Tavor, new assault rifle as accurate as a sniper rifle.

The new Israeli made Assault rifle is deadly accurate, close range, and acts like a sniper rifle at long range, do you think this rifle will beat our M4, and upcoming XM8? The XM8 resembles a GC6C.

www.youtube.com...
youtube.com...
youtube.com...





[edit on 27-10-2007 by jca2005]

Finally got the videos to work sorry.

[edit on 27-10-2007 by jca2005]

[edit on 27-10-2007 by jca2005]

I don't think that it will catch on with the American military simply because it is a bullpup and has the associated problems that come with this design, most notibly that it can't be fired left handed without alteration of the weapon. While we in the UK have not found this to be a major problem with the SA80, the US may not be so undestanding.

I also didn't see anything in the video that suggested "sniper" level accuracy. Hitting a head sized target at 300m is achievable with many of the current in service assault rifles. 300m is often considered to be point blank with an SA80. I think that doing this from the standing position says more about the shooter than the weapon, who is a self-professed ex-sniper. Now if he was hitting head-sized groups at 800m with an assault rifle, then I'd be impressed.

I think not.

In 1983, using an FN SLR with iron sights, I won the Best Shot (Rifle) and Best APWT. I was having an exceptional day. Hardly any wind, bright and sunny and I really felt good.

The FN SLR could, at a pinch and using match grade ammunition, be used as a sniper rifle. In my opinion, the M14 was superior because at the time, it doubled as a sniper rifle, especially in Viet Nam.

None the less, both weapons fired the 7.62 mm round which, before the adaptation of the M2 for sniping, was the standard round for sniping throughout the world.

The arms manufacturing base in the US are dead against the 'Bullpup' design because, as Paddy has rightly stated, the weapon may only be fired from one shoulder.

The production costs to accomodate left handed firers using a 'Bullpup' designed weapon, far outweigh its advantages.

However, I do believe that had somebody designed an M14 in a 'Bullpup' configuration, we would still be using 7.62 as our main rifle ammunition today.

I agree with the comments about the 7.62 apposed to the current M4 / M16.

It appears that in Iraq and Afghanistan the military is using scopes on almost every weapon. All I can say to that is, “its about damn time”. However, now that the military is trying to shoot targets at range I feel that the M4 and the M16 is the absolute wrong choice for our military.

If you would remember, the original stoner design for the military was the AR10, not the M16 that we have today. Stoner originally designed the military to shoot his brand new weapon in 7.62, not the wimpy 5.56 that the military is using now.

I think that the military should finally go back to its roots and start equipping soldiers with an AR10 variant weapon instead of the M4’s that they have now. With the AR10 you have a better choice of caliber and all the same options that people have with the M16 variants because essentially they are the same design. One, however, was meant for larger calibers.

If the military had been smart from day one then they would have adopted the AR10 and only scaled the caliber back a bit to perhaps a 7.0 caliber weapon. I personally think that a 7.0 caliber weapon could easily be made from an AR10 and that the weapon magazines can still be designed to hold 25 rounds or so thereby not compromising ammo load out for the combat soldier. Sure he will not be able to carry as much, but then again with the increased range and the current use of scoped rifles then he should not need as much.

All in all we must get back to a better balance between the weapons that we had during world war two and the weapons that we carry now. What we need is a bigger bullet, in a weapon just as flexible as the M16, with the capability to longer range kills.

reply to post by Hot_Wings


I agree with much of what you say re. the 7.62mm cartridge. It is a far more useful round for engaging targets at range than the 5.56mm. However I believe that the 5.56mm is under rated, probably due tho the current trend in using carbines instead of rifles.

The British Army hasn't reported the same problems with the 5.56mm that the US troops have. We use a weapon with a 20" barrel, giving a bit more muzzle velocity than the 14" barrel on the M4. This increases the effective range of the 5.56mm and makes rounds on target more likely to drop a target. If more US troops were issued with the M16 instead of the M4, I think we'd see a big drop in failure to stop reports and a bit more faith in the 5.56mm round.

The 7.62 does still have a place in the section though. I believe that keeping the 5.56mm round as the mainstay of the section and issuing a 7.62mm marksmans rifle to the best shot in the section as well as keeping a 7.62mm machine gun in the section would create more diversity.

I used to be a believer that well aimed semi-automatic fire was the only thing that mattered in the section, and that large quantities of ammo were simply not needed if the rifleman was doing his job. This probably stemmed from my operational experience in Ulster, where this was the only thing that could be advocated. Recent tours in Iraq and the 'stan have changed my mind on this. I used to carry 6 mags. I now don't carry any less than 10 plus a bandolier with another 150 rounds in my daysack.

Fire suppression is the way forward. This needs lots of ammo. I'm not advocating a spray and pray policy, but there are times when you just need to get a load of rounds down to keep the enemys head down so you can attack. Putting everyone back on 7.62mm would reduce the load that can be carried. Keeping everyone on 5.56mm reduces range. A middle ground cartridge may be useful (6.8SPC maybe?), but we'll have to wait out to see how such a round performs in tests.

Originally posted by PaddyInf
I think that doing this from the standing position says more about the shooter than the weapon, who is a self-professed ex-sniper.

An ex-SEAL sniper at that, still this weapon is made for the close combat fight. I don't see anything special about a sighted rifle capable of head shots at 300 meaters in the hands of a good shooter.

Originally posted by jca2005
... The XM8 resembles a GC6C.
...

It doesnt resemble one, it IS a G36 stuffed into a fish

But the program is near death.