IWI TAVOR Coming to USA

usa_tavor_rifle_stickman-tm-tfb

After the appearance of the TAVAR at SHOT Show, there has been much speculation as to who will bring the Tavor to the USA and how much it will cost. A post at AR15.com suggests that IWI is manufacturing the receiver in the USA and importing parts kits from Israel.

Photo © Stickman

The US semi-auto Tavor will be manufactured in the US by IWI. Charles Daly and Trans World Arms will not have anything to do with the manufacturing of this firearm.

It will be made from Israeli imported parts and US sourced parts in full compliance with 922(r).

The semi-auto construction and engineering has been approved by BATF&E.

The Tavor accepts AR-15/M-16 mags, including PMags. Which mag will actually be supplied with the Tavor has yet to be decided.

The sample shown at SHOT, with a 16″ barrel (cold hammer forged, 1:7 twist, chrome lined) and full length Picatinny top rail, is only one configuration that is contemplated. (Actual production of this model will have a 16.5″ barrel in order to meet the US minimum 26″ OAL.) Other models could include a 18″ version with or without the Mepro 21 reflex sight; perhaps to become the “IDF” model.) The number of models to be offered has not been finalized.

Initial deliveries are projected to be on the market by the end of October, hopefully sooner.

The projected MSRP (for models without optics) will hopefully stay under $2k.

My prediction is a MSRP of $1,999.95. With optics and accessories probably $2,600.

I did not see the model pictured above that was at SHOT Show. It was unfortunately nowhere to be found when I went to visit the CD Booth. The receiver design is quite different from the Tavor models IWI lists on their website. This version features a long full length top picatinny rail, not just a short forward rail. The iron sights are a nice addition.

I fear that this is a bad time to bring a new, expensive and non-AR-15 gun to market. There is going to be a big gun buy up pre and post-election. After that, maybe 2nd quarter 2013, there is bound to be a slump. If they start production in late 2012, or early 2013, by the time they have everything running smoothly, they will be right at the start of the post-election sales downturn. I hope this gun does not suffer the same fate as the Steyr AUG.

[ Many thanks to jdun1911 for emailing me the link. ]




Steve Johnson

Founder and Dictator-In-Chief of TFB. A passionate gun owner, a shooting enthusiast and totally tacti-uncool. Favorite first date location: any gun range. Steve can be contacted here.


Advertisement

  • Higgs

    Personally dont like bullpups, but i got a wierd thing for this weapon. Looks like ill need to start whorin’ myself out again.

    • SPC Fish

      i agree

    • Fritz

      How much. ;)

    • Jeff

      Same, this an an underfolder AK are the guns that make me go “why do I want this so bad”???

  • D.Moura

    Taurus bought a licence to manufacture the tavor tar-21 here in Brazil, unfortunately only few special batallions received due to the high cost. The same happened in Israel where they will still use the m16 for quite some time.
    Do you know if the US will evaluate any chance of equiping some special units with this amazing bullpup AR?

    • Charles222

      Doubt it.

      • charles222

        Attn people who disliked my post: SOCOM and the US military have not and probably will never adopt a bullpup service rifle. Get used to the idea.

      • W

        charles is right. with the m4 and SCAR available, not to mention millions of hours of training with the conventional rifle layout, no unit in their right mind would start over from scratch.

      • Mike Knox

        @W tell that to European Armies in the 70s-80s..

      • W

        youve got to be kidding me mike. do try to keep up with the conversation. Ill make it simple for you.

        the following question was asked, “Do you know if the US will evaluate any chance of equiping some special units with this amazing bullpup AR?”

        Charles 222, said “doubt it” and explained that a bullpup rifle has never been in service, thus will not anytime soon, if ever. I explained that with the millions of hours in training and experience with the M4 and ergonomically similar SCAR, that charles’ assertion is correct.

        European experience with bullpups (they are adopting many conventional rifles) is irrelevant when pertaining to the US military, since they do not have the manufacturing capacity or sheer exporting assets to directly compete with the US in arms exports. There is a reason why M4s and M16s are eclipsing other rifles among many armies that have traditionally used different designs (especially AKs).

      • Joe Schmoe

        It probably would never happen but what “W” said was wrong as well.

        It didn’t stop Israel from recently transitioning to a bullpup. It makes no difference what people are used to, the new recruits are the ones that get trained on the bullpup while the older guys keep the AR (or whatever they’re using) till they finish their service. Thus, a smooth transition with no “re-training” required.

      • Mike Knox

        @W
        Well guess what, France tried that transition back to conventional layouts, but it didn’t work for them. Same with the UK, Austria, and Belgium. And guess what, Asia is going with the Bullpup trend as well, just ask Iran, China, India, Thailand, Singapore, and Saudi Arabia too. And the Amusing fact is, the previous Countries were using AK/Derived designs. Another kicker is half those countries picked the TAR-21 as their replacement.

        Hell, Israel began with AKs and moved to the Galil, an AK derivative, then to the AR-15 and developed the TAR-21 to suit their needs.

        A faint but hard fact for Yanks is that AR-15 usage outside the colonies is quite sparse. Your remark about the “eclipsing of other rifles” is quite a bad joke. An example: Papua New Guinean rebels surrendered their FAMASes to the authorities recently, while a few years back, journalists have shared photos of such rebels with M16s.

        Or how about Libya, the government gradually replaced their AR-16/M16 and AKs with FAMASes and FN2000s in the mid 2000s by selling them to rebels in south east asia. Funny thing is half those procuring rebels later replaced those rifles with, wait for it, FAMASes and a few TAR-21s.

        I can’t help with the long post but things just kept ringing up..

      • W

        “It probably would never happen but what “W” said was wrong as well.”

        You were right in your post, but in what way was mine wrong?

        ” Well guess what, France tried that transition back to conventional layouts, but it didn’t work for them.”

        Why do you suppose that is? the famas has been in service since the 70’s, so it would make no sense for them to adopt a conventional rifle because of the familiarization with the bullpup.

        Many other french elite military and police units use conventional rifles. Like the SIG, HK 416, G36, and SCAR.

        “Same with the UK, Austria, and Belgium.”

        the UK’s SA80 wasn’t adopted in respectible numbers by other customers, the AUG was more successful, and Belgium uses the FN FNC. The British have been using the SA80 since the 80s and Austria since the 70’s. I will not be surprised if they never adopt rifles of conventional layout just like the US or canada would never adopt rifles of a bullpup layout.

        “And guess what, Asia is going with the Bullpup trend as well, just ask Iran, China, India, Thailand, Singapore, and Saudi Arabia too.”

        Yes, Asia is using a lot of bullpups. My argument was sheer number of rifles exported and adopted by other countries. Nobody but the host country is using the QBZ95 and others. the M4/M16 is being exported in large numbers to middle eastern clients and is used by many special operations units in Asia, including the countries you listed.

        “And the Amusing fact is, the previous Countries were using AK/Derived designs. Another kicker is half those countries picked the TAR-21 as their replacement.”

        Most of these countries adopted bullpups for special forces units, like India. China transitioned from a rifle that looked like a AK, but was mechanically different.

        “Hell, Israel began with AKs and moved to the Galil, an AK derivative, then to the AR-15 and developed the TAR-21 to suit their needs.”

        that is untrue. Techncially the IDF began with sten submachine guns and the FAL, before adopting the Galil (a copy of the Finnish Valmet) and then the M4/M16. The tavor was phased into service later. Israeli special operations are the only units that have used the AK.

        “A faint but hard fact for Yanks is that AR-15 usage outside the colonies is quite sparse. ”

        That is also untrue. The AR15 and its variants are used by Canada, the Netherlands, South Korea, the Phillippines, Turkey, Israel, Greece, Denmark, Colombia, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Afghanistan (im sure im missing alot). Hardly “quite sparse” and hardly in a position to be surpassed by bullpup rifles. Read the link below and weep. http://www.colt.com/ColtMilitary/Customers.aspx

        “Your remark about the “eclipsing of other rifles” is quite a bad joke. An example: Papua New Guinean rebels surrendered their FAMASes to the authorities recently, while a few years back, journalists have shared photos of such rebels with M16s.”

        ooohhh, papa new guinea LOL. I was talking about countries that traditionally used AKs, like many middle eastern countries, that transitioned to the M16. Yes, the M16, in total numbers produced and exported, remains higher than bullpups. The US is also the largest arms exporter on the planet (bigger than the 10 nations under it combined), so this shouldnt be surprising.

        “Or how about Libya, the government gradually replaced their AR-16/M16 and AKs with FAMASes and FN2000s in the mid 2000s by selling them to rebels in south east asia. Funny thing is half those procuring rebels later replaced those rifles with, wait for it, FAMASes and a few TAR-21s.”

        and nowhere have i said that bullpups are being completely phased out. Their numbers, however, cannot hold a candle to conventional rifles like the M16, especially in the 5.56 caliber.

      • W

        “It makes no difference what people are used to, the new recruits are the ones that get trained on the bullpup while the older guys keep the AR (or whatever they’re using) till they finish their service. Thus, a smooth transition with no “re-training” required.”

        joe, it makes all the worlds difference when you have a army composed primarily of professional, career soldiers. The US military will never adopt a bullpup because of the logistical and training and doctrine strain it will place on the system (which addressed the main subject of the comment were responding to). With a army like the IDF, with conscripted soldiers, transitioning could be indeed easier.

      • Joe Schmoe

        @ W –

        =”joe, it makes all the worlds difference when you have a army composed primarily of professional, career soldiers. The US military will never adopt a bullpup because of the logistical and training and doctrine strain it will place on the system (which addressed the main subject of the comment were responding to). With a army like the IDF, with conscripted soldiers, transitioning could be indeed easier.”

        Maybe you’re right, but I doubt we would ever know the effects of having the U.S. Army transition. But I still believe everyone is overstating the difficulty in such a transition considering it has been done in the past in many countries, even those with professional/career soldiers.

        In addition, I agree with you that the bullpup will find it hard to take over not because of any technical inferiority, but simple pricing and backing. Compare the price (or lack of one/free) for an M-16 or AK, then compare it to the average prices for bullpups.

        =”that is untrue. Techncially the IDF began with sten submachine guns and the FAL, before adopting the Galil (a copy of the Finnish Valmet) and then the M4/M16. The tavor was phased into service later. Israeli special operations are the only units that have used the AK.”

        Well, the IDF’s list of main weapons went sort of like this (in order):

        Sten/KAR-98
        FAL/UZI
        Galil
        M16
        Tavor

        Though in the late 60’s and 70’s there were a lot of soldiers in many units who did take up AK’s and were allowed to, but it wasn’t an official armament.

      • Mike Knox

        @W
        And your point on your “point by point” reply? You’re not reinforcing your claim. My reply shows how much Bullpups are replacing conventional layouts like AR-15s and AKs in right minded units as you claim.

        Exports and statistics are just a thin front compared to what people are actually using. As far as I can tell, some units I personally know have been using P90s, FN2000s and TAR-21s more than ARs.

        The US being the Biggest Arms Exporter on the planet? That’s Russia, Dork. In fact you’re almost behind Germany already. Your link? That’s just a list of customers, not countries with supply contracts. Each one of those countries just bought a number at certain times. You just bought in to their publicity blurb. They didn’t mention how many of them transitioned to other Rifles, especially Bullpups, in fact, more than half of them did.

        Shame I didn’t include Africa yet. Denel’s been producing CR-21s for most of their neighbours recently.

      • W

        “And your point on your “point by point” reply? You’re not reinforcing your claim. My reply shows how much Bullpups are replacing conventional layouts like AR-15s and AKs in right minded units as you claim.”

        Apparently you have a problem with reading comprehension. Try again. There are a few nations that are replacing their conventional layouts with bullpups (like Israel), though they are also adopting more modern conventional designs. Im never said conventional layouts are replacing all bullpups, though I am pointing out that conventional rifles are in no way threatned by bullpups when it comes to sheer numbers.

        “Exports and statistics are just a thin front compared to what people are actually using. As far as I can tell, some units I personally know have been using P90s, FN2000s and TAR-21s more than ARs.”

        Some units you personally know? LOL. Some units I personally know are using the aforementioned weapons though regular units are also using conventional layout weapons and have replaced them with newer conventional layout designs. There is no doubt the P90 is popular, though the F2000 and TAR21 will never be as popular as conventional rifles. That is a fact. Get over it.

        “The US being the Biggest Arms Exporter on the planet? That’s Russia, Dork. In fact you’re almost behind Germany already. Your link?”

        Wrong. The US is the world’s largest arms exporter http://armstrade.sipri.org/armstrade/html/export_toplist.php

        here is another http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/R42017.pdf

        Russia is #2. Thank you for demonstrating that you just wikipedia’d “arms industry” and incorrectly read the statistics that place Russia as higher than the US…without updated numbers for the US. Laughable.

        “That’s just a list of customers, not countries with supply contracts. Each one of those countries just bought a number at certain times. You just bought in to their publicity blurb. They didn’t mention how many of them transitioned to other Rifles, especially Bullpups, in fact, more than half of them did.”

        citations? 8 million have been produced. Have 8 million AUG been produced? F2000? any other bullpup? not remotely. This is one of my major points.

        Do try to keep up. Bullpups are not “replacing” ARs in significant numbers. Many units are purchasing bullpups to compliment their line of conventional rifles. More countries are using bullpups, though the design is not phasing out conventional layouts as a whole…not even being remotely close.

        “Shame I didn’t include Africa yet. Denel’s been producing CR-21s for most of their neighbours recently.”

        no and africa also uses unknown quantities of AKs and other conventional layout rifles. The South African military is still using the locally produced variant of the Galil.

        You are trying to argue that bullpups are eclipsing conventional layouts, especially the M16, which is grossly incorrect. I have debunked this myth.

