DTA vs. AIAW
I picked up a DTA with .308, .260 and .338 conversions and have extensive time on an AIAW and AWSM in .308 and .338 respectively. My AIAW would be comparable to the new AT without the rapid change barrel option.
After shooting the DTA for almost two years along with an AIAW that I previously owned, below are my notes of the experience from thousands of rounds of field shooting with both platforms. Hopefully this helps people deciding between both rifles.
Weight
The DTA is lighter by a couple pounds and this weight is noticeable over the AI. I really wish AI would get their short caliber rifles down to the 9-10lbs. range for the next generation. If someone wants it heavier they can always add some weight to it. The size of the DTA is can be an advantage as the weight of the rifle is pulled towards you and makes some positional shooting easier. The DTA is almost 12” shorter than comparable size barrel AI (or other rifle) due to the bull-pup design. But then again I shoot the AI equally well in positions as with the DTA.
The lower weight and shorter size of the DTA is less fatiguing for certain things like offhand shooting, but the length/weight of the AI makes it slightly more accurate for me offhand due to dampening wobbles. So, pick your poison. For prone shooting with a sling I find I can change magazines faster with the DTA over the AI because the magazine is totally rearward. However for bipod shooting I am faster with the AI as I can leave the rifle butt in position and just use my front hand to do the work with the magazines. Six of one, half dozen of another.
Trigger
The DTA trigger is very good. Not just for a bull-pup, but in general. It's not as good as the AI for me (I'm used to a two stage trigger), but for a single stage trigger it beats most rifles I've shot. I do think though the AI trigger is better.
Magazines
The DTA magazines are below average. They have lot of sharp edges and I think loading them is a bit of a pain as they are single stack and you have to slide the rounds into the feed lips vs. pushing in like on the AI double stack mags. I think the magazines hurt the overall experience with the rifle. AI magazines are still the best in the industry. It’s a lot easier to single feed the AI over the DTA due to how the magazines work.
DTA had only 5-6 rounds for the magazines, but now has 10 rd. magazines. The AI magazines are better made and work better then the standard 6 round DTA mags. I have not seen a 10 rd. magazine in person for the DTA to compare.
The new DTA 10 rd. magazines are single stack and appear to be quite long vs. the AI double stack magazines which sit in a lot shorter. Again, I haven't used the DTA 10 rd. magazines yet, just an observation. They look like a bit of a kludge being just longer and still single stack. It looks like a poor attempt at higher capacity, IMO.
I think the DTA magazines are a huge negative for the weapon vs. the AI mags. I understand compromises had to be made for the DTA to work in long action and short action, but it seems years after release that DTA's only solution has been an extremely long and ungainly single stack 10 round magazine. Making the magazine longer just means it will grab more gear, hit the ground in prone shooting, and generally just be a bit of a hack. I think they should look to do a next gen chassis that uses a true double stack magazine that can hold at least 10 rounds in short action calibers, or even 338LM if they think they could do it. Yes it may not be compatible with former chassis owners, but that’s life. Technology moves forward.
Polymer Stocks
The polymer sides for the AI and DTA are about the same. They will both scratch with use, but are both extremely rugged. The DTA screws for the polymer sides are all different sizes so you need to keep track of what goes where when you take it apart. The AI screws are all the same size so you can put them back in any order and it doesn't matter. I like the thumb hole stock of the AI personally better than the DTA, but this is all personal preference. I wish the DTA grip was thinner, or had an option for different backstraps or sides with a narrower profile. The AI grip is thinner and this works better for my hand. Again, all subjective.
Bolt Quality
I think the AI bolt is thing of beauty and very smooth. The DTA bolt is OK but not as smooth. After about 1000 rounds so far I just find the DTA average in terms of smoothness vs. the AI. The DTA wants to be run hard. If you run it hard, the DTA will feed and eject reliably. Even slowly it works fine for me if you run the bolt fully just as with any other bolt gun. The AI can be run softer, but I run all bolt guns hard to avoid any problems.
