  

all in all though, i do get your point...if the rifle was built on the highest quality of products that we've experienced, felt and have seen..would be something for sure.  then again, i don't think we'd get it for $900-1000 either at that point.

https://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_43/453235_.html (https://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_43/453235_.html)


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: Frostburg on January 13, 2017, 09:49:57 PM
You know, like high quality polymers and metal alloys like those found in the Tavor or Steyr AUG or
SCAR. I would like to have an RDB made with the same specs, but utilizing those rifle's materials and quality control and fitting.  That would be amazing.

i actually like the rdb polymer...feels tough and rigid along with knowing it's zytel polymer.  steyr aug doesn't impress me polymer wise and the charging handle is pretty terrible and cheap feeling...middle of the pack for me or as you'd expect with a bullpup rifle.  the tavor and x95 though i would have to agree slightly.  the subtle texturing is a nice touch and appears to lead the pack regarding polymer quality.  there are cheaper feeling polymers out there ie fs2000 or entry level ar15s etc...  i'm completely satifsfied with the RDB as a product especially in comparison to the competition with regard to quality and price.

the scar is the cream of the crop but when i pick it up i'm not "floored" by the build quality but can tell it's precise and above average especially the integrated sights.  now when i shoot the SCAR though...that does blow me away how light the recoil is on the light and heavy.  likewise, the RDB blew me away how it shoots like a .22.

i did get a chance to install a 3-9 power on my RDB recently and was getting sub MOA groups more than expected at 100yds albeit not by much.  i didn't have my sharpie on me and went with a group so didn't get a chance to take my time and get photos down but will and will post here when i get a chance.  reminds me of the link below - gentleman was getting 1" groups and average 1.5".  i averaged 1.7" when i documented accuracy.  

all in all though, i do get your point...if the rifle was built on the highest quality of products that we've experienced, felt and have seen..would be something for sure.  then again, i don't think we'd get it for $900-1000 either at that point.

Hmm. After your comparison, I think I'll give the RDB another shot. I called Keltec a few days ago and they are sending me a new extractor pin in the mail.  I was actually grilling the rep on the phone about my problem, sorta asking some pointed questions about why this occurred, and how I will know that it won't occur again. I didn't have the chance to really talk to him about it as my new gf decided to call me 18 times in a row while I was on the phone with rep, so I kept hearing her call waiting tone beeping the entire time. It was maddening.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: SamM on March 27, 2017, 05:05:32 PM
My past bullpups have been the Steyr AUG A3 and one of the first IWI Tavors sold. My current bullpup is a Steyr AUG A3 MI. The first AUG A3 was way too heavy for what it was. These are 5.56 rifles why must they weigh 8lbs or more? The Tavor was a real disappointment for me too. It was a great rifle but when shooting it suppressed, all the air went out of that ballon real quick. It gassed me horribly. My thought was to replace it with the X95. After reading about the accuracy of the X95 and the gas issue of the Tavor, that wasn't an option. If you don't own a suppressor the Tavor might seem like the perfect rifle. Suppressor use nullifies that. The Tavor let me down, so I went back to the AUG. Neither of these weapons are completely ambidextrous. I have always wanted a completely ambidextrous semi-auto weapon. Until the RDB came along nobody truly made one. Say what you want about it but the Kel-Tec RDB is a product of the 21st century. It's about time a company had the foresight to look to a future design. As a student of firearms, I find the RDB refreshing. Finally, something new. My hat is off to Kel-Tec.

What really has me considering this rifle is the new Kel-Tec RDB-S (Survival). This is truly a unique rifle. The ergonomics look perfect. I see it as a great, general purpose weapon. The one criticism would be the retractable stock. I see no point to it. No pistol grip means that it will go into any rifle case and just about any backpack. The ultimate in a concealable rifle. What I am considering is buying an RDB until the RDB-S is available and then build a hybrid using parts that I like from each rifle. The RDB stock on the RDB-S lower and the RDB-S handguard. I'd like to see a slightly heavier profile, fluted barrel on the RDB-S. If not, I'll have one modified into what I want. I did that with my AUG barrel.

The reports from Kel-Tec are that they will eventually build the RDB in .308W. The worlds first lightweight, compact, ambi, semi-auto .308W rifle. These are great times that we live in. The criticism of the Kel-Tec seems pointless to me. I have done nothing but hold one (it was not for sale or it would have been mine). It's the first rifle that has me excited about bullpups in many, many years. Honestly, the quality seems on par with the rest. Look closely at the quality of the AUG stock. It's sub-par in my book. You can see grinding marks in it. Not the best quality. The metal parts are perfect and Steyr has done a great job with the A3 M1. Both my AUGs would out shoot my Tavor any day of the week. The Tavor is a 2.5 MOA rifle. The AUGs shoot about 1.5-2 MOA. This is with stock triggers. With a good trigger the AUG would outclass any Tavor.