      • Mike Knox

        @W
        “sheer numbers” Wow, your internet skills amuse me, grasshopper. Read about ‘Arms Scrapping’, start in Africa and Central Asia. Governments and units have been selling, salvaging or just plain old burning down arms stockpiles over the last decade just to keep up on their securities. That’s not something you can just read about on the internet. The Proliferation of the AR descent is just prominent in market blurbs and, well, the internet. It’s close to going down the drink like old AKs, HKs and FNs.

        Unlike you, I actually know people in these units in real life, Military, Police, and Private Security. And not just in the U.S.. The only thing left AR about their gear is the U.S.G.I. STANAG hand me down magazines they use. Even attachments tailored for the AR are turned in for multi-platform ones.

        And if it didn’t occur to you, it’s 2012 of the year of our lord and the first quarter ended already. Your statistics (well,that first one’s a dead link) were just 2011, third quarter from a source only in the U.S., not the U.N., NATO, or WTO.

        Seriously?, you’re just relying on assumed numbers from a producer’s advert and antiquated reports, from the internet no doubt. Reported numbers are stunted by actual and unreported numbers. A step up, unit stocks may include older, conventional weapon layouts but actual issue include the weapons I’ve mentioned.

        And if you’re starting about Africa, read again about my 1st paragraph. Government reforms have been made to curb on unchecked arms trades down there. One of which is a new rifle design (and layout) to null weapon familiarity.

        I must admit, part of my replies are to add on updating about the real world for any readers, not just to chip your teeth..

      • Mike Knox

        @W
        Just a jab and I can’t help it but: ” not to mention millions of hours of training with the conventional rifle layout”. It takes you that long to figure out how to work out a Rifle and use it? I trumped myself laughing..

      • W

        ” “sheer numbers” Wow, your internet skills amuse me, grasshopper. Read about ‘Arms Scrapping’, start in Africa and Central Asia. Governments and units have been selling, salvaging or just plain old burning down arms stockpiles over the last decade just to keep up on their securities. That’s not something you can just read about on the internet. The Proliferation of the AR descent is just prominent in market blurbs and, well, the internet. It’s close to going down the drink like old AKs, HKs and FNs.”

        Yet the evidence proves otherwise. Your mention of arms scrapping is irrelevant and doesn’t change the fact that the AR15 is in far more hands than any bullpup out there. Conventional rifles still dominate the arms market. No amount wishful thinking can prove otherwise.

        “Unlike you, I actually know people in these units in real life, Military, Police, and Private Security. And not just in the U.S.. The only thing left AR about their gear is the U.S.G.I. STANAG hand me down magazines they use. Even attachments tailored for the AR are turned in for multi-platform ones.”

        hmmm, for somebody that is as credible as you seem to think you are, possessing a vast goldmine of information, you seem ill informed. You continually beat a dead horse by stating that bullpups are revolutionizing the international arms market and leading to a mass destruction of conventional rifles. They are not. Sales and adoption of conventional rifles is as strong as ever, especially in the case of the M4/M16 platform.

        “And if it didn’t occur to you, it’s 2012 of the year of our lord and the first quarter ended already. Your statistics (well,that first one’s a dead link) were just 2011, third quarter from a source only in the U.S., not the U.N., NATO, or WTO.”

        http://armstrade.sipri.org/armstrade/page/toplist.php

        the link works on my computer, so try it again. Just a FYI, 2012 is not completed yet, so any measures in arms exports cannot be adequately made. I don’t care what your sources say, it doesn’t change the fact that total arms exports in 2012 cannot be measured simply because it is impossible.

        and the source of information is based out of Stockhold Sweden. So much for US bias…

        I assume you have more credible sources of information? The US is still the top arms exporter. This is a commonly known fact throughout the world.

        “Seriously?, you’re just relying on assumed numbers from a producer’s advert and antiquated reports, from the internet no doubt. Reported numbers are stunted by actual and unreported numbers. A step up, unit stocks may include older, conventional weapon layouts but actual issue include the weapons I’ve mentioned.”

        I provided credible sources and statistics on weapons exports, which i assumed would help explain why American small arms are being placed in the hands of many nations’ soldiers. Of course, to you, these sources are rendered unreliable simply because you mysteriously know a secretive group of shadow men that have all the answers to the exact number LOL. Yet since you are involved in such a mysterious, secretive organization, you spend your days attacking a random person over the internet while arguing facts that are commonly accepted, with evidence to substantiate.

        “And if you’re starting about Africa, read again about my 1st paragraph. Government reforms have been made to curb on unchecked arms trades down there. One of which is a new rifle design (and layout) to null weapon familiarity.”

        “government reforms”? im sure they are being well enforced LOL. My original point with Africa is that the country uses conventional layout rifles because of their abundance. Yet to you, your prototype CR21 is revolutionizing the arms trade in africa and leading to the scrapping of its competitors. This is untrue.

        “I must admit, part of my replies are to add on updating about the real world for any readers, not just to chip your teeth..”

        LOL okay if you say so. Tell me something new great oracle.

        ” Just a jab and I can’t help it but: ” not to mention millions of hours of training with the conventional rifle layout”. It takes you that long to figure out how to work out a Rifle and use it? I trumped myself laughing..”

        you must be pretty fucking stupid, so ill break it down simple for you. A soldier is more effective employing a weapon system that he has had years of experience with rather than relearning a entirely new design. You seem to think “familiarization” makes a soldier a expert with a rifle. That is definitely not the case, as anyone in the military or law enforcement would know.

        Again, since you are such a “credible” library of information (undoubtedly received from your beloved museums ((I need to go to the fucking museums you go to because those must be high speed!)), point out where i am incorrect. I seek your divine truths LMAO.

      • Mike Knox

        @W
        Wishful thinking? I actually am rooting to keep ARs around but it’s undeniable. Forty years ago the east they thought they’d never stop using AKs, now look, they’re using ARs, TARs, FNs and QBZs. Same thing’ll go for the AR, it’s starting in the Mediterranian and working east.

        Sales? Hah! Good one. I wouldn’t be surprised you’d double your order of chips when they tell you it’s half off fat. Like I’ve said before, Sales are pointless compared to General Issue at the current moment. But apparently that doesn’t seep though your leather forehead and granite skull.

        Sweden? They’re the last people to learn about Arms statistics. In fact everyone lies to them just just like Germany and Japan did in World War Two. You’re putting through the internet as a matter of fact, where statistics are more often than not, made up.

        Shadow men? Wow, comicbook guy, you really can stay in character off the telly. These peeps I’m talking about are half the guys I made a wager with on who’d last longer in ROTC. They’re USMC, Army Engineers, Metro SWAT, and Private Security right now, while I picked college like the other half.

        I’ve got to ask, how much blood did you shed though your nose from using that many long words for a few sentences just for one insinuation, eh?

        And all that from a silly jab? HAH! I just trumped three bars of “Waltzing Matida”. When I last checked, it took me half an hour after lecture to do a half-minute take-down, reassembly and function check with an M16A2, and an hour for my Dad’s Steyr AUG the next week. But to you it seems, SOCOM operatives take more than a millenia (even with familiarisation training) to do it while a sixteen year-old can do it in an afternoon before tea. Hell, it only takes up to a week for a 1000 man regional guard straight from municipal voulonteers in Burma to learn a dozen small arms and maneuvres with spare time to learn signals and Epirit de corps.

        Your “wisdom” is amuses me , grashopper..

      • W

        “Wishful thinking? I actually am rooting to keep ARs around but it’s undeniable. Forty years ago the east they thought they’d never stop using AKs, now look, they’re using ARs, TARs, FNs and QBZs. Same thing’ll go for the AR, it’s starting in the Mediterranian and working east.”

        Yup. This is what Ive been saying for the past couple of days.

        “Sales? Hah! Good one. I wouldn’t be surprised you’d double your order of chips when they tell you it’s half off fat. Like I’ve said before, Sales are pointless compared to General Issue at the current moment. But apparently that doesn’t seep though your leather forehead and granite skull.”

        Pointless compared to general issue? In order for the rifles to be generally issued, they must be sold first. Now im teaching deductive reasoning (jesus christ). Where I was going with the arms exports was that the US is the largest exporter, so it should be surprising that more rifles in the M16 family are becoming available than any other time in history. you just admitted in your first paragraph that the M16/M4 is becoming more “general issue”; it is certainly more common than it was 15 years ago. Again, its what ive been saying all along.

        “Sweden? They’re the last people to learn about Arms statistics. In fact everyone lies to them just just like Germany and Japan did in World War Two. You’re putting through the internet as a matter of fact, where statistics are more often than not, made up.”

        First you claimed that the sources of information are only from the US, then you attack Sweden on arms statistics. Of course everyone lies to them; they’re much larger than what is publicized. considering the source of information, i call bullshit on them being “made up”. It is certainly more credible than hearsay from individual people.

        “Shadow men? Wow, comicbook guy, you really can stay in character off the telly. These peeps I’m talking about are half the guys I made a wager with on who’d last longer in ROTC. They’re USMC, Army Engineers, Metro SWAT, and Private Security right now, while I picked college like the other half.”

        Oh what a informative source of information. The next time i need information on the complex reality of global geopolitics and arms exports, alongside small arms worldwide, ill be sure to ask college graduates and ROTC cadets. Never mind think tank studies, the United States Congress, national governments, UN, and US intelligence. What would they know?

        “I’ve got to ask, how much blood did you shed though your nose from using that many long words for a few sentences just for one insinuation, eh?”

        If its a problem, let me help you. http://oxforddictionaries.com/?region=us

        “And all that from a silly jab? HAH! I just trumped three bars of “Waltzing Matida”. When I last checked, it took me half an hour after lecture to do a half-minute take-down, reassembly and function check with an M16A2, and an hour for my Dad’s Steyr AUG the next week. But to you it seems, SOCOM operatives take more than a millenia (even with familiarisation training) to do it while a sixteen year-old can do it in an afternoon before tea. Hell, it only takes up to a week for a 1000 man regional guard straight from municipal voulonteers in Burma to learn a dozen small arms and maneuvres with spare time to learn signals and Epirit de corps.”

        Right because that sixteen year old would be just as proficient as a trained soldier or policeman that has been using the weapon in training and a tactical environment for years. LOL

        There’s more to weapons proficiency than “familiarization”. If you take two soldiers, one with a familiarization course under his belt and a trained rifleman with years of experience, well see who comes out on top. Im not sure why were having this argument.

        “Your “wisdom” is amuses me , grashopper..”

        Im glad i can be amusing. hopefully you learned something. Ill ask again, where in my previous posts have I typed incorrect information?

      • W

        “working overtime comicbook guy? Israel isn’t fighting an insurgency, dumbass.”

        LOL apparently you are ignorant of the meaning of “insurgency”. What is exactly occurring with the palestinians, who are revolting against a legitimately recognized authority (dictionary definition of “insurgency”)? It is a insurgency. Hezbollah is a insurgent group, as they are organized fighting a recognized government. Or do you think it is a conventional war? It is not. Guerrilla/Irregular War? Yes, as the term is used interchangeably with “insurgency”, “asymmetric war” and “terrorism”.

        “Using Armour all the time is inadequate compared to using Light Patrol units geared for CQC, hence the point of the TAR-21′s replacement of M16s. It’s just Common Sense, but obviously that’s amongst you mental gaps.”

        Yeah its rife with common sense. Its so rife with common sense that the US began fielding tanks in afgh…..oops…apparently armor is still a invaluable asset, even in Afghanistan and especially in Iraq. Your light patrol assets are just for that: patrolling; they are completely unsuitable for engagement operations i.e. Gaza Strip. I’m talking about operations outside the realm of security, such as Operation Cast Lead and the the 2006 Lebanon War.

        “And apparently you’re not too keen on reading. That last section isn’t addressed to you. Since it doesn’t occur to you, that passage is the grounds for most Armour design priorities since the Great War on the western front. In that last sentence of yours, you’re referring to just IFVs, not MBTs.”

        Ill respond to it as I see fit. Since you are making a mountain out of a molehill, is the last paragraph inaccurate? I was citing the reason why the Merkava was designed the way it was designed in the first place. You apparently missed the part where I said “It has the ability to serve in roles otherwise infeasible for equivalent main battle tank chassis…”

        “Unless you’re aware, dorkman, you’ve steered this off topic with your Merkava argument when you were hassling about Israel’s position on the M16. Nice driving, gummo..”

        The merkava “argument” was used as a example, alongside its dedicated APC variant and the armored bulldozer, of Israel’s lessons learned fighting in urban conflicts and how armor is essential. Thats it. Then you proceeded to argue with me that they don’t use heavy armor, “that the Six Day War ended years ago”.

        Anyways, im done with this discussion. Hopefully things are more clear for you.

      • Mike Knox

        @W

        Hey dingbat, It’s the 2010s The US isn’t the largest exporter of ARs any more. You’re already beaten by China. International AR-15s were obtained by licensed manufacturers in the 80s and 90s. That “figure” you got from the company website was rounded off from the accumulated produced number, and by “worldwide” they included the US which accounted fro the obtuse majority.

        General issue doesn’t mean it’s what’s constantly used, there’s the matter of personal preference where any officer or serviceman can requisition a different unit as long as it accomodates STANAG parameters or unit standards. It’s actually encouraged since almost everyone has a ruling of equipment familiarisation where everyone in the unit knows how to use eveybody else’s gear where flexibiity includes equipment diversity. That there is something you can’t get off the internet, Mr wiki whizzard.

        And you suppose the UN, NATO or WTO runs on hearsay? In fact the first two actually run their data though internal intelligence, manufacturer’s statistics/peformance, conflict reports and statistics. The last one keeps check on the manufacturer’s output and proliferation by middle sources to say two. Your sources on the other hand are just on an annual count by one office, an outdated report only from the U.S. and an internet blurb by a manufacturer.