The DTA was throwing metal shavings into the receiver area as parts broke in. It stopped eventually, but I think they should have tighter finishing standards for a rifle this expensive. The AI never threw metal shavings into the action and came very smooth from the factory. In fact, I've never had any rifle throw metal shavings into the receiver! This happened to other people I know as well so I don't think it's a one-off thing for the DTA. The way the bolt works in the DTA the striker follows a long channel all the way back and this is where some of the shavings originate. It seems like something that should be addressed by DTA in production and QC and not for the customer to experience.
Safeties
I prefer the three position locking safety on the AI vs. the DTA because it locks the bolt closed. This means when I'm carrying the rifle I don't need to worry about the action coming open or going out of battery as would happen on the DTA. But in all fairness, most rifles don't lock the bolt closed with the safety on and I rarely use a rifle safety when shooting anyway. When the rifle is loaded I assume it is unsafe, and when it is unloaded it is safe. I don’t rely on safeties.
The DTA Safety is more ergonomically placed above the trigger guard and is quieter when you take it off. The AI safety you have to reach up a bit to use and taking it off can spook game if you just flick it forward due to the loud click. The DTA safety then is easier to use without disturbing your position. However the DTA safety feels pretty average vs. the AI. The AI safety is also three position which allows you to not only lock the bolt with full safety on, but also work the bolt with the firing pin still blocked to clear the chamber or do a chambering test on rounds at the range without chance of an AD. I would trust the safety in the AI more when it comes to rugged abuse due to the design and how it blocks the firing pin while detaching the trigger sear.
Bipod Options
The DTA requires a picatinny mounted bipod and I think most of these style bipods suck. This is not a DTA specific issue, but I’'m thinking DTA could come up with a better bipod solution for their weapons than third-party providers. I like what Sako did with the TRG specific bipod as an example. DTA could have a DTA specific bipod made to work with just their chassis.
The AI (AW and AT) uses a stud mount in the chassis for bipods. The AI bipod mount swivels easily and quickly detaches if you don't want it on the rifle. This is not a drawback with the DTA as most rifles today use the picatinny mounting system. It's just that a lot of the bipods are really kind of hacks and I don't especially like most of them due to the complexity and nature of them to come loose, have sharp edges to catch gear, wobble too much, etc. Arguably, the new AX series did away with the bipod mounting stud which is unfortunate for such an important piece of gear on a rifle. I think the dedicated stud attachment point is superior to all picatinny mounting options I’ve ever tried so this is not a uniquely DTA problem, just the way the industry has gone.
Bolt Throw
The DTA bolt throw is a love/hate thing. I got used to it, but I am faster with my AI in prone shooting. In the other positions I didn'’t notice much difference. The DTA is about as fast to me as most standard bolt guns. I do notice that it’s easy to break my cheekweld by accident with the DTA due to the location of the bolt handle and how may hand needs to come back. This can be overcome in training, but still if you are wearing muffs there is tendency for your hand to hit them when cycling the action and this can cause you to lift your head vs. the more conventional AI action.
I see a lot of DTA shooters break cheekweld on cycling the action so this is not a unique situation, but proper practice needs to be followed to break this habit.
With the above said, I find when I’'m shooting prone that the sight picture and position cycling the DTA is almost always disturbed much more than a traditional bolt action rifle of any kind. It kind of takes me out of the groove if engaging targets quickly. Your rear elbow supporting the rifle is moving a lot on the DTA and that just shakes things around more.
Magazine Changes
Magazine changes for me are faster with the AI. I think the magazines on the AI insert cleaner and the central magazine release catch is more ergonomic to me. The AI mag-well is all metal and the magazines insert easier and always drop free. The DTA mag-well is part of the polymer stock and the sharp edges of their magazines tend to catch on it and fight a bit. The plastic gets chewed up as well. The DTA magazine release drops free which is good, but realize the release buttons are at different positions on each side of the rifle so you need to train your hands to move to the right location. I think it is a huge mistake to have button positions for right vs. left hand in different areas for rapid magazine changes on the DTA.
The AI just seems faster to me due to how it is laid out and how the mag release works in one central location (other rifles like the Sako TRG follow a similar pattern). I wish the DTA mag release was at one central location like the AI so there is no muscle memory issues on left vs. right side releasing.
