Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 24, 2017, 07:42:09 AM
Home Home Help Calendar Login Register
News:

Please support BullpupForum.com sponsors!!
. . . Midwest Industries . . . BullpupArmory.com . . . Shooting Sight . . . BullpupUnlimited.com . . . Homeland Guns . . . . . . . . . . . . AB Arms . . . GallowayPrecision.com . . . K & M Arms . . . . . . Geissele Automatics
+  BULLPUP FORUM
|-+  Bullpup Rifles (Auto & Semi-Auto Centerfire)
| |-+  IWI Tavor & X-95
| | |-+  Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?
Pages: [1] 2 3 Print
Author Topic: Why do people hate on the X95 more than the Tavor SAR and the AUG?  (Read 2271 times)
Chairforce26
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 12


« 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.
Logged
RadScorpius
Bullpup Fanatic
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 613



« Reply #1 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.
Logged
Chairforce26
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 12


« Reply #2 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?
Logged
RadScorpius
Bullpup Fanatic
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 613



« Reply #3 on: May 04, 2017, 10:47:17 PM »

They did, but that long top rail and handguard are still pretty dumb of a modification.
Logged
RadScorpius
Bullpup Fanatic
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 613



« Reply #4 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.
Logged
Hivedr.
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 145


« Reply #5 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

Logged
Rastoff
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 62



WWW
« Reply #6 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.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2017, 12:44:43 PM by Rastoff » Logged

Remember, you can post here because they died over there.
Freedom isn't free.
AlexTavor
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 26


« Reply #7 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.
Logged
Chairforce26
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 12


« Reply #8 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.
Logged
AlexTavor
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 26


« Reply #9 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.
Logged
BellatorInvictus
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 117


« Reply #10 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...
Logged
Chairforce26
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 12


« Reply #11 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.
Logged
AlexTavor
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 26


« Reply #12 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.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2017, 12:42:18 AM by AlexTavor » Logged
BellatorInvictus
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 117


« Reply #13 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).
Logged
THX1138
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 50


« Reply #14 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.
Logged
Screwball
Member
**
Online Online

Posts: 19


« Reply #15 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.
Logged
THX1138
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 50


« Reply #16 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
Logged
Hivedr.
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 145


« Reply #17 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.


 

     
Logged
AlexTavor
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 26


« Reply #18 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
Logged
AlexTavor
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 26


« Reply #19 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


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.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 Print 
Jump to:  



Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SimplePortal 2.3.5 © 2008-2012, SimplePortal
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!