        These people I know are the ones actually using these Weapons, not some basement critter with an online PC. Unlike you, I have hand on experience not just by desire but part of an academic requirement. But like you’ve said, it takes you more than a thousand years to figure out and intermediate automatic rifled individual firearm and properly utilise it.

        Weapon proficiency is an overall measure, that half hour it took me was just for function and overall familiarisation. I got marksmanship and handling from varmint hunting at a relative’s farm years before. Just so you’d know, Hunting is a Tactical experience. That’s something you can’t relate to since it happens Outdoors, beyond your natural habitat in the basement..

      • W

        “Hey dingbat, It’s the 2010s The US isn’t the largest exporter of ARs any more. You’re already beaten by China.”

        In exports from China? China may be a large manufacturer of weapons, though i remain extremely skeptical of the US being beaten by China in terms of AR15 exports. Citations please?

        “International AR-15s were obtained by licensed manufacturers in the 80s and 90s. That “figure” you got from the company website was rounded off from the accumulated produced number, and by “worldwide” they included the US which accounted fro the obtuse majority.”

        Thank you for finally agreeing with me. That number is a statistic of how many AR15/M16/M4s that were produced…my point since my first posts. Ill ask once again, were 8 million AUGs produced? SA80? Tavor 21? Famas? F2000? One of my points is that there is a reason why the platform is becoming more prevailent in countries that previously used other platforms (whether they replaced them, destroyed them, or stored them is irrelevant), simply because larger numbers were produced. Unless bullpups approach the 8 million mark, they will not become as popular (despite being standardized in some countries).

        “General issue doesn’t mean it’s what’s constantly used, there’s the matter of personal preference where any officer or serviceman can requisition a different unit as long as it accomodates STANAG parameters or unit standards. It’s actually encouraged since almost everyone has a ruling of equipment familiarisation where everyone in the unit knows how to use eveybody else’s gear where flexibiity includes equipment diversity. That there is something you can’t get off the internet, Mr wiki whizzard.”

        That is something I have previously mentioned, if you were paying attention. Just to make things clear, I was talking about numbers of AR15s versus numbers of total bullpup rifles. Not whether they’re consistently used. Not what personal preferences are. That is irelevant. I even threw a bone at you by comparing numbers of ONE conventional layout rifle design versus the entire bullpup line. Yet you act as if bullpups are replacing conventional layout rifles, especially AR15s, because they are so revolutionary and ground breaking. They are great weapons, though they are anything but revolutionary and ground breaking.

        “And you suppose the UN, NATO or WTO runs on hearsay? In fact the first two actually run their data though internal intelligence, manufacturer’s statistics/peformance, conflict reports and statistics. The last one keeps check on the manufacturer’s output and proliferation by middle sources to say two. Your sources on the other hand are just on an annual count by one office, an outdated report only from the U.S. and an internet blurb by a manufacturer.”

        Im not sure where you jumped to this conclusion, but that is incorrect. As I have said before, I consider SIPRI a far more credible source of statistics information than ROTC cadets, security people, SWAT, and army engineers. Sorry, but their job is not to compile statistics on the arms industry and many, possibly excluding the private security and USMC (PMCs I assume?), dont operate outside the US. By the way, if you paid any attention to SIPRI and where it gets its sources of information, ill gladly point you in the right direction.

        “ur sources on the other hand are just on an annual count by one office, an outdated report only from the U.S. and an internet blurb by a manufacturer.”

        Actually not…

        “SIPRI maintains contacts with other research centres and individual researchers throughout the world. The Institute cooperates closely with several intergovernmental organizations, notably the United Nations and the European Union, and regularly receives parliamentary, scientific and government delegations as well as visiting researchers.” From my source http://www.sipri.org/about

        Im sorry…gumbo

        “These people I know are the ones actually using these Weapons, not some basement critter with an online PC. Unlike you, I have hand on experience not just by desire but part of an academic requirement.

        And its laughable that you seem to know so much about me. Everybody knows at least someone that has employed the weapon of discussion, though that doesn’t necessarily make them a expert on total the statistics behind it. Again, sorry to say, I trust information from think tank studies, the United States Congress, national governments, UN, and US intelligence more than I do the sources you mentioned (which I have also, so its left to a matter of perspective).

        “But like you’ve said, it takes you more than a thousand years to figure out and intermediate automatic rifled individual firearm and properly utilise it.”

        Thats not what I said at all. Let me repeat myself again for the third time. A soldier that has used a particular platform for a long period of time is more proficient and effective than a soldier that has used the platform after only a familiarization course. Your contention goes against the very principle of any respectible training regimen.

        “Weapon proficiency is an overall measure, that half hour it took me was just for function and overall familiarisation. I got marksmanship and handling from varmint hunting at a relative’s farm years before. Just so you’d know, Hunting is a Tactical experience. That’s something you can’t relate to since it happens Outdoors, beyond your natural habitat in the basement..”

        Okay, this is just hilarious. You are edifying yourself but trying to argue with me that soldiers who received a familiarization course and overall experience with a weapon, of say, 6 months (optimistically) experience with a particular platform are just as effective as soldiers that used a platform for years. Again, this is utterly rediculous and untrue.

        And hunting? LOL. your targets don’t shoot back and cover and concealment are basically a non issue if you are a decent marksman. A varmint hunter does not make a tactically sound or proficient soldier. Giving you some credit, it makes you familar with concepts of shooting moving targets, though does not equate to you grasping the concept of fire and maneuver and shooting under stress.

        and my basement? HAHA. you seem to know nothing about me. Being a old montana boy, I have hiked my fair share of mountains and valleys in persuit of game. Of course, age has taken its toll on me, so i dont nearly trek the kilometers like i used to as a teenager.

      • Mike Knox

        @W
        I’ll keep my personal reply Short and simple: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! All that just to go in little circles?! Basket weaving circles.

        Your “eight million” number is useless. primarily because up to six million of those right now are scrapped, mothballed, salvaged, or just plain old disposed by primary means (i.e. pioneer tool swings to the receiver). The number that matters is the remaining millions liming to another million while the millions of bullpups catching up with more than twice that amount in order back lags.

        SIPRI just counts less than a hundred people who occasionally check in for annual statistics. And that’s the only one source you’re peering on.

        I really laugh hard at your “sources” because just one office doesn’t account for the whole study. Just as DoD and Defense Ministries says so, the only reliable source are the end users themselves, which is where I get my info. All you have are Pages from the internet..

      • W

        “HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! All that just to go in little circles?! Basket weaving circles.”

        I called you out for using circles then you accuse me of doing so. Hilarious. Im glad other people can see these posts.

        “Your “eight million” number is useless. primarily because up to six million of those right now are scrapped, mothballed, salvaged, or just plain old disposed by primary means (i.e. pioneer tool swings to the receiver). The number that matters is the remaining millions liming to another million while the millions of bullpups catching up with more than twice that amount in order back lags.”

        Since you didn’t provide any citations for your last comment that China has surpassed the US in AR15 exports, ill go ahead and make the call that you’re full of shit. Up to six million scrapped, etc? where’s the evidence of that? a buddy in ROTC?

        Millions…ambiguous numbers. just millions! LOL. Ill go ahead and say, using the Mike Knox Law of statistics, that there will be millions of conventional layout rifles introduced in the next decade with twice the millions on back order.

        and you have the audacity to attack my sources…LOL you dont even provide any and make a pretty incredulous, if outright outlandish, point. Whats with your obsession over the internet? did somebody steal your identity or something?

        “SIPRI just counts less than a hundred people who occasionally check in for annual statistics. And that’s the only one source you’re peering on.”

        Actually, no its not, if you were paying attention. Let me refresh your memory for you.
        http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/R42017.pdf

        yours truly, United States Congress.

        occasionally check in for annual statistics? that argument is pretty weak considering that you have provided nothing. No book, published article, or, god forbid, a credible internet site.

        But I suppose its a conspiracy. A conspiracy to hide the fact that Russia and China are arms hegemonies taking over the world and the US Congress, intelligence services, WTO, UN, NATO, and SIPRI are all in on it! its ok. breathe into a paper bag and relax, its going to be ok. The Russians and Chinese are not coming.

        “I really laugh hard at your “sources” because just one office doesn’t account for the whole study. Just as DoD and Defense Ministries says so,
        the only reliable source are the end users themselves, which is where I get my info.”

        Right…so your sources are hearsay. And you think you’re laughing hard…

        “All you have are Pages from the internet..”

        which provide a myriad of other sources from various governments and other parallel organizations of government.

        That is not true and are internet pages that terrible? Some are. Some are not. This is the case with radio, television, and newspaper. The primary criticism of the internet is anybody can write anything claiming it to be credible. Of course, you being educated, should know the importance of citing your work. Not only have you used 0 citations, you havent even used ambiguous citations. Just I know a friend. Everybody has “friends”.

        I keep asking where I put out incorrect information, and you seem to be unable to point that out and refute it. But keep up with the ad hominem attacks and personal insults…its allows exponential growth of your arguments, i promise.

      • Mike Knox

        @W
        You really are just after being “correct” at something on the internet while in real life, you’re rarely correct at anything at all.

        I’m sure I’ve skipped relies on some points but I’ll try and cover them. This reply may be long but I’m trying to cover as much as I can before another trip in two days.

        To start, Hunting IS a Tactical Experience. I’m sure when you get the word ‘Tactical’ the only things that register into your mind is SWAT, Special Forces or any of the sort but you’re sadly mistaken. Tactical is anything with complete Awareness and Preparation, two things that are essential in Hunting. That’s something you definitely can’t learn form the internet, obviously something you’re ignorant to.

        Obviously, you don’t seem to know how to count that well. Because your “myriad” of sources are just three: a broken link, a company page and a shorthanded report (which is more of a marginal statistic paper). It’s no surprise you don’t know how to read a Government circulated paper. Even with your Freedom of Information Act, data in papers like the one you’ve been pushing is heavily edited, filtered and even censored up to whole sections counting them as “redundancies” or “inessential” just before submission. Not to mention having omitted sources like the ones I’ve enumerated (company performance, End report statistics and even actual deliveries just to name a few).

        In other words, that paper of yours won’t count for anything if you’re after exact figures. To sum it up in short, that paper you’re clinging to is just what one guy counts in trade traffic. That’s right, only one person, Richard F. Grimmett, not the entire Congress. And it’s a release of the report as well, meaning it’s an abbreviation of the actual submitted report making that data incomplete. It doesn’t mention which items and products are even on traffic. That’s why it just counts as hearsay, even unacceptable to an official consensus. I know this because I was taught this sort of scrutiny while working in Corporate Administration.

        Unlike you, My source is word from mouth coming from an actual end user of firearms, in a personal conversation. My last talk with a Police Boat Officer was if it was a good idea to stow an FN2000 by the thigh like a P90. He found slinging a Colt M977 inconvenient with the barrel hitting the deck and equipment with the stock wedging into his vest and pack.

        The point is, you’re just relying on offhand sources, the internet, hearsay, or just plain old loose guesses. It’s even doubtful if you have any firearms experience at all with that info. You’re just saying this and that because you’ve heard it here and read it there, but nothing remotely close to first person accounts or personal experience.

        It IS a solid fact that conventional layout rifles are getting caught up by bullpups. China for one, has yet to deliver at least a million more QBZ-95s to half the active duty in the PLA and the rest of the reserves counting to almost a million more while still trying to keep a quota of deliveries to foreign users which is nearly another million. And that’s just one country out of nearly a dozen transitioning to bullpups. Conventional layouts on the other hand are starting to dwindle. Every time a Unit relocates, there’s almost a third a chance they’ll get newly issued gear, including rifles, upon redeployment since everyone leaves and arrives only with personal effects. That preceding fact applies internationally.

        So on a canvas square, Conventional layouts are getting replaced by Bullpups by necessity, convenience, preference, and efficiency. Bullpup Advantages outnumber Disadvantages even from different opinions.

        To answer a persistent question of yours: no you haven’t provided any correct information since your replies just ambiguous and indirect to the question why more bullpups are starting to replace conventional layouts. You haven’t even explained any “glaring” flaws on bullpups from one of your other RSS replies. Now what else do you have to offer, Fairy Princess of the Internet? Another webpage? Try replying with an informative direct response, not something from a “source” other than your own

        I’m wagering on three things: you’ll skimmer dribbling citrus kool aid and avoid a reply (most likely sockpuppeting again) pretending not to be there, start attacking and nitpicking on my reply still avoiding a topic inline response, or take offense at something in this with irrational action..

      • W

        “To start, Hunting IS a Tactical Experience…”

        If you say so. and you’re the one laughing at me? Hunting teaches you marksmanship and becoming efficient at shooting moving targets, thats it. Those are important but hardly the complete picture when it comes to tactical training.

        “Obviously, you don’t seem to know how to count that well. Because your “myriad” of sources are just three: a broken link, a company page and a shorthanded report (which is more of a marginal statistic paper). It’s no surprise you don’t know how to read a Government circulated paper. Even with your Freedom of Information Act, data in papers like the one you’ve been pushing is heavily edited, filtered and even censored up to whole sections counting them as “redundancies” or “inessential” just before submission. Not to mention having omitted sources like the ones I’ve enumerated (company performance, End report statistics and even actual deliveries just to name a few).”

        I posted two links about arms exports and one about AR15s specifically. One from SIPRI and another from FAS.org and Colt Defense. Despite your criticism of the veracity of it, you have provided no rebuttal say for your attempt with tea time conversation. Its no surprise to me you have little understanding of where the reports acquire their information from, which is indeed a myriad of sources. Its hypocritical how you talk about enumerating company performance, but criticize my citation using Colt. Is FNH or IWI somehow more credible? LOL.