Maintenance
The DTA bolt field strips easily, but you do need a 1/2" drive tool to do it. The bolt internals are simple and you can tell they put a lot of thought into the design. The AI bolt field strips without tools, but there are a lot of small bits for the firing pin adjustment, etc. that could be lost if you start taking things apart out in the field (which is not recommended anyway). The DTA bolt is really a thing of beauty internally and is almost Glock like in simplicity ( a good thing). The AI bolt is finished better, but the DTA bolt simplicity is very good and fewer parts means likely fewer problems.
With DTA you can buy a spare firing pin and striker spring to carry in your field repair kit. These items weigh a couple ounces at most. With AI you can't buy these parts easily. It could be argued that the AI will not break a firing pin, etc. But experience with other rifles tells me that having an option to carry a spare firing pin and spring would be a good idea with any rifle you need to use in the field.
Sling and Rifle Ergonomics
The DTA has good sling mounting options with flush cups front and rear. The new AX and AT do as well so this is a draw. I tend to use a simple sling so the AIAW central sling mount is fine.
I can'’t find a single comfortable way to carry the DTA in a sling. The rifle has ton of stuff sticking out all over it. From the pistol grip, to the rear stock, to the sharp magazine, to the abrasive forearm, to the big bolt handle. It also likes to flop and roll around a bunch and just won’t sit flat. I can’'t carry the DTA rifle comfortably and am constantly being poked, rubbed, snagged, or scrapped with the thing.
The AI isn’t much better in all fairness, but at least there are a few less places for it to grab onto me when hiking and it tends to stay flat instead of flopping around. I’'m wondering if the rifle makers have ever gone on a serious bush bashing hunt with these weapons just to see how much they snag on things when being carried and how comfortable they to hold for many hours at a time?
For me I prefer less things on my rifle so I like the relatively clean lines of the AIAW over the DTA without all the rails all over the place. The DTA, like most modern tactical rifles such as the AX, has too much metal exposed for use in really cold weather. I tend to grab forward on the handguard for positional shooting in some cases and would want to cover this metal area with something to keep my hands warmer (yes even with gloves you’ll feel the cold). Same for carrying the rifle in hand. Aside from both rifles being far too heavy, the exposed metal on the DTA makes it uncomfortable to carry in colder temps. In fairness, the AX series has the same problem.
The AW and AT have more plastic up front and is more comfortable to hold when it is cold. The AX has as much metal on the fore grip as the DTA so again it’s a draw. I taped some foam over the DTA rail to cover it up to keep the cold at bay.
Field Carrying and Usage
The overuse of exposed metal and rails on rifles is completely unnecessary for most people and ruins the ergonomics of the system. Outside of mounting gear for military users on the top rail and front sides, the overabundance of rail space lowers the usability of a rifle.
From a field shooting perspective, the metal tubes and rails are uncomfortable to hold, freezing cold for carrying, snags on gear, collects debris when bush bashing, cuts into your hand from recoil when you hold it outside the plastic areas, and generally ruins the ergonomics of the rifle in all regards compared to simpler stocks. Rifles with heaps of mounting rails are like carrying a freezing cold cheese grater in your hand all day. I guess they are more useful now for PRS shooters attaching barricade stops and other tricks. But mostly for field shooting these kinds of rails are pretty uncomfortable.
I wish that DTA would offer an alternative front rail system that would allow you mount a bipod for instance, but would otherwise be some kind of reinforced synthetic (or carbon fiber) that was not freezing cold to hold and didn’t have sharp edges all over it. Also it would be nice if it had a real palm swell area that ran the length of the fore grip to the bipod/sling attachment area instead of the 2-3 inches of plastic area they have now. Again, this is not just a DTA flaw, but came out of the PSR contract bids from all makers where they got rid of useful foregrip space and replaced it with metal rails. Why not make this area comfortable to hold with your hand as it should be?
Reliability
Both rifles have been reliable and feed reliably to me. Sometimes I do not put the DTA bolt in full battery when running the rifle and I'll get a light strike/no fire on a round. I will then have to run the bolt to reset things. So in this way the DTA is sensitive to the bolt handle being all the way down. The AI on the other hand will still fire a round in that condition as the spring can pull the bolt down into full battery and still strike the primer with sufficient force. The DTA bolt must be run fully and hard so this is a training issue and I’ve had fewer issues with bolt being in battery now that I have 1500+ rounds with the rifle.
