PDA

View Full Version : The Cat is Out of the Bag! (Tavor)



Charles Daly
26 September 2009, 23:12
In that the "cats out of the bag" over on arfcom (and several other internet forums as well) concerning the IWI Tavor, I thought I should make the members of WEVO aware of what's going on.

KBI is teaming up with IWI, following the successful transition of the Jericho pistol line to KBI from Magnum, to bring the Tavor bullpup carbines and rifles to the US market. They will be built in the US from Israeli and American components. Formal introduction to the industry will occur at the 2010 SHOT Show.


http://www.israel-weapon.com/files/0240_web.jpg

As we did with our entry into the AR-15 market, we are soliciting opinions from the shooting community on certain features/construction to incorporate into the production.

The current topic in the thread on AR-15 com is whether or not to use the original 14.95" barrel (CTAR model) with a pinned flash suppressor vs. going with a 16" barrel with a removable flash suppressor. You can read all, or the portion of the thread that concerns this topic, (on pages 18 through 20), by clicking here (http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=6&f=43&t=280158).

We would like your opinions also. Please feel free to post here, on arfcom, or on The Charles Daly Forum (http://www.charlesdalyforum.com/) with any questions or comments you may have.

rebelEMPIRE
27 September 2009, 00:56
Personally, I'm a guy that likes to modify anything and everything that can be modified. So, that said, I would prefer an unpinned flash suppressor if it means having the 16" barrel.

However, with the introduction of a new rifle into the US market, it's quite a gamble to change the design/manufacturing process. Albeit, it's a rather small difference/alteration; it most likely won't pose much difficulty.

Keep a good design a good design. If there's nothing wrong, don't change it. When the Tavor gains more popularity, only then should we introduce options for customization.

Cosmetically, an extra 1.5 inches sticking out looks a bit out of place for a 16" barrel. I don't think consumers would like this. On top of that, I don't think the majority of consumers modify their weapons much beyond their "out-of-the-box" condition.

From a business perspective, I would choose to stick with the stock barrel and a pinned flash suppressor.

-rebelEMPIRE

Bryant
27 September 2009, 10:51
The entire reason for owning a bullpup is to keep it compact. Lengthening the barrel to accommodate a select few who might add a suppressor doesn't add the overall value for the majority who will own it. I say leave the barrel the original length and for the few who want to add a suppressor- then they can register as an SBR.

Stickman
27 September 2009, 13:30
While a 16" barrel would be a nice option, I think the original barrel would be a better offering.

TehLlama
27 September 2009, 15:28
I agree with the above - the selling points are going to be Compact and Proven for the first few batches - let the sales on those dictate which direction from there.

Are these going to ship with small EMag sets as well?

SilentType
27 September 2009, 22:04
I can't speak for the gun community at large.

For me I can tell you that it would depend on how well the standard flash suppressor that will come with the CTAR performs compared to alternative flash suppressors on the market. If it performs well than I would rather have the shorter overall length barrel even if it means having the flash suppressor pinned. If it performs poorly compared to alternative flash suppressors on the market than I think I'd be disappointed in having it pinned. Just that simple.

Suppressors are illegal to possess in my state so that is not a concern for me.

eravelo
28 September 2009, 06:40
As a multiple Steyr AUG owner, I can tell you that an extra 1.5 inches in a bullpup design is hardly noticeable.
Make your life easier by going 16, and get the 14.5 incher as an option.

Regards,

Jorge

bigcoastie
28 September 2009, 11:10
I would prefer the 16" I just don't think 1.05" is worth permanently attaching something.

uspopo
28 September 2009, 15:35
I would also opt for the 16" barrel as well...

ryanm
29 September 2009, 12:45
This will be incredibly sweet if it happens! I hope they use the Israeli spec barrel.

Charles Daly
2 October 2009, 17:16
This will be incredibly sweet if it happens! I hope they use the Israeli spec barrel.

We are trying to accomplish that. It's CHF, chrome lined, 1:7 twist.

HS2
3 October 2009, 06:29
We are trying to accomplish that. It's CHF, chrome lined, 1:7 twist.
Any estimate on the price?

C-Fish
3 October 2009, 16:29
16" for me as well.

Thomas M-4
3 October 2009, 21:35
I say keep the 14.95'' barrel it would appeal to more people I think keeping it as orginaly designed as possible.
1st question will it have a MARS sight with it?

Optimus Prime
6 October 2009, 23:24
I like the look of the shorter barrel, but I just know if I were to get it that way, I'd probably end up with a can and no way to attach it.