        “Unlike you, My source is word from mouth coming from an actual end user of firearms, in a personal conversation…”.

        Hmmm, guess what, mine are too.

        “The point is, you’re just relying on offhand sources, the internet, hearsay, or just plain old loose guesses.”

        Hmmmm…pot meet kettle. My sources are published and are representantive of governmental organizations I already mentioned (which you accuse of being diluted because of secrecy, despite the freedom of information act; this point further bolster’s the reports’ picture: arms exports are larger than what is publically revealed) and yours are from personal sources.

        “It’s even doubtful if you have any firearms experience at all with that info. You’re just saying this and that because you’ve heard it here and read it there, but nothing remotely close to first person accounts or personal experience.”

        sure. if you say so. For one that tried to claim the SA80 was in no way inspired by the AR18 and the SIG 550 is not a long stroke piston rifle, i remain dubious of your overall experience with firearms.

        Considering you are the guy that said in another post that “you have the internet, and I have museums”, and is reliant on personal conversation, which is technically hearsay, I find your position to question my sources rather disingenous.

        “You really are just after being “correct” at something on the internet while in real life, you’re rarely correct at anything at all.”

        Again you cannot seem to be able to point out where im correct at all, despite asking about ten times. you just resort to personal attacks.

        “It IS a solid fact that conventional layout rifles are getting caught up by bullpups. China for one, has yet to deliver at least a million more QBZ-95s to half the active duty in the PLA and the rest of the reserves counting to almost a million more while still trying to keep a quota of deliveries to foreign users which is nearly another million. And that’s just one country out of nearly a dozen transitioning to bullpups. Conventional layouts on the other hand are starting to dwindle. Every time a Unit relocates, there’s almost a third a chance they’ll get newly issued gear, including rifles, upon redeployment since everyone leaves and arrives only with personal effects. That preceding fact applies internationally.”

        Again, I challenge your contention that conventional layout rifles are getting caught up with my bullpups. There are millions of AR15s, tens of millions of AKs, over a million 308 battle rifles, and millions of different conventional layout platforms. Bullpups have a lot of catching up to do.

        “So on a canvas square, Conventional layouts are getting replaced by Bullpups by necessity, convenience, preference, and efficiency. Bullpup Advantages outnumber Disadvantages even from different opinions.”

        In some units they are getting replaced, though conventional layouts will remain in service for some time. Bullpups have evolved much since the 1970’s, predictably, and have become more efficient and ergonomic.

        “To answer a persistent question of yours: no you haven’t provided any correct information since your replies just ambiguous and indirect to the question why more bullpups are starting to replace conventional layouts.”

        my replies are ambiguous? LOL. If you scroll back at the top, youll see that the question was asked “do you know if the US will evaluate any chance of equiping some special units with this amazing bullpup AR?”

        Charles said, “doubt it”, and I agreed with him because of the US military’s wealth of knowledge and proficiency on the M4/M16 platform and the ergonomically similar SCAR will prevent bullpups for becoming popular in the United States. This is a fact. I wasn’t talking about european armies. i wasn’t saying bullpups are terrible rifles. of course we wouldnt be having this coversation of you fucking paid attention.

        “You haven’t even explained any “glaring” flaws on bullpups from one of your other RSS replies. Now what else do you have to offer, Fairy Princess of the Internet? Another webpage? Try replying with an informative direct response, not something from a “source” other than your own”

        Glaring flaws on bullpups? I covered disadvantages of bullpups, which have been largely remedied by newer designs. The main disadvantage of the bullpup in the US is reluctance to relearn a new design (since the US military institution is rather conservative), which is associated with practicality. There’s really no point in adopting such a platform in the United States. I avoided covering the glaring flaws in bullpups because it is off subject.

        “I’m wagering on three things: you’ll skimmer dribbling citrus kool aid and avoid a reply (most likely sockpuppeting again) pretending not to be there, start attacking and nitpicking on my reply still avoiding a topic inline response, or take offense at something in this with irrational action..”

        Im counting on you responding with a emotional response, possibly further edification of your ambiguous hearsay sources, and ad hominem attacks.

        And this is the last time im responding to you. Since you are unwilling to have a civilized conversation and provide a informative aspect to your argument (instead of a dick sizing contest), not to mention resorting to childish remarks and other shenanigans (because attacking a random person over the internet with electrons really hurts), Im done arguing with you.

        Since you are unwilling to provide citations or any evidence whatsoever to support your remarks, Ill conclude that you are full of shit. Surprised? you shouldn’t be. Maybe if you want to have a informative discussion, at least demonstrate you have at minimum two neurons rubbing together. Ta da.

      • Mike Knox

        @W

        Still with your “pont by point” master plan, eh? So I got £10 from my flatmate.

        Unsurprising how hypocritical you are with ad hominem attacks, eh? No need to guess your “firearms experience” just involves radio shack talk seeing how you try to be meticulous you are with nitpicking my replies. Excessive scrutiny on another’s actions denotes personal strive to offend the other. In a more metaphorical but simple form, so you’d get it, it’s your chicken calling my Eagle a coward because the former’s to far to hear the latter’s jest. More colourful than ‘pot calling the kettle black’ for variety.

        I’m just sure as every dawn on the next day that you’re just bantering with “internet sources” or being “correct on online statistics” plainly because you can’t discuss on Bullpup and conventional layout rifle’s advantages and disadvantages. Hell, you can’t even exemplify on personal hands on experience. You can’t discuss on weapon balance, Handling, orientational implements or even a muzzle report.

        Like I’ve said before you’re just stuck clittering in front of an online glowing rectangle. While I’m replying from real world sources and experience. I might even want to add a personal phone cap and image from last year, and if you really can “research” anything from the internet (where’ you’ll usually blunder up), google up a certain guy’s patches, gear and equipment waiver records to see which month in 2010 he turned in his M933 to start orientation with the TAR-21 and which day he got qualification. Only reasons I can’t is it breaks laws and immorally exploiting a police officer’s trust. People like that are where I get my info, not the same alley where retarded memes and duckfaced skanks float about.

        So, still to lilly galled to actually talk about Bullpups instead of internet pages?..

      • W

        hmmm, still nothing to contribute to the argument but more personal attacks. Why am I not surprised?

        I see you still haven’t answered my question…don’t worry, im not holding my breath.

        have a nice evening, “mate”

      • Mike Knox

        @W
        That’s your retort? Your dainty wrists might need a break. I’ve heard better arguments than yours at the tot’s corner.

        I’ve already answered your “question”, you’re just too dull to get it. So start talking about firearms..

      • W

        Oh you want to talk about bullpups? fine.

        Im going to buy one of these fucking Tavors when they first come to the united states. Do you know why?

        Because I havent touched one since my deployment to Sinai, which was a good number of years ago. Regardless of where you may think my position is based on my arguments, don’t think for a minute that I hate bullpups. My contention that the US military will never adopt them is not a statement against the design of bullpups, but the condition of the US military. They seem to think the M4 is the best carbine platform in the world and nothing can touch it; I would gladly watch the two rifles being objectively compared to one another.

        Owning a Tavor will adequately compliment my FS2000 and MSAR AUG.

      • Mike Knox

        @W
        That’s just horrible. You’re not good at making stories up as you are at using internet “sources”.

        Unless you’ve read, the SCAR competition was meant to replace the M4 because of inherent flaws. Only one of those rifles didn’t get used for contentious reasons. But enough of that.

        I’m sure as hell all your Firearms “credentials” are just made up, seeing the trend of your posts. Tavors deployed on the sinai peninsula? HAH! That’s a laugh. The last time Israel was there was in the Six Day war Decades before the Tavor’s inception. Only an inbred moron would thing up of a farce like that.

        You really live up to my name for you, gummo..

      • W

        “Unless you’ve read, the SCAR competition was meant to replace the M4 because of inherent flaws. Only one of those rifles didn’t get used for contentious reasons. But enough of that.”

        Actually it was not, “if you’ve read”. The SCAR stands for Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle, which means it was intended as a upgraded platform for USSOCOM personnel, not to replace the M4 among rank and file troops. Later, with the individual carbine competition, a variant of the SCAR, the Advanced Carbine, is competing to become standardized.

        “I’m sure as hell all your Firearms “credentials” are just made up, seeing the trend of your posts.”

        Funny, i was thinking the same thing. Wanna know why?

        -Your reply that you had museums, and “I had the internet”
        -The SA80 is based on the EM2
        -The SIG550 is not long stroke gas operated.
        -the G36 had nothing to do with the AR18.
        -China is exporting more AR15s than the US
        -Bullpups are surpassing conventional layout rifles
        -Russia and germany surpassed the US in arms exports
        -The US Congress, intelligence agencies, WTO, UN, NATO, and SIPRI are bullshit and personal friends are much more reliable for information
        -bullpups will be adopted by the US military since they are so revolutionary and groundbreaking, despite the US military’s decades of experience with the conventional M16/M4.
        -The SCAR was designed to replace the M4.

        Sorry gumbo, but you’re all fucked up.

        “Tavors deployed on the sinai peninsula? HAH! That’s a laugh.”

        Well, if you actually have deployed there you would be able to put 2 and 2 together, since the US is located in the eastern zone, which is coincidentally located on the Israeli border. Yup have actually been deployed to Israel too. Its a great country.

        “The last time Israel was there was in the Six Day war Decades before the Tavor’s inception. Only an inbred moron would thing up of a farce like that”

        To be precise Israel was there last in 1979, as it was egypts. sorry buddy, but i knew that (that is something you learn in elementary school geography).

        But you learned your craft in a museum and you train police officers and soldiers the secret art of the bullpup…while taking vacations to jamaica. Do you drive a aston martin?

      • Mike Knox

        @W
        Hah! Still can’t get over your failures. You really can’t talk about the firearm on topic can’t you? You’re back off topic again.

        Just like your “sinai” claim, everything you claim to know about Firearms or your “credentials” are just made up.

        Keep talking gummo, you’re reinforcing your ‘inbred retard’ image..

    • Sid

      Doubtful. The physical mechanics of using a bullpup do not adapt well in CQB. Quick reloads are not as possible with a bullpup as they are with a traditional configuration. There are too many other options for well-established platforms.

      • Joe Schmoe

        It’s funny is how off the mark you are on this post.

        Bullpups like the Tavor were designed to be superior in CQB environments due to fitting a longer barrel in a shorter weapon and a host of other reasons.

        And yet no one has brought up any basis for this fallacy that bullpups do not allow quick reloads. How about some proof finally on this claim?

      • Mark

        “Bullpups like the Tavor were designed to be superior in CQB environments due to fitting a longer barrel in a shorter weapon and a host of other reasons.”

        Why do I car how long my barrel is in a CQB environment? It’s nothing against the Tavor, it’s just that most of us have been training on the AR platform so much it’s too difficult to swap over to this platform for serious work. If it was a rifle with a forward magazine and similar controls or more simple controls than the AR we can adapt but this is just too much of a change.

        Not taking anything away from the gun at all though. It’s just a reality that many won’t want to start from square one when they have years of AR MOA training.

      • W

        “Bullpups like the Tavor were designed to be superior in CQB environments due to fitting a longer barrel in a shorter weapon and a host of other reasons.”

        they were designed to be shorter, but the AR15 design is streamlined and highly mobile. its light weight makes it highly desirable in CQB.

        “And yet no one has brought up any basis for this fallacy that bullpups do not allow quick reloads. How about some proof finally on this claim?”

        I would like to have a competition with anybody if they can reload their bullpup faster than i can my SCAR or AR15. I will put a years worth of income on the table.

      • Mike Knox

        @W The IMI Tavor was developed to replace the M16 in Israel after all. Especially with the tight quarters and fast paced combat they deal with. A lighter weapon isn’t as good as a lighter and smaller one when it’s still just a tad shorter than it’s heavier predecessor..

      • W

        “The IMI Tavor was developed to replace the M16 in Israel after all. Especially with the tight quarters and fast paced combat they deal with. A lighter weapon isn’t as good as a lighter and smaller one when it’s still just a tad shorter than it’s heavier predecessor..”

        It was developed to replace the M16, though not for the reasons you think so. For one, it is not vastly superior. Two, the political climate in Israel is encouraging the country to become more self sufficient with its proprietary arms industry assets. Unsurprisingly, they are pushing for a domestically produced rifle and machine gun family, which is smart on their part. The M4s and M16s are still being used by many Israeli units and special operations (sayeret matkal), due to large numbers in inventory. Many that are worn out or aging are being replaced by tavors.

        bullpups would be easier to manipulate while inside armored vehicles, which is conducive for the IDF since their operations are highly mechanized and reliant on heavy armor.

      • Joe Schmoe

        @ Mark –

        So because you are coming from an AR setup and it would be harder for YOU to adapt to bullpup is a reason to put down bullpups in general?

        A guy coming from a bullpup to an AR might say the same thing.

        @ W –

        Come to Israel then, I’m sure there are a lot of users here that can match you doing combat reloads. But then again, I asked for proof to back up such statements and you offer none.

        So until you conduct or find such a test, let’s lay off that baseless claim.

        And weight? The CTAR-21 that has a longer barrel in a more compact profile weight around a half-a-pound more than the M4, I don’t think that’s enough to even warrant mention.

        In addition, it was shown in internal tests to be superior in dust environments to the M4 (as well as more accurate), but then again 90+% of jams are caused due to magazines.

        Sayeret Matkal uses many different and specialized weapons, but regular Israeli SF units have already begun the transition to the Tavor.

      • Mike Knox

        @W
        Hey guess what, year by year, Israeli units are transitioning to the TAR-21 with the goal of completely replacing the AR-15 inventory with TAR-21s. Some would say, it gets done easier by selling off their AR-15 leftovers.