The AI has always worked for me in all weather and conditions with minimal maintenance. I keep the action wiped down and lubed and it always works. The DTA has been reliable so far, but I wonder how the rear receiver area where the bolt slides will be working when it gets dust, ice, snow, etc. in it? The AI has less areas exposed to collect dirt and debris vs. the DTA with the large exposed opening behind the bolt into the butt of the weapon. Debris or snow getting in the DTA bolt raceway is going to pack up. I have had leaves and debris already get into the raceway and I could just imagine it turning into a problem eventually. I would like to see DTA have an option so this rear bolt area is covered when not being actively cycled.
In terms of build quality, to me the AI is the winner. I feel the overall construction of the AI is a step above most all rifles I’ve used including the DTA. The exposed bullpup raceway for the bolt on the DTA is a debris magnet and needs to be covered somehow. Also, the fact that the DTA was throwing metal filings into the receiver for a bit didn’t inspire confidence in the overall finish of the weapon. I just trust the AI more due to the overall fit and finish being so much better.
Bullpup vs. Traditional Bolt Rifle Safety
People get freaked out of the bullpup and rounds near their face of the DTA, but actually I think the design is safer than a traditional bolt action rifle like the AI.
With the DTA you have around 5" of thick barrel mounting area forward of the chamber where the quick change clamping takes effect. This area is FAR thicker than the typical bolt action rifle. Further to this, your face is next to more metal that is the receiver where the bolt slides further protecting you. Finally, in the event of something catastrophic, your face is not directly behind the bolt of the weapon as it is on a traditional bolt gun. I think people worried about using the DTA due to the location of the chamber are overstating the problem and likely outcome vs. traditional bolt location.
Accuracy
Accuracy wise it's a draw. I shoot my AI better and this is because I’ve not fully adapted to the DTA ergonomics. But the DTA is easily a 0.3MOA rifle with handloads and I think accuracy between the two is basically identical if the shooter has good technique. I am however more consistently accurate with my AI for whatever reason.
Switch Barrel
The DTA switch barrel is a nice feature, but the new AI rifles have that as well. I have an AW which needs a barrel wrench to do the same thing. I don’t switch barrels a lot so the caliber conversion feature in 60 seconds I could give or take myself with either platform. I doubt either platform is that much better than the other on barrel swaps for it to matter to most shooters. I don’t think any particular switch barrel system has that much advantage over another. I’'m actually happy with my AW even though it takes me a little longer to do a barrel swap.
When playing with the DTA switch barrel I find it doesn't go exactly back to zero. Usually there is a 0.1-0.4 mil shift in zero from what I've experienced so far. I don't know how the AI handles this on the new AT and AX models. Regardless of what the companies tell you, I'd still re-verify zero on any switch barrel rifle to be sure.
Switch caliber is fine, but it probably shouldn’'t be a major buying factor for most shooters that want consistency and repeatability in their performance. Switch barrels can actually promote inconsistency with their ease of major component swapping all the time. I’'d focus on ergonomics before switch barrel speed.
Suppressed Shooting
Shooting suppressed the DTA wins. The DTA is easily 12”" shorter in most suppressed use in my experience vs. the AI. The DTA is also far more maneuverable due to the length with a suppressor (especially with an overbarrel suppressor). I think the DTA muzzle brakes work great and are small and unobtrusive for the calibers used for shooting unsuppressed as well. The AI muzzle brake works fine, but they are larger and heavier than the DTA versions and recoil reduction between the AI and DTA brakes seems about the same to me.
Weight
The DTA wins on weight being about 2 lbs. lighter than the AI. However the AI weight I think can make it a bit more stable in weird positions because it tends to dampen movement. I wouldn’'t recommend taking either of these rifles on a serious hunt on foot, but the DTA has a clear advantage in terms of weight.
Still, DTA should make the rifle lighter. The compact size, firepower, and lighter weight would be a really compelling package.
AI should stop worrying about putting on another 5,000 sq. ft. of rail mounting space and drop 3-4lbs. off their rifles.
If someone wants a heavier rifle, DTA and AI can ship them a picatinny mountable brick to put on it.