The Tavor seemed overly complex to me. The barrel removal was horrible, the multi-cal option was dropped and a bolt change requires shipping back to the factory for head spacing. That's a no-go. The non-adjustable gas system is also disappointing. The rail was also too low to use optics effectly. A higher rail was a needed accessory. Same with the trigger. This was one of the only weapons that I lost money on. I'm old enough to remember the pre-ban weapons of the 1980's. Owned most of them and shot the rest. The Tavor was one of the most disappointing weapons ever.

To sum up, the RDB has me excited. I'll probably own a couple of them before it's all over. The AUG will probably go down the road shortly, as I move into the 21st century. Feel free to criticize my thoughts on these weapons. If you are not looking at the RDB as a step forward, then you are not looking at it correctly. Your glasses may be rose colored.

SamM



Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: HBeretta on March 27, 2017, 11:18:38 PM
My past bullpups have been the Steyr AUG A3 and one of the first IWI Tavors sold. My current bullpup is a Steyr AUG A3 MI. The first AUG A3 was way too heavy for what it was. These are 5.56 rifles why must they weigh 8lbs or more? The Tavor was a real disappointment for me too. It was a great rifle but when shooting it suppressed, all the air went out of that ballon real quick. It gassed me horribly. My thought was to replace it with the X95. After reading about the accuracy of the X95 and the gas issue of the Tavor, that wasn't an option. If you don't own a suppressor the Tavor might seem like the perfect rifle. Suppressor use nullifies that. The Tavor let me down, so I went back to the AUG. Neither of these weapons are completely ambidextrous. I have always wanted a completely ambidextrous semi-auto weapon. Until the RDB came along nobody truly made one. Say what you want about it but the Kel-Tec RDB is a product of the 21st century. It's about time a company had the foresight to look to a future design. As a student of firearms, I find the RDB refreshing. Finally, something new. My hat is off to Kel-Tec.

What really has me considering this rifle is the new Kel-Tec RDB-S (Survival). This is truly a unique rifle. The ergonomics look perfect. I see it as a great, general purpose weapon. The one criticism would be the retractable stock. I see no point to it. No pistol grip means that it will go into any rifle case and just about any backpack. The ultimate in a concealable rifle. What I am considering is buying an RDB until the RDB-S is available and then build a hybrid using parts that I like from each rifle. The RDB stock on the RDB-S lower and the RDB-S handguard. I'd like to see a slightly heavier profile, fluted barrel on the RDB-S. If not, I'll have one modified into what I want. I did that with my AUG barrel.

The reports from Kel-Tec are that they will eventually build the RDB in .308W. The worlds first lightweight, compact, ambi, semi-auto .308W rifle. These are great times that we live in. The criticism of the Kel-Tec seems pointless to me. I have done nothing but hold one (it was not for sale or it would have been mine). It's the first rifle that has me excited about bullpups in many, many years. Honestly, the quality seems on par with the rest. Look closely at the quality of the AUG stock. It's sub-par in my book. You can see grinding marks in it. Not the best quality. The metal parts are perfect and Steyr has done a great job with the A3 M1. Both my AUGs would out shoot my Tavor any day of the week. The Tavor is a 2.5 MOA rifle. The AUGs shoot about 1.5-2 MOA. This is with stock triggers. With a good trigger the AUG would outclass any Tavor.

The Tavor seemed overly complex to me. The barrel removal was horrible, the multi-cal option was dropped and a bolt change requires shipping back to the factory for head spacing. That's a no-go. The non-adjustable gas system is also disappointing. The rail was also too low to use optics effectly. A higher rail was a needed accessory. Same with the trigger. This was one of the only weapons that I lost money on. I'm old enough to remember the pre-ban weapons of the 1980's. Owned most of them and shot the rest. The Tavor was one of the most disappointing weapons ever.

To sum up, the RDB has me excited. I'll probably own a couple of them before it's all over. The AUG will probably go down the road shortly, as I move into the 21st century. Feel free to criticize my thoughts on these weapons. If you are not looking at the RDB as a step forward, then you are not looking at it correctly. Your glasses may be rose colored.

SamM



i've been preaching this for quite a while now.  the main gripe is QC/reliability but i didn't care with a lifetime warranty and luckily my gun has been problem free at over 1k rounds now.


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: SamM on March 28, 2017, 08:44:57 AM
HBeretta,
It's good to hear that the rifles, in the hands of paying customers are reliable. The lifetime warranty is a good indication that Kel-Tec will stand behind their rifles. This gives me even more confidence in my choice to pick one up. I'm looking for a green RDB for a good price. I jumped too fast on the Tavor and paid way too much for one of the early rifles.  Not happening again.

SamM


Title: Re: RDB thoughts?
Post by: Tj7 on April 20, 2017, 12:14:30 PM
New short RDB video. Looks to run great; even with steel on a few occassions in this video. The guy even made some nice hits out at 300 yards. Very smooth handling rifle.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lA4NwKQaGuo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lA4NwKQaGuo)