        Heavily reliant on Motorized units? Did it ever occur to you that the Six Day War ended a long long time ago, in a country the internet rarely cares about, except for oiks who have a beef with Hebrews and their Pad..

      • W

        “Come to Israel then, I’m sure there are a lot of users here that can match you doing combat reloads. But then again, I asked for proof to back up such statements and you offer none.

        So until you conduct or find such a test, let’s lay off that baseless claim.”

        there are plenty of videos of combat reloading a AR15 platform. just do a youtube search. you offer no tests either so were stuck in a mexican standoff.

        I said that the M4/M16 still remains in large numbers in Israel. They are indeed phasing them out with the Tavor, understandibly so. I agree with them doing that.

        “Hey guess what, year by year, Israeli units are transitioning to the TAR-21 with the goal of completely replacing the AR-15 inventory with TAR-21s. Some would say, it gets done easier by selling off their AR-15 leftovers.”

        hey guess what? I agree with you. They are transitioning to the Tar 21. Im saying that M4s and M16s are still in inventories, which is also true.

        “Heavily reliant on Motorized units? Did it ever occur to you that the Six Day War ended a long long time ago, in a country the internet rarely cares about, except for oiks who have a beef with Hebrews and their Pad..”

        jesus f–king christ dude. seriously? yes heavily reliant on motorized units. Armor is extremely effective in a MOUT environment, especially vehicles specifically designed to support troops in such a environment, such as the Merkava, its APC variant, and bulldozers.

        The merkava is designed to transport troops, which is conducive for urban warfare. Did israel utilize only light units in Operation Cast Lead? not remotely, as that would be stupid. Yes Israeli has heavy armor for a reason, and that is because it is:

        1.) outnumbered by less than friendly neighbors that possess armor themselves.
        2.) highly effective when strategically employed properly in MOUT (military operations in urban terrain).
        3.) heavy armor reduces casualties in MOUT and forces the terrorists to use more resources to create bigger bombs, which increases their probability of being compromised and destroyed.
        4.) heavy armor is essential for defensive warfare, which is why the IDF exists in the first place.
        5.) Israel lacks the manpower to needlessly put individual soldiers at risk, which is parallel with point #3.

      • Joe Schmoe

        @ W –

        =”So until you conduct or find such a test, let’s lay off that baseless claim.”

        there are plenty of videos of combat reloading a AR15 platform. just do a youtube search. you offer no tests either so were stuck in a mexican standoff.”

        Yup, so let’s agree not to bring up this claim again until there was some contest done between a champion bullpup shooter and champion AR shooter. In any case the difference will probably be so minuscule in either direction that it wouldn’t matter in real life.

        I threw you a bone as well by mentioning that even though in testing the Tavor was less prone to jamming, the truth is that 90+% (U.S. Army statistic) of jams are caused by the magazine anyways.

      • Mike Knox

        @W
        You’re quite the joke aren’t you? Unless you’ve seen the news, all the fire fights in Israel right now is done in urban areas where there’s no room for armour and can only be fought on foot. The Merkava was designed according to it’s name which is Hebrew for chariot, a fast mobile fighting vehicle, not whatever is Hebrew for carriage. It’s designed as a Main Battle Tank, not an APC. It’s carry room can fit six troops but that’s just a design excess, not intent.

        Your “points” are just moot. You’re talking about open fielded fighting which is impractical in Israel. Since it’s not obvious to you, IDF troops fight militants (not terrorists as you would assume, who also don’t use Armour and such tactics) in Close Quarters. By Close I mean very close, as in alley and hallway fighting where targets are engaged from tight spaces and along buildings. And maneuvers are done building to building through spaces less than a few shoulders width. The M16 was good for mobility but not in portability. That’s why the TAR-21 came about. Since that it’s their new S.I. weapon, that means that’s where they do their fighting..

      • W

        “You’re quite the joke aren’t you? ”

        likewise. you have debunked nothing and continually grasp at straws and then resort to personal attacks when you cannot refute anything. Im not trying to be a asshole, Im trying to tell you that you have a misunderstanding of how things are.

        “Unless you’ve seen the news, all the fire fights in Israel right now is done in urban areas where there’s no room for armour and can only be fought on foot.”

        LOL. If you did see the news, you would notice IDF Merkavas. They’re kind of hard to miss. You seem to act like the IDF only employs light infantry in its operations, which is untrue. No respectible army would do this (Russia learned the hard way after using just armor to take Grozny).

        “The Merkava was designed according to it’s name which is Hebrew for chariot, a fast mobile fighting vehicle, not whatever is Hebrew for carriage. It’s designed as a Main Battle Tank, not an APC. It’s carry room can fit six troops but that’s just a design excess, not intent.”

        The Merkava was designed to transport troops in addition to its role as a main battle tank; no other produced main battle tank has this capability. Its increased cargo space allows MOUT concepts to be realized, such as improved crew survivability, more efficient casualty evacuation, employment of scouts, and command and control. It is not just a “design excess”; it was designed that way because Israel fights typically in urban environments.

        “Your “points” are just moot. You’re talking about open fielded fighting which is impractical in Israel.”

        Nope. I am talking about MOUT, military operations in urban terrain. You would know that I emphasized this if you actually read my reply and applied critical thinking.

        “Since it’s not obvious to you, IDF troops fight militants (not terrorists as you would assume, who also don’t use Armour and such tactics) in Close Quarters.”

        Now you are arguing over semantics. Terrorist, militant, whatever. According to the US, Hamas is a terrorist organization. Hezbollah is also classified as a terrorist organization. Ipso facto, the “militants” the IDF have been fighting fit the classification of “terrorist”. that is why i used the term.

        Obviously the terrorists don’t use armor, though their tactics of asymetric warfare necessitate the use of armor for the following reasons i have already listed above.

        “By Close I mean very close, as in alley and hallway fighting where targets are engaged from tight spaces and along buildings. And maneuvers are done building to building through spaces less than a few shoulders width.”

        Which is why armor is important for infantry on the ground. Armor can also be used for breaching and clearing obstacles, cover, medical evacuation, observation with optics, and, of course, superior firepower. I already covered that.

        “The M16 was good for mobility but not in portability. That’s why the TAR-21 came about. Since that it’s their new S.I. weapon, that means that’s where they do their fighting..”

        The TAR21 would indeed be more suitable for urban warfare. Israelis fight with a variety of small arms, not just the TAR21.

      • Joe Schmoe

        @ Mike –

        Name has nothing to do with the purpose of the vehicle.

        Merkava = Chariot
        Achzarit (previous main APC) = Cruel (inside joke)
        Namer (new APC based on Merkava4) = Tiger

        @ W –

        The Merkava was designed to be able to carry up to six infantry or several stretchers if needed, it was not a design by-product. There is also a medical version of the Merkava (indistinguishable from the outside) that houses several medical bed units.

        ==”LOL. If you did see the news, you would notice IDF Merkavas. They’re kind of hard to miss. You seem to act like the IDF only employs light infantry in its operations, which is untrue. No respectible army would do this (Russia learned the hard way after using just armor to take Grozny).”

        “The Merkava was designed to transport troops in addition to its role as a main battle tank; no other produced main battle tank has this capability. Its increased cargo space allows MOUT concepts to be realized, such as improved crew survivability, more efficient casualty evacuation, employment of scouts, and command and control. It is not just a “design excess”; it was designed that way because Israel fights typically in urban environments.”

        Yes, all of this was put to excellent use in Operation Cast Lead.

        ==”Obviously the terrorists don’t use armor, though their tactics of asymetric warfare necessitate the use of armor for the following reasons i have already listed above.”

        This though is not accurate.

        Hezbollah does employ a wide range of personal armour, nearly all its basic infantry and artillery crew are protected by Flak Jackets while some of its soldiers designated for shootouts/close combat have full Class 3+ (stops rifle) armour.

        Hamas also sometimes uses armour but it is more scarce.

      • Mike Knox

        @W
        Why am I not surprised your reply composition rings of Internet Mastery of the Faux Ruses.

        Unless you’re familiar with media reporting standards, broadcasts are just a slim shot of the picture. You can See a lot of Merkavas only out of stock footage of the recent mark. In reality however, they’re more on doing patrols with HMMWVs. Light armour’s only around rarely, and if they are, they’re either APCs or Engineer vehicles.

        The rest of your reply is just plain old dreary. You’re just bickering about this and that, but nothing factual or supportive of your assumptive claims. I’ve seen dog turds change colour under the summer heat more amusingly than your reply.

        @Joe Shmoe

        The Merkava designation came about after the design request of having the engine at the front to get better personnel protection. They’re following the old Armour Survival Philosophy: if disabled, they become a fixed gun. If incapacitated, a pillbox. If trapped, a bunker. If destroyed, a tomb. I didn’t remember the exact wording actually but the Idea’s all there..

      • W

        “Why am I not surprised your reply composition rings of Internet Mastery of the Faux Ruses.”

        Right…the internet. you can do some serious research on that state of the art 56K dial up internet service LOL… in the mountains.

        “Unless you’re familiar with media reporting standards, broadcasts are just a slim shot of the picture. You can See a lot of Merkavas only out of stock footage of the recent mark. In reality however, they’re more on doing patrols with HMMWVs. Light armour’s only around rarely, and if they are, they’re either APCs or Engineer vehicles.”

        It goes back to my original point: the IDF is heavily mechanized and reliant on heavy armor. Light armor would be soft skinned vehicles, which are inadequate in urban warfare and counter insurgency. Very few armies have mastered the art of urban warfare and utilization of adequate armor assets conducive to counter insurgency like the IDF. Indeed, the US unwisely re-learned many of these lessons in the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars. Armor is as important in crushing insurgencies as it is in the open field, especially tanks and APCs.

        “The rest of your reply is just plain old dreary. You’re just bickering about this and that, but nothing factual or supportive of your assumptive claims. I’ve seen dog turds change colour under the summer heat more amusingly than your reply.”

        You can hate the information all you want, but point out where it is incorrect.

        “The Merkava designation came about after the design request of having the engine at the front to get better personnel protection. They’re following the old Armour Survival Philosophy: if disabled, they become a fixed gun. If incapacitated, a pillbox. If trapped, a bunker. If destroyed, a tomb. I didn’t remember the exact wording actually but the Idea’s all there..”

        You are continuing to argue over why it was named what it was named. The fact stands: it is a main battle tank designed around crew survivability and improved flexibility compared to other tanks. It has the ability to serve in roles otherwise infeasible for equivalent main battle tank chassis, such as having troop transport, APC, medical, and command and control capabilities.

      • Mike Knox

        @W
        56k dial up? I doubt you were sober coming up with that “smart” retort, or just plain old sensible.

        “art of urban warfare and utilization of adequate armor assets conducive to counter insurgency”, working overtime comicbook guy? Israel isn’t fighting an insurgency, dumbass. Using Armour all the time is inadequate compared to using Light Patrol units geared for CQC, hence the point of the TAR-21’s replacement of M16s. It’s just Common Sense, but obviously that’s amongst you mental gaps.

        Unlike you, bickering doesn’t count as informative. It may be for you on your D&D nights with your pasty chaps, but not in the real world.

        And apparently you’re not too keen on reading. That last section isn’t addressed to you. Since it doesn’t occur to you, that passage is the grounds for most Armour design priorities since the Great War on the western front. In that last sentence of yours, you’re referring to just IFVs, not MBTs.

        Unless you’re aware, dorkman, you’ve steered this off topic with your Merkava argument when you were hassling about Israel’s position on the M16. Nice driving, gummo..

    • Alex-mac

      U.S customs is already using the Steyr Aug. The Steyr Aug has been available for decades and is very similar to the Tavor. I see little reason to switch.

      • Gadfly

        “US Customs” has not existed for almost a decade. The AUGs were on the way out about the time Customs became ICE (now HSI). AUG’s are now totally gone from inventory and MP5’s are about 90% gone. Replaced by the M4 for Agents and the Mk18 for SRT (SWAT types). Having dealt with all three platforms extensively, I will take a Colt over an AUG any day. MP5 was great for getting in and out of vehicles and clearing halls and stairs etc… I miss it, but the ergonomics sucked next to the M4…

      • Charles

        I’d be willing to bet you if I had a Tavor.
        A years income would be nice

      • W

        the AUG used by US Customs is so 1980/early 1990. Almost every law enforcement agency uses a AR15 type rifle. They have even replaced the newer G36s in many instances.

    • A.K. for T-7

      “Taurus bought a licence to manufacture the tavor tar-21 here in Brazil, unfortunately only few special batallions received due to the high cost.”

      That’s a completely inaccurate information. Taurus made an agreement to license produce the Tavor to the brazilian army in antecipation to a foreseen competition to replace the FAL. When the Army stated that no competition would happen and that they would go with the Imbel developed IA2 rifle, the deal ceased and not a single Tavor was made in Brazil by Taurus factories, let alone put in use buy SF units. Taurus later created the CT556 rifle to compete in the police market and that’s all. No Tavors in Brazil.

      Taurus always makes this agreements to try to be the lone supplier or intermediate deals for the armed forces and police. Last year they made a similar deal with HK to have exclusivity in selling HK weapons in Brazil, antecipating a major buy to reequip the Federal Police (HK416, HK417 and more MP-5s to replace older ones in use for 50 years now).

  • Alex Pawelczyk

    It’s a shame us Californians will have to wait till someone can come up with a bullet button for it. By then, hopefully it will have gone down in price xD

    • PackingPanda

      Seriously, and we have to deal with the 30″ OAL requirement too. Kinda kills the fun/practicality of the Tavor, don’t it?

  • Blg

    I also agree with Higgs about the gun, but I’ll leave the whoring to him.

  • Pathfinder

    If the MSRP is really around $2k, I will hold off on the Kel-tec RFB!!!!! Methinks it will be higher tho.