AR Performance
8 October 2009, 23:22
nice

rgrprib
11 November 2009, 07:26
I'd like to see the 14.5 with a pinned FS myself. Very rarely do I remove a flash suppressor for whatever reason. Like someone stated before, if the factory flash suppressor functions well, there would be no need to replace it.

olds442tyguy
11 November 2009, 11:53
How about the original barrel length, with a permanently attached flash hiding QD suppressor adapter that works with one of the flush mount suppressors available.

IE: Something like an AAC Blackout adapter that works with a can capable of mounting on the TAVOR like the SCAR-SD*.

Truth be told, the 16" would save everyone lots of headaches though.



*I have absolutely no experience with the TAVOR or the SCAR-SD, I just listed the SCAR-SD as it looks to be one of the suppressors capable of mounting on the IWI with it's minimal muzzle to hand guard clearance. The Surefire K series may also fit the bill as well.

Parashootist
20 November 2009, 11:03
As stated, in a bullpup design the extra length presented by a 16" bbl would generally be unnoticed. IMHO, a 16' bbl would save problems for many end users in the U.S. It probably wouldn't be a deal breaker for me, but it would definitely be a factor in my choosing a SCAR, ACR, Tavor, etc., so my votes goes for the longer barrel w/removeable FH. I bought an AAC Omni can primarily for the feature of easy QD mounting on any of my 5.56 rifles fitted with an A1, A2 or SOCOM FH.

flyer
4 December 2009, 11:50
I do not care about the extra inch, so which ever option will get me a Tavor at a decent price.

aceat64
6 December 2009, 17:35
I vote for 16" with the removable FS.

eternal24k
12 December 2009, 07:58
Just let me know when to send my money

Ryo
1 January 2010, 20:18
Can't have the SBR in my state so short barrel wouldn't be option for me. It would have to be pinned to get to legal length or 16". Good to have both options.

dspd204
22 January 2010, 10:39
Has anything came out of SHOT about the Tavors?

Optimus Prime
22 January 2010, 11:18
I think they plan on announcing it at the NRA show later this year.

Scarecrow87
31 January 2010, 19:44
Charles Daly went out of business... :( I just checked their website. What happened? :/

I don't think we'll be getting the Tavor anytime soon.

Optimus Prime
31 January 2010, 20:33
Kinda wondering what's going to happen with it now too... especially after the ACR fiasco this looked even more tempting.
Hopefully somebody will pick it up and not screw it up.

joffe
1 February 2010, 13:34
Maybe it'll go like the CD G4 (http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/12/22/magnum-research-desert-eagle-1911/) - it'll be taken by Magnum Research, called the 'Desert Eagle Combat Infantry Modular Assault Tactical Entry' (D.E.C.I.M.A.T.E.) rifle and have 'DESERT EAGLE' stamped on the side in huge, ostentatious letters. Then they'll say something about the 'proud heritage of the Desert Eagle' whatever that means (overweight, overpriced and unreliable?) and how a rifle has finally 'earned' the Desert Eagle name.

Okay, I'll get my coat now.

ICANHITHIMMAN
5 February 2010, 08:43
I want as close to factory specs as I can get!

Optimus Prime
5 February 2010, 15:23
Maybe it'll go like the CD G4 (http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/12/22/magnum-research-desert-eagle-1911/) - it'll be taken by Magnum Research, called the 'Desert Eagle Combat Infantry Modular Assault Tactical Entry' (D.E.C.I.M.A.T.E.) rifle and have 'DESERT EAGLE' stamped on the side in huge, ostentatious letters. Then they'll say something about the 'proud heritage of the Desert Eagle' whatever that means (overweight, overpriced and unreliable?) and how a rifle has finally 'earned' the Desert Eagle name.

Okay, I'll get my coat now.
Heh... I was just laughing at their 1911 add earlier today.

bluealtered
7 February 2010, 12:10
Maybe it'll go like the CD G4 (http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/12/22/magnum-research-desert-eagle-1911/) - it'll be taken by Magnum Research, called the 'Desert Eagle Combat Infantry Modular Assault Tactical Entry' (D.E.C.I.M.A.T.E.) rifle and have 'DESERT EAGLE' stamped on the side in huge, ostentatious letters. Then they'll say something about the 'proud heritage of the Desert Eagle' whatever that means (overweight, overpriced and unreliable?) and how a rifle has finally 'earned' the Desert Eagle name.

Okay, I'll get my coat now.

Whoa joffe, don't get your coat yet. The truth isn't always popular, but it's still the truth. blue

Stickman
8 February 2010, 16:27
I wouldn't write this off yet. I think we'll see CD back after a restructuring of things.

TehLlama
18 March 2010, 13:09
I reeeeally hope so, this and the 941 Jericho really had my interest.