Mechanical Problems
The DTA trigger weight set screw worked itself loose and almost came out. If I didn’t happen to inspect it, it would have fallen out completely. The trigger still worked, but this screw should be secured from factory, or staked at the bottom so it simply can’'t fall out. My AI trigger has never given me any trouble after 5000+ rounds of use plus that many dry fires easily. I trust the AI trigger more than the DTA trigger.
Conclusions
All in all, the DTA and AI each have good and bad points. The ergonomics of the DTA need to be tried out beforehand if you are able. And I'd say give it a good go and not just a few minutes. When I first tried the DTA I wasn't sure about it, but after lots of dry firing and live rounds I got more used to it. Although if I’'m honest, I shoot my AI better and faster for comps (and most traditional bolt guns). Each has pros and cons and if you can try both that is best.
With all of the above said, I sold the DTA. I just wasn’'t shooting it well compared to my AI and the bolt throw was always wrecking my position vs. a traditional rifle. Truth be told, I still have the AI but mainly shoot a Sako TRG due to the better ergonomics and much lighter weight. If AI were to release a rifle under 10lbs. I’'d sell my AW and do an upgrade.
Get the DTA if you want compact size and don't mind the drawbacks above. Get the AI if you want a well finished rifle and can handle the significant weight penalty.
Thanks for reading.
I picked up a DTA with .308, .260 and .338 conversions and have extensive time on an AIAW and AWSM in .308 and .338 respectively. My AIAW would be comparable to the new AT without the rapid change barrel option.
After shooting the DTA for almost two years along with an AIAW that I previously owned, below are my notes of the experience from thousands of rounds of field shooting with both platforms. Hopefully this helps people deciding between both rifles.
Weight
The DTA is lighter by a couple pounds and this weight is noticeable over the AI. I really wish AI would get their short caliber rifles down to the 9-10lbs. range for the next generation. If someone wants it heavier they can always add some weight to it. The size of the DTA is can be an advantage as the weight of the rifle is pulled towards you and makes some positional shooting easier. The DTA is almost 12” shorter than comparable size barrel AI (or other rifle) due to the bull-pup design. But then again I shoot the AI equally well in positions as with the DTA.
The lower weight and shorter size of the DTA is less fatiguing for certain things like offhand shooting, but the length/weight of the AI makes it slightly more accurate for me offhand due to dampening wobbles. So, pick your poison. For prone shooting with a sling I find I can change magazines faster with the DTA over the AI because the magazine is totally rearward. However for bipod shooting I am faster with the AI as I can leave the rifle butt in position and just use my front hand to do the work with the magazines. Six of one, half dozen of another.
Trigger
The DTA trigger is very good. Not just for a bull-pup, but in general. It's not as good as the AI for me (I'm used to a two stage trigger), but for a single stage trigger it beats most rifles I've shot. I do think though the AI trigger is better.
Magazines
The DTA magazines are below average. They have lot of sharp edges and I think loading them is a bit of a pain as they are single stack and you have to slide the rounds into the feed lips vs. pushing in like on the AI double stack mags. I think the magazines hurt the overall experience with the rifle. AI magazines are still the best in the industry. It’s a lot easier to single feed the AI over the DTA due to how the magazines work.
DTA had only 5-6 rounds for the magazines, but now has 10 rd. magazines. The AI magazines are better made and work better then the standard 6 round DTA mags. I have not seen a 10 rd. magazine in person for the DTA to compare.
The new DTA 10 rd. magazines are single stack and appear to be quite long vs. the AI double stack magazines which sit in a lot shorter. Again, I haven't used the DTA 10 rd. magazines yet, just an observation. They look like a bit of a kludge being just longer and still single stack. It looks like a poor attempt at higher capacity, IMO.
I think the DTA magazines are a huge negative for the weapon vs. the AI mags. I understand compromises had to be made for the DTA to work in long action and short action, but it seems years after release that DTA's only solution has been an extremely long and ungainly single stack 10 round magazine. Making the magazine longer just means it will grab more gear, hit the ground in prone shooting, and generally just be a bit of a hack. I think they should look to do a next gen chassis that uses a true double stack magazine that can hold at least 10 rounds in short action calibers, or even 338LM if they think they could do it. Yes it may not be compatible with former chassis owners, but that’s life. Technology moves forward.