    I disagree 100% with your assessment of the timing tho. The bubble started back up as early as it did because the populace knows that there is no choice for POTUS this year. Anyone really think Romney will rein in the BATFE??? Or go easy on gun-owners/buyers??? Doubtful.

    Here’s hoping they have the US Tavor on the streets in this country before the election. It will sell like crazy well after the election, in fact, right up to the moment .gov shuts ‘em down.

  • TangledThorns

    This blog post is based on months on old news but you’ll find further details with video in this thread here.

    http://bullpupforum.com/index.php?topic=478.0

    I have my eye on this rifle along with the ARX-160.

  • ray

    is it me or do all manufacturers like that $2000 price point, I think they ask that much just cause they can. I don’t see 2 grand sitting there, or for the rfb or colts new. 308 and regular ar. my ak was 500 bucks and it hasn’t gone wrong once yet, is this really 4 times an ak? I just don’t thinkso. anyone who owns a $2000+ gun..honestly is it worth it

    • RB

      You hit it right on. At the end of the day, a product is worth what someone will pay for it. The Tavor has been much-hyped even though, really, nothing about it is new. Steyr AUG and French FAMAS have been around for decades and are identical for all intents and purposes. A user might appreciate small ergonomic improvements but that is nothing revolutionary and will make little difference in an operational environment.

      What it boils down to is this: the assault rifle has been around for more than a half-century, and it’s reached the zenith of its development. Just as the longbow, then the crossbow, then the musket could each only advance so far, so has the rifle. The next revolution will be something entirely different–flechettes and caseless rounds never really panned out. Directed energy? Airburst grenades? Who knows. But the rifle is as good as it’s going to get.

    • Doug

      I’m with you on the $2000 mark. The only reason I’m hoping to get one is because I’m finally nearing a time in my life I can afford to buy a bullpup and put it on patrol with me since SBR’s are not legal in my state (and probably won’t be for some time).

      I was kind of annoyed when $1000, then $1500 was the going price for my desired platforms. They’ve always been just out of reach. But then there are other people that just throw money at something that catches their eye someday and then hardly use it. Oh well. I chose a profession that doesn’t pay the best.

  • Erik

    I would be considerably more interested in US receiver, IWI marked Galils (SAR, AR, and the like) in 5.56 and 7.62×51 than the Tavor.

    I have a Century Golani and an old Action Arms import, but both are in 5.56. Would love to add a 7.62 version to my collection.

  • Burst

    Color me unimpressed.

    The civilian Tavor, with it’s heavier barrel and lack of silly drainage holes, would be a different story.

  • Zach

    I’m more interested in why Michael Kassnar / TWA / Charles Daly is no longer involved, when he’s the person and company that was showing this at SHOT 2012.

    The original Charles Daly / KBI went out of business when a fancy 1911 they had contracted for from an Israeli company magically appeared at Magnum Research for the same or lower price. One might think there had been a double-cross. The overtones of this press release suggest a repeat.

    I was briefly interested in the Tavor but lost interest long before this announcement, and my interest is now zero. Nearly all bullpups suffer from the same problems – the only ones that seem to go halfway to fixing them are the Kel-Tec RFB and KSG, and to a lesser extent the FN FS2000. The latter would be more interesting if the trigger wasn’t horrible and if it could use a range of AR15 magazines instead of only GI ones.

  • Bryan S.

    PLus side… The high price and eventual discontinuance will mean whoever did buy one will end up with a good return when they sell it in 10 years.

    Or the NFA will be repealed and we can import the real ones… I know… Im laughing inside too (halfheartedly)

  • Mouse

    IT TOOK THEM LONG ENOUGH. Wonder what took so long in finding someone in the US to sell it? I mean, Canada has had the thing for years now.

  • Volk CNC

    It’s great news my neighbors to the south will finally get to see the Tavor. I purchased one of the first civilian rifles available back in 2006. Amazing rifle. You really have to have the thing in your hands to appreciate just how perfectly balanced it it. It becomes an extension of your body and just feels right. The rifle really shines in close in or vehicle borne use.

    I’m a bit upset about the projected sub $2k price. I paid $3000 Canadian for mine. You guys suck!

  • http://elastomatik.wordpress.com/ Edgar Castelo

    The Alien films would benefit from the “kewl” look…
    They all get killed, anyway! LOL
    Make a far more complicated and expensive weapon, just because you can, and call that “progress”;
    Every one to his/her own taste, in the end…

  • Chase

    I like the look of it much better than the AUG. But seriously, why can’t we move to nitrocarb’ed barrels?

    • Other Steve

      Melonite can make a good barrel better, or a fair barrel into a horrible mess. It needs to be done right and I certainly wouldn’t want cheaper companies doing it. It’s a good surface conversion but not an end all barrel treatment. Be careful what you wish for.

    • Carlos U.

      I like the look of the Styer, but HATE that trigger.

  • Raoul O’Shaugnessy

    Rear end of the gun looks pretty KelTec-y…wonder what firearms maker with heavy experience in plastics is gonna make the receiver for them.

  • JMD

    I’m going to start saving now, just in case they actually get these to market in a timely manner. I’ve wanted a Tavor for many years. I’m going to be a little irritated if it doesn’t pan out this time, yet again.

  • W

    Ive been waiting a very long time for this, meticulously researching and praying that taurus wouldnt be manufacturing them for the US civilian market.

    Im just excited.

    • mosinman

      me too : ) this rifle is long overdue to be imported

  • Vhyrus

    SHUT UP! JUST SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY!! TAKE IT DAMN YOU!!

    • jdun1911

      Someone posted that it cost almost 3k in Canada.

      I agreed with Dk-Prof that good bullpup shouldn’t cost more than $800. I also agree with him that the Tavor doesn’t bring anything new to the table. It just another typical bullpup design.

      3k is a lot of money. With that amount you can automatically get a three gun setup and still have money left over.
      $1500 AR15 with optic or $1700 if you go for SBR.
      $500 for Glock
      $400 for 870 or 590.

      • Komrad

        I think you might want to spring for a Saiga-12 or maybe a cheap Stoeger or Weatherby semi rather than a pump.

      • W

        well if you dont want it, then dont buy it. some people buy what they want because they can. 800 dollars for a “good” bullpup? you cant get a “good” AR15 for that.

      • Tinkerer

        I wrote on another post about how the free market works. The manufacturer can ask for whatever price they want, but in the end it will be the balance between offer and demand what will determine the price. If the demand is high and the offer is low, the prices will skyrocket. If the demand is low and the offer is high, the prices will plummet. Nowadays everybody is offering their own AR-15, so the offer is pretty dang high. Of course, there is some high demand for those, so the price remains at a certain level.

        Now, there will be one manufacturer offering this polymer-bodied bullpup rifle, so the offer will be quite low. It will depend on how high the demand is what will determine the market price of this rifle.

      • jdun1911

        W,

        The rifle is made out of plastic and cost 3 time as much as the metal AR15. It’s a typical bullpup that has the classic flaws associated with the design. It’s not worth the money.

      • Stella

        Telling other people what to do with their money is a bit silly, let alone to ascribe value to something for someone you have never met. From my time in the Mid-East, including Israel, there is no 5.56 rifle I have wanted more than a Tavor. They really are compact and ergonomically sound.

        Perhaps some of us can’t get excited for yet another AR (or some minute tweak made to it) and want something different for their next 5.56 platform. The “AR or bust” attitude is boring.

        Frankly, I would rather save my money for a Tavor, an AUG, a Beretta 160-whatever–heck anything–than spend $1200 on yet another AR.

      • W

        “The rifle is made out of plastic and cost 3 time as much as the metal AR15. It’s a typical bullpup that has the classic flaws associated with the design. It’s not worth the money.”

        its worth the money if i determine if it is. that is how capitalism works. jesus christ, do they teach economics anymore in high school?

        and the tavor is constructed mostly of high impact polymer/composites and steel. not just “plastic”. ironically, the same comments were made about the M16 when it first came out.

        “Telling other people what to do with their money is a bit silly, let alone to ascribe value to something for someone you have never met. ”

        Ill say it is utterly stupid. apparently people do not know how our system in America works.

      • jdun1911

        W,

        Capitalism will work the same way for the Tavor as it did for the ACR, SCAR, MSAR, and countless other before them. In order to be competitive in America rifle business you need to price it at or below AR level. In order to be competitive you need a strong third party support for the rifle.

        1% off all the people that posted that said they will by it on release date will probably buy it. With over 60 millions (almost three time the Great Depression) Americans out of work. I doubt many people have 3k to throw around.

        The AR isn’t made of plastic. It receivers isn’t plastic. It trigger isn’t plastic. The only thing that is plastic in the AR is the stock, hand guard, and pistol grip.

        I actually wonder if you even shot a gun before.

        No high level shooting competitor has ever won a major event with a bullpup. No major training school teach bullpup as their primary weapon of choice. Even Special Forces used convention design like the AR instead of their military issued bullpup. There are reasons.

        The bullpup design is fundamentally flawed.

      • Stella

        IWI is likely pricing the Tavor as such for reasons of scale. They may not sell them by the truck load, but IWI is smart enough that they would not have gotten into this if they could not turn a profit, which is all that really matters. Lucky, also, that IWI is not a small company like MSAR and the Tavor is turning into an international success (unlike the ACR and SCAR). In short, neither IWI nor their products are going away anytime soon.

        For someone out of work, a $2000 rifle is the same as a $1200 rifle (well really $2000 after all the silly do-dads to make it high speed): unaffordable. Clearly that is not IWI’s market and I don’t see how its relevant to this discussion.

        As for plastic, my experience with IDF soldiers illuminated two salient points: that they love the Tavor and that some are absolutely brutal on their weapons. Plastic or not, the Tavor is holding up. The proof here is in the pudding.

        Lastly, I don’t care about competition shooting. I don’t care about fighting off some tinfoil zombie communist jihad. I want a rifle that that has combat chops, that is different, and that is fun. Too bad I am a poor graduate student. Perhaps I will sell my ARs to buy a Tavor!

      • W

        “Capitalism will work the same way for the Tavor as it did for the ACR, SCAR, MSAR, and countless other before them. In order to be competitive in America rifle business you need to price it at or below AR level. In order to be competitive you need a strong third party support for the rifle.”

        *facepalm. there are other rifles selling out there that are outside the Ar15 design. The reason why the AR15 is popular is because of the plethora of spare parts and accessories available for them (which have the support of the US defense industry since the platform is the US military’s standard weapon). You are making unfair comparisons.

        Some people like the idea of learning and getting familiar with other rifles besides the tried and true Ar15 design. I like trying different things.

        “1% off all the people that posted that said they will by it on release date will probably buy it. With over 60 millions (almost three time the Great Depression) Americans out of work. I doubt many people have 3k to throw around.”

        the unemployment rate is at 22%, though not higher than the great depression (consider the US population size now compared to 80 years ago). plenty of people will have money to throw around. Gun owners that whine about money need to find a different hobby or win the lottery; i don’t know what to tell them.If you had one inkling of what it takes to put a new design of rifle on the shelf then you would be more empathetic.

        “The AR isn’t made of plastic. It receivers isn’t plastic. It trigger isn’t plastic. The only thing that is plastic in the AR is the stock, hand guard, and pistol grip. ”

        this doesn’t change the fact that the M16 faced criticism for being “space agey” and “plasticy” (even contributing to the rumor that it was produced by Mattel). The Ar15 was also first introduced in a era of wood and steel, making it revolutionary in its time. Im pointing out the hilarity of you criticizing the tavor for something the M16 was guilty of in its introduction (both baseless piles of bullshit).

        “I actually wonder if you even shot a gun before.”

        no ive never touched a gun in my life LOL. ;) (as i look at my gunsmith and armorer certification the wall alongside my tab)

        “No high level shooting competitor has ever won a major event with a bullpup.”

        shooting competitions are saturated with AR15s. Americans are very familiar with the AR15 platform. Bullpups are more popular in europe. Again, a unfair comparison.

        “No major training school teach bullpup as their primary weapon of choice.”

        instructors at major training schools are former military and police, so they use AR15s and have extensive background experience with the weapon. Again, unfair comparison.

        “Even Special Forces used convention design like the AR instead of their military issued bullpup. There are reasons. ”

        Again, the US military’s primary weapon is the M4. there is a reason why the SCAR utilizes similar ergonomics. It would make no sense for US SOCOM to relearn the bullpup platform when so much experience, training, and spare parts are available for the M4.

        “The bullpup design is fundamentally flawed.”

        I believe that bullpups have glaring flaws, though this is being remedied by newer generations of bullpups and improvements over existing platforms. The tavor takes many lessons learned with bullpups and comes up with solutions.

      • Mike Knox

        @W

        I can’t help it but “certification”? In a reply written like that? Keyboard commando. An 18B isn’t Armourer MOS.

        If it doesn’t occur to you, almost everyone goes through Familiarisation nowadays. And when the more than three fourths of the U.S.’s allies using Bullpups, it wouldn’t be a surprise that SF units like SOCOM wouldn’t have a problem with adapting a Bullpup. They just won’t because of politics, not ability.

      • W

        “I can’t help it but “certification”? In a reply written like that? Keyboard commando. An 18B isn’t Armourer MOS.”

        yeah certification, as in a piece of paper indicating that the course was completed. It is also on my DD214. It sounds to me like you need a glass of STFU since you cannot refute a single thing I have said and it is obvious you are desperate since you are resorting to personal attacks. Classic. Grow up.

        “If it doesn’t occur to you, almost everyone goes through Familiarisation nowadays.”

        there is a difference between a familiarization course and having 5, 10, 15, or 20 years with a particular weapon system and its employment in a combat environment. A familiarization course with a bullpup will never be as effective all around as YEARS of experience with a conventional rifle and vice versa. This is a fact. Anybody with any professional experience will know this.

        “And when the more than three fourths of the U.S.’s allies using Bullpups, it wouldn’t be a surprise that SF units like SOCOM wouldn’t have a problem with adapting a Bullpup. They just won’t because of politics, not ability.”

        Dude, give me a fucking break. 3/4 of US’s allies are not using bullpups, though a large number are. SF units would have a problem using bullpups since they wouldn’t have to; using a different rifle would place strains on training and logistics.

        And politics? USSOCOM adopts what it needs because it needs it. They pick what works, and for good reason. With the M4 and SCAR available, there would be no reason to use a bullpup except when integrating with a allied nation’s troops on the ground.

      • Mike Knox

        @W
        Wow, that first paragraph of your reply was over defensive. Means something doesn’t it. If I had a pence every time I’ve seen someone reply with DD214 about their “qualifications”, I’d get myself something worth at least £200.

        Does any of your replies have any factual content that actually support your claims? Because that one doesn’t..

      • W

        hmmm, you seem pretty adamant on sources, which i provided, though your posts seem to mysteriously lack any evidence to back them up. Of course, this is not the first time you would make such a small “omission”.

        Keep spinning though. Point out which information I have provided that is untrue.

      • Mike Knox

        @W
        Well that was a short reply for a change. Salty gut after getting your “qualification” shot down?

      • W

        Ill ask again, which information have I provided that is untrue?

    • JMD

      I’m throwing my money at the screen as hard as I can, but nothing is happening!

      • Carlos U.

        That’s because 20 bucks ain’t gonna cut it.

  • jdun1911

    Ok someone posted with link to a Canada gunshop. It $2,749.00 up north. Canadian dollar is around the same value of US dollar currently.

    http://www.canadaammo.com/product.php?productid=12&cat=0&page=1

    • David/Sharpie

      Yes the dollars are about the same, but we have to go thru a HELL of a lot more bullshit with importation, registration etc fees than you do, so for us it is $2700 but for you I’d expect around $2000.

      A Gen 4 G17 cost me $720 before tax, how much would that be in the US? I’ve heard around $500

  • Mike Knox

    Why are the comments mostly about it’s price? It’s not like just about everyone’ll up and buy one the moment it gets on the shelves and keep using it all the time..

  • Doug

    If it stays under $2K I’m probably in. I was warming up to the MSAR E4, but they’ve gone out of business and I’d like to stick to something with active customer support.

    • jdun1911

      Gunsmithing is easy. Getting parts from a defunct manufacture is the trouble.

  • Lance

    That’s whats aggravating $3000 for a gun made with plastic and and stamped metal parts A Galil is better and cheaper. Time fore some common sense to prices when buying mass produced military style weapons.

    • JMD

      Oh, a Galil is better? You’ve spent a lot of time using both weapon systems?

      • Lance

        Traditional Assault rifle are better than bullpups the fact too that the Galil had a trigger guard and used the exilent AK action to a extent made it better to me.

      • Joe Schmoe

        Lance is what’s known as a “troll”.

        He spams nonsense on many different Defense related website about stuff he knows nothing about but gets people riled up. Ignore him.

    • Lance

      Yet Joe your full of crap and never prove your side of comments. so shut up jerk wade.

      • Joe Schmoe

        Dude, the folks over at DODBuzz already laughed your ass off the blog with your ridiculous statements.

        So tell me then, how is the Galil better than the Tavor?

      • Lance

        Joe your being a smug jerk wade again All I said that traditional Assault rifles a better than bullpups many here felt the same way. YOu dont know crap about anything and your a troll and a butt-head as well.

    • Komrad

      Protip Lane:
      Much of what you state as fact is opinion. If you instead stated it as opinion, you’d probably get a better response. There are merits to both conventional and bullpup firearms. Bullpups can balance better and have better ergonomics. Conventional rifles often have better triggers and are often easier for left-handed shooters to use.

      You could easily argue either side, but a blanket statement is not an argument, it is an assertion. So, next time, phrase it like an opinion and use a little more punctuation. You’ll probably get a better response.

    • W

      dude, stop posting about money and cost. get a different job, a better paying one, or win the lottery. i dont know what to tell you.

      One thing that is a pet peeve with me is gun owners bitching about money. there are plenty of “cheaper” hobbies out there.

  • Sean

    I’d rather have a decent AR. And a shotgun. And a few handguns. And a case or three of ammo. I could get all of those things for the same price as this rifle.

    • Komrad

      You could purchase 10 Mosin Nagant M91/30 rifles with 440 rounds of ammo each for the price of one Tavor (assuming purchasing local with no shipping charges).

      • Komrad

        To be clear to those thumbing me down, I don’t think a Mosin-Nagant or 10 would be an acceptable replacement for any 5.56 semi-auto. I just think of all guns in terms of how many Mosins I can buy instead. It’s just a way to help visualize the price/value of a gun.

  • -V-

    One thing to point out is the Tavor has a metal receiver. The plastic is there to protect the metal parts from dings, scratches, and the elements. Looking forward to this piece. My main curiosity is how is the trigger on this rifle.

    • Dman

      Trigger is 5lbs short break and clear.

  • NickB

    I hope my local range doesn’t mind the fact that it doesn’t have a safty, but then again I just won’t pay the extra $600 for the other parts and use the money to bribe the range master.

    • ThomasD

      Look at the still photo at the top of the page.

      Just behind the trigger and above the handle you might notice an engraved semi circle and a small protruding fiddly bit. That’s a selector switch, one selection being ‘safe.’

      I’m guessing the civilian model will not rotate all the way forward.

      • NickB

        My mistake then, I’m not very familiar with the bullpup reciver and I thought it was a side selector like the AR platform.

  • D

    Oh look, it’s another 5.56mm rifle with a 16-18 inch barrel! I like how it looks, but having a gun that looks snazzy isn’t worth a few grand, considering it doesn’t do anything particularly special or different. I could see it being expensive if it was something special, but really and truly it does the same thing as any other 5.56 rifle with the same barrel length would do in 99% of all cases.

    • Jon

      Just for a reciprocal view, the beauty of a bullpup design is having a full rifle length barrel in a weapon the size of a SBR conventional rifle. In places like Washington state (where I live currently) citizens are not allowed to create new SBR’s. You can build an AR pistol (yuck) but a short weapon for indoors (read home defense) is relegated to pistols or a 16″ carbine. A 16″ barreled bullpup with overall length greater than 26″ misses the NFA classification and as such is available to those of us who would like a shorter weapon but are restricted by senseless laws that give boogeyman status to shorter barrels.

  • Sam

    Stogies and assault rifles. This man has class.

    • http://www.texasguntrust.com SC-Texas

      Thanks for using my video. The rifle felt nice. I like its feel almost as much as the steyr aug.

  • Will

    2K and they couldn’t include better iron sights? really?

  • SM

    I really like bullpup style rifles and assault rifles in general, but I can’t justify spending $1,000+ on a toy.

    I’ll stick to my “outdated” bolt action surplus rifles and pump action shotguns if I ever actually had to use a firearm for something other than shooting paper.

  • Ruff

    The biggest failing of the AUG was it didn’t use commonly available mags (same with the MicroTechs). The barrel swap was easy but crappy trigger. I wonder how the connect rod trigger on this feels? Probably just as bad.

    To those arguing about CQB…are you really in SRT or SF? How many house clearings have you done? Why do you care if the answers are no and none? Mag changes need to be where your hands are, not reaching behind you. Take some training at Ft. Bragg. Oh that’s right, you’re not military. Then take classes from Kyle Lamb and those that followed him (Costa, et al.). You are arguing from a position of weakness since nobody has run them side by side. And absolutely no military is going to retool their training platforms at this point of budget cutting.

    As for the timing of this release I agree it may be poor. Plus, that dumb price point issue seems to alienate many buyers, including me. But who am I to speak? I still carry a 1911 and mostly hunt with and competitively shoot an M1A1 Scout.

    • noob

      There’s a tavor armourer manual that shows how to strip the trigger mechanism

      http://www.scribd.com/doc/29008594/Tavor-Armourer-Manual

      As far as I can tell, the genius of the system lies in the fact that the trigger bar pulls rather than pushes on the actuator on the hammer pack. This means that there is no possiblity of trigger bar flex, or rubbing.

      still don’t know what that means in real terms, because I’ve never fired one of these things.

      I remember there was a knowledgeable commentor here who had lots of pictures… check old thefirearmblog posts on the tavor for the guy who posted the serial number window picture.

    • Doesitmatter?

      AUG’s mags were acually the strong point. It was impossible to design reasonably strong plastic magazine (given materials of time) to fit into M16 type recepticle. You can trust me on this one.

      • Geodkyt

        AUG magazines are a strong point from an engineering POV.

        They are a WEAK point from a “marketing to US civilians” POV.

        Same issue as HK G33 and Galil magazines — or for that matter AR magazines for 7.62×39 and 5.45×39 variants.

        When the market you are trying to reach has tons of available, inexpensive, reasonably decent magazines available, and your design in teh same role and caliber uses proprietary, comparitively expensive, magazines, it’s going to cost you plenty of market share.

        For all the weak points of the USGI AR magazine, it’s not exactly the “Son of Chauchat” POS that internet commandos insist. Yeah, it’s more fragile than an AK mag, and yeah, AUG and the other proprietary mags are BETTER, running a milspec USGI AR magazine that isn’t beat to crap works just fine. Being able to buy 3 or 4 “OK” magazines for the price of ONE marginally superior magazine adds up in the minds of buyers spending their own money. . .

        Now that Gen2 PMags are nearly the same cost as new USGI, sticking with something that can reliably feed from these mags makes economic sense, AND gives the same advantages that the “superior” proprietary mags have.

        I mean, I have buckets full of 1911, GP35, and Beretta mags (and NONE of them are ProMag or similar crap), but when I got a Sig P250 the mag cost (MSRP around $50, I found them for around $30) meant I only bought enough for two basic loads so I could go practice without having to empty my carry mags in order to practice with ball.

  • Doesitmatter?

    Let people have what they pay for, that’s one thing. The other is actual technical merits. As someone quite properly mentioned, it does not bring any technical improvement or innovation or point of curiosity, save for being outright ugly. I’d say SA80 in comparison with this is king. Besides, this kind of layout is siutable merely for short range action such as CQB. In that case, I am missing right caliber at least in range of 9-10mm (such as russian Groza).

    • Stella

      The SA-80 was a disaster (on the same order of the M-16) that took a decade, oodles of money, and H&K to fix. It is still roundly panned. The Tavor may not be the unique little snowflake you seem to want but then again nothing has been as such in small arms for over 50 years.

      • Doesitmatter?

        True enough; the latest of copiers must have learned something. There is no magic about retracing AR-18 one more time with one guide rod instead of two. SA80 is of same heritage.

  • jdun1911

    Stella,

    The market will decide and you know what it already decided.

    There are a lot of people that will not throw good money on subpar system like the ACR, SCAR, AUG, G36, etc. All commercial failures in the USA. The Travor will not be the exception.

    • Stella

      How are those systems subpar? I know for you anything that is not an AR is heresy incarnate but come on.

    • Tinkerer

      Subpar rifles? Not sure if troll or just pathological victim of “not invented here syndrome”.

    • ragnarok220

      Let’s not forget the Government regulations. I want to buy a G36 not SL8.

      • PanFriedPipeBomb

        Amen to that! The SL-8 isn’t a neutered G36, its a G36 with a sex change.

      • David/Sharpie

        Haha, they are pretty cool though.

        Also, I heard there ARE semi auto G36s but HK built them on the same receivers as the true, full auto G36, thereby making it an NFA firearm.

        They really do hate civilian gun owners

    • W

      “There are a lot of people that will not throw good money on subpar system like the ACR, SCAR, AUG, G36, etc. All commercial failures in the USA. The Travor will not be the exception.”

      Dude, i don’t know what you’re smoking but those are not subpar systems. the SCARs in my neck of the woods are selling like hot cakes.

      Microtech did a incredible job with the AUG and we have yet to see Remington’s iteration of the ACR. After a few teething issues, Bushmaster’s ACR is not a terrible rifle either.

      the G36 was not released commercially, but the SL8 was. a fool would think they are the same rifle as they are not.

      Have they surpassed all AR15 sales? no. that is a unfair comparison with unreasonable expectations equivalent to introducing a new pistol and complaining its sales havent exceeded the 1911 platform.

    • Bondmid003

      jdun1911 I’m curious what you’re basing your assessment on that the SCAR/ACR/G36/AUG are all failures? The fact that they aren’t AR’s or AK’s? I feel like it is silly to compare commercial success of a rifle that is made by only one company (like the SCAR or ACR) to a rifle that is made by 100’s since the design is now public domain. Little apples and oranges don’t you think? And the G36 has never been sold in the US in its original configuration.

      david/sharpie, that is an interesting thought and there might have been some truth to that before they created the SL8. I do know that HK has released semi auto G36’s in Canada because Canada does not have an importation ban like we do. Like all guns in Canada though, they are very expensive. If you search HKpro.com you can find pics of a couple.

      • David/Sharpie

        Sorry dude, I just found this comment today.

        Yeah I know there are some guns that we can get that you can’t, or are very expensive to get. I’ve heard of 1 MP7 that cost the guy $11,000. I’ve never seen one in the store, only pics of this guys.

        I’ve only ever seen 1 SL8 being fired, but a few on the rack at the store. Honestly I’ve never seen a true semi auto G36.

        But, for one of the lucky mofos that can own full autos, they’ll spend $800 on a 1928 Thompson, yes I have seen them for that low.

        Or “incomplete” firearms, I’ve heard of a story that some guy has 2 incomplete Thompsons, apart they won’t fire, but the second has the parts that the first is missing. That would be awesome.