Polymer Stocks
The polymer sides for the AI and DTA are about the same. They will both scratch with use, but are both extremely rugged. The DTA screws for the polymer sides are all different sizes so you need to keep track of what goes where when you take it apart. The AI screws are all the same size so you can put them back in any order and it doesn't matter. I like the thumb hole stock of the AI personally better than the DTA, but this is all personal preference. I wish the DTA grip was thinner, or had an option for different backstraps or sides with a narrower profile. The AI grip is thinner and this works better for my hand. Again, all subjective.
Bolt Quality
I think the AI bolt is thing of beauty and very smooth. The DTA bolt is OK but not as smooth. After about 1000 rounds so far I just find the DTA average in terms of smoothness vs. the AI. The DTA wants to be run hard. If you run it hard, the DTA will feed and eject reliably. Even slowly it works fine for me if you run the bolt fully just as with any other bolt gun. The AI can be run softer, but I run all bolt guns hard to avoid any problems.
The DTA was throwing metal shavings into the receiver area as parts broke in. It stopped eventually, but I think they should have tighter finishing standards for a rifle this expensive. The AI never threw metal shavings into the action and came very smooth from the factory. In fact, I've never had any rifle throw metal shavings into the receiver! This happened to other people I know as well so I don't think it's a one-off thing for the DTA. The way the bolt works in the DTA the striker follows a long channel all the way back and this is where some of the shavings originate. It seems like something that should be addressed by DTA in production and QC and not for the customer to experience.
Safeties
I prefer the three position locking safety on the AI vs. the DTA because it locks the bolt closed. This means when I'm carrying the rifle I don't need to worry about the action coming open or going out of battery as would happen on the DTA. But in all fairness, most rifles don't lock the bolt closed with the safety on and I rarely use a rifle safety when shooting anyway. When the rifle is loaded I assume it is unsafe, and when it is unloaded it is safe. I don’t rely on safeties.
The DTA Safety is more ergonomically placed above the trigger guard and is quieter when you take it off. The AI safety you have to reach up a bit to use and taking it off can spook game if you just flick it forward due to the loud click. The DTA safety then is easier to use without disturbing your position. However the DTA safety feels pretty average vs. the AI. The AI safety is also three position which allows you to not only lock the bolt with full safety on, but also work the bolt with the firing pin still blocked to clear the chamber or do a chambering test on rounds at the range without chance of an AD. I would trust the safety in the AI more when it comes to rugged abuse due to the design and how it blocks the firing pin while detaching the trigger sear.
Bipod Options
The DTA requires a picatinny mounted bipod and I think most of these style bipods suck. This is not a DTA specific issue, but I’'m thinking DTA could come up with a better bipod solution for their weapons than third-party providers. I like what Sako did with the TRG specific bipod as an example. DTA could have a DTA specific bipod made to work with just their chassis.
The AI (AW and AT) uses a stud mount in the chassis for bipods. The AI bipod mount swivels easily and quickly detaches if you don't want it on the rifle. This is not a drawback with the DTA as most rifles today use the picatinny mounting system. It's just that a lot of the bipods are really kind of hacks and I don't especially like most of them due to the complexity and nature of them to come loose, have sharp edges to catch gear, wobble too much, etc. Arguably, the new AX series did away with the bipod mounting stud which is unfortunate for such an important piece of gear on a rifle. I think the dedicated stud attachment point is superior to all picatinny mounting options I’ve ever tried so this is not a uniquely DTA problem, just the way the industry has gone.
Bolt Throw
The DTA bolt throw is a love/hate thing. I got used to it, but I am faster with my AI in prone shooting. In the other positions I didn'’t notice much difference. The DTA is about as fast to me as most standard bolt guns. I do notice that it’s easy to break my cheekweld by accident with the DTA due to the location of the bolt handle and how may hand needs to come back. This can be overcome in training, but still if you are wearing muffs there is tendency for your hand to hit them when cycling the action and this can cause you to lift your head vs. the more conventional AI action.
I see a lot of DTA shooters break cheekweld on