  • John Doe

    If they could price it right with the AR-15, I’m willing to throw my money at it. If some clever guy would make a .300 AAC conversion for it, I’ll be even happier.

  • dg13

    Here is a video of a bullpup “rapid reload” technique (in a .308 RFB):
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYgpsEdncP8

    he is not even trying to go super fast, but as you can see…..it is not slow.

  • PackingPanda

    That particular Tavor would probably look better with a set of MBUS sights…

  • PackingPanda

    Takes PMAGs? I kinda want one.
    If only the FS2000 took PMAGs, let alone EMAGs >_<

  • mica

    now can someone please tell me why an usa company can,t make a quality bullpup for our troop,s \\ IMI \ HK \ but no usa bullpup,s ????

    • David/Sharpie

      They don’t want them………

      They’d rather a conventional rifle. Also, imagine if there was a KB with a bullpup!?!

    • W

      the US is a less than ideal military and police marketplace for bullpups, kind of like selling buick cars in europe ;)

      The military will stay conventional (as they should) and kabooms can be remedied with a kevlar cheek piece or superior engineering.

      • David/Sharpie

        Same with the Canadians, although JTF2 does have the P90 in inventory.

        Yeah, but still, I wouldn’t want a piece of cloth (Kevlar) between me and an explosion, I had an out of battery firing with a .22 and that was bad enough.

        May just be me, but I wouldn’t want a KB that close to my face. I know it is a one in a million chance of happening, but it could

      • W

        David, I agree. That is one of the reasons why I had a bit of a phobia regarding bullpups.

        The P90 is a incredible weapon. Lightweight, reliable, simple, accurate, and having a high rate of fire. There is a reason why it is popular.

    • Tinkerer

      To all who fear catastrophic failures on bullpup rifles: I ask you to Google “AUG catastrophic failure” or “AUG kB!”. The Steyr AUG has been in use by several military and police forces, as well as a few lucky individuals, for 35 years. I still have to find a single case of catastrophic failure on that rifle that might warrant more fear than in traditional layout rifles. You can try it with other bullpup rifles, too, like the FAMAS, L85, TAVOR, SAR-21, F2000. Some are more reliable, some are less. But any catastrophic failure that is more dangerous than in a traditional layout rifle? Please, if you know of one, post the info.

      • David/Sharpie

        I assume that’s directed at me? I never said it WOULD happen, just that IF it DID happen, I believe it would/could be worse due to proximity to the persons head, chances are the receivers ARE strong enough to contain a KB, but I’m not an engineer so I wouldn’t know about the strength unless I saw the aftermath of a KB in a bullpup.

        In a traditional rifle the breech is farther forward than a bullpup (Obviously) so IF a catastrophic KB occured it could do more damage if the receiver wasn’t strong enough to contain it. That assumption stems from a KB that occured with an AR after 15000+ (?) rounds were fired without cleaning, it tore the side of the receiver completely off the rifle.

        Don’t misunderstand what I’m saying, I am not saying I wouldn’t buy a bullpup, just that if I did, it would be a very high quality one, IN CASE something like that happened

      • Tinkerer

        David/Sharpie: I wasn’t directing my post especifically to you, I apologize if you felt that I did. What I WAS doing was addressing a common concern that I have seen in other websites, forums, and whatnot, about the potential danger of catastrophic failures in bullpup rifles, where the chamber lies so close to the shooter’s face. I have seen the same argument used many times before: “bullpups are dangerous in case of kB!”, etc, and yet I haven’t seen a case of that allegued danger happen in real life.

        Any rifle should be designed with safety in mind, even more so a bullpup. And in fact, the successful bullpups I have seen have in fact been designed with safety as a primary concern, hence the lack of evidence of any special danger with bullpups, even after decades of continuous use.

  • Fred

    There doesn’t seem to be much room for gloved trigger finger.

  • W

    So summing everything up, which post contains untrue information Mike?

    Since you cannot provide a adequate reference/s to debunk what I have said, and you continually resort to childish name calling and deliberately misunderstanding my posts, im going to assume you’re either:

    1.) What you keep calling me, a internet commando LOL
    2.) Full of shit
    3.) A troll

    Which is it?

    Its always fascinating how the debate cycle works, you are a perfect example of this.

    1.) Non Sequitur response to a post of mine
    2.) Deliberate misunderstanding of my responding post; name calling mixed in.
    3.) After i call you out on your bullshit, you either resort to more name calling or backtrack. Its always one or the other. Critcism of sources mixed in.
    4.) After I continually ask for you to show me where my posts are incorrect, you maintain a shrowd of enigmatic silence.
    5.) After you can refute nothing, you just sling more name calling and circular logic. *name calling doesn’t hurt. your just posting electrons that are transferred throughout silicon chips. I promise.

    Btw, I didn’t know that they teach international geopolitics, small arms familiarization, statistics (albiet secret super duper statistics that are far from the prying eyes of US congress, the UN, WTO, and SIPRI), COIN, MOUT, and Armored Warfare in ROTC…or was it the theoretical basketweaving college of conceptual industry design university? Or, do tell, was it that museum you mentioned in another post? Or could it have been all from the paper that you wrote that seems to be the dead sea scrolls of all small arms design???

    • Mike Knox

      @W
      That’s just sad. Is an RSS correspondence really that important to you? You’re just pathetic. I don’t need an internet source just for my references primarily because It’s from real life experiences and interpersonal knowledge with people who’se lives involve these topics. Unlike you who demand an internet source just for some queasley reassurance. In other words, everytime I reply based of real life reference, you wiki it up for a dingly comeback.

      Let me guess, you spent the whole weekend mandering at this argument of yours and edging, prying for a reply in your mum’s basement while I spent it with water/motorsports, beach capming, and diving in Jamaica and the Keyes with a significant Girl. By the way they were using L85s in port security at the former, not AKs or ARs..

      • W

        More personal attacks and edification of your “sources”. Again, Ill ask the question, which post contains untrue information Mike?

      • W

        btw, internet source? any source will do. i mean any source. Sorry, but in the realm of credibility, documented, published articles hold more weight than anonymous personal sources that are unverified. Its not a statement against the people that provide the information (on the contrary), its just a commonly asserted fact.

        another ad hominem attack? unsurprising.

        and jamaica is a member of the commonwealth of independent former british colonies; ipso facto its close association with the UK would lead to the adoption of similar customs, tactics, equipment, and small arms. Unsurprising as Belarus or Ukraine retaining the AK platform. Next.

      • Mike Knox

        @W
        He-heh, The internet really is a serious thing for you, eh? I’m sure your mum’s so proud of you.

        Belarus and the Ukraine?, another conjugation by the wiki whizzard. They both haven’t upgraded their arms stocks because of a turbulent economy and defense budget. What you don’t know is that they’re on a contract waiting list with FNH. No doubt including FN2000s.

        I’m just curious, what is it that you gain with your needy craving for “internet notoriety” in these aimless arguments of yours? I just poke you poodles and sure enough, you’re among the ones that bark for a while and scamper around the corner dribbling lemonade after your yelping gets squeaky..

      • W

        “He-heh, The internet really is a serious thing for you, eh? I’m sure your mum’s so proud of you.”

        another ad hominem.

        “Belarus and the Ukraine?, another conjugation by the wiki whizzard. They both haven’t upgraded their arms stocks because of a turbulent economy and defense budget. What you don’t know is that they’re on a contract waiting list with FNH. No doubt including FN2000s.”

        yet another ad hominem. It does nothing to show anything remotely close of the F2000 or any bullpup replacing all of their conventional rifles.

        “I’m just curious, what is it that you gain with your needy craving for “internet notoriety” in these aimless arguments of yours? I just poke you poodles and sure enough, you’re among the ones that bark for a while and scamper around the corner dribbling lemonade after your yelping gets squeaky..”

        yet another and another with a cuter flair. More personal attacks but no facts. fascinating. Now you are deliberately leaving my questions unanswered and avoiding them, so ill ask for the fifth time: which post contains untrue information Mike?

      • Mike Knox

        @W
        Ad hominem? You must be a “master” at internet gaggles. I know you’re just starting with that because you’re out of your “facts”. That’s quite hypocritical seeing your header post there.

        Nice going gummo, forgot your bowl of paint chips for breakfast or something?..

      • W

        you had something useful to say?

        i guess not, more bullshit.

      • Mike Knox

        @W
        Right in the plums. How’s it feel getting called out on your hyposcrisy?
        Looks like the “high and mighty wiki warrior” got wicker knees.

        Now if you don’t mind, start talking about bullpups before you go on another internet fed ramble..

  • http://www.duilegal.info/ Duilegal

    beautiful site…….

  • Eugene Neigoff

    I have read the comments and as a Viet Nam Combat veteran, an active shooter who has and still owns multiple bull-pup rifles I wish to report that on a recent trip to Israel I shot the TAVOR rifle and can vouch for the quality. It was a great experience, and when I go back to Israel in October of this year I plan to take a camera and photograph it. I was there for a life cycle event and forgot my camera when I was called and told the shooting event scheduled for that afternoon. The TAVOR is great, I was shooting the military version at an Israel Defense Force base commanded by the son of a friend of mine. He was a LT COL and also was like his father a career officer.

    We fired over 300 rounds and I was impressed with the grouping at 100 and 300 meters. The rifle I was using was picked from a rack of 20 guns awaiting issuance to new inductees. The trigger of this gun was about 4 pounds and did have some creep. Mosh said the trigger on most guns were between 2 and 4 Kilograms 4.4 to 8.8 pounds. Let-off was crisp, and the linkage did not show the rubberness of any of my AUG’s or the MSAR.

    I presently have in my gun room the following Bull-pup rifles in 5.56mm, they are
    1. STYER AUG
    2. MSAR
    3. FAMAS RIFLE
    4. SEMI AUTOMATIC VERSION OF THE L85
    I fire these rifles every time I go shooting and have put over 30,000 rounds through my STYER AUG.

    I have told my dealer here in Arizona that I want one and he says that he will order it oce they are available. The price is not unreasonable. The MSAR’s cost 1700 two years ago and my AUG”’s cost between 600 and 1500 when purchase in the 1980’s. I have multiple AUG’s and love them. The Magazines are hard to get, and the TAVOR uses m-16 magazines which I have plenty.

    • Bondmid003

      Out of curiosity how do you have a civilian version of the L85. To my knowledge the only sniff of a civilian version was a kit from Prexis but that it turned out to be vaporware.

    • Real World Knower of Things

      There are NO semi auto only L85’s to my knowledge legally in this country, plenty of post sampies but I would love to know how a postie was torched and turned into a legal semi. Seriously, what is the deal?

  • Masood

    So does anybody have any real information on an estimated date of availability?

  • JoeMuggle

    Lots of LOL worthy material here

    The Tavor was never meant to replace, and will never replace the Israeli dependence on the M4.

    The Tavor is something that IWI has created to make $$$$$$$ with, they will sell it to other countries for profit like they do with the Galil. The Israelis will continue to primarily rely on the M4 for 90% of their small arms needs. They get them all for free anyway courtesy of the US taxpayers. I dont blame IWI for wanting to capitalize on all the stupid fanboys who will pay 3 times more because it is a “super special Israeli assassin weapon of Gods chosen idiots”. The Israelis have carefully cultivated this “tacticool image” to gain acceptance among the Fox news watching, Terrist’ hating, Nuke ‘em all,bible thumping, American morons.

    • HamieLRS

      LOL…what a sad, angry, misinformed little man.

      • Jordan

        Never in my life have I heard someone be so wrong in one posting. The Tavor is in fact replacing their standard loadout, and has been for many years already. The weapon is solid, has received great reviews from independents who aren’t owned by some corporation, but instead have their own websites and home videos.

    • SFS444

      Are you dumb or just another liberal socialist? Maybe a neo dumbass Nazi? You make no sense. What da mean terrorist hatin? Do you like’em…haji? Maybe you are muslim huh? Puss.

  • C

    The Tar-21 will not be available in the US. Under laws it cannot be imported, and all the US plans to manufacture it in the US have fallen through as of October of 2012. No new info on if and when the Tar-21 will be available has surfaced so this is basically now a moot issue.

    • S J

      Source for your info? Because I sat with Mr. Kassnar of Trans World Arms, the company that is dealing with the importation and marketing of the Tavor, for over an hour at the Bullpup Shoot and discussed the importation process, the Tavor, and bullpup rifles in general and what they were dealing with the bring the Tavor in.

      Unless you can provide a little more solid info, I am calling “internet shennanigans” on your post ;)

      • http://none Pestilence

        *GASP!* Not “Internet Shenanigans”!

        • http://www.facebook.com/julius.henry.14 Julius Henry

          If the reciever is made here, it’s not an Import.

    • Noah
  • Levi

    I want to hear more from W and Mike Knox about this!

    • Mike Knox

      W gave up when he ran out of internet..

  • Roninpryyst

    The imi rep at shot show said they will be available in march

  • http://twitter.com/JMHaircut JACK BARBER

    VERY NICE

  • Jb

    They will be released march of 2013.

  • fjkhoury01

    What does the Tavor offer over the Steyr Aug or the FS2000 or FAMAS??? It honestly looks like an AUG with different ergos.

  • http://www.facebook.com/tom.hall.169405 Tom Hall

    Here you go boys and girls: http://www.iwi.us/tavor.html

  • D tap

    look at IWI.US web site this gun is now available in US also check Zanders, elliot brothers, an dozen other wholesalers list the gun. First shippments have already been delivered to retailers I have my order in an have been confirmed. manufacting is being done in harrisburg PA

  • http://www.facebook.com/kent.brown.908 Kent Brown

    It is an Israeli weapon that is all I need to know. I have been waiting years for this to come to America.

  • http://www.facebook.com/john.carrillo.522 John Carrillo

    looking to purchase one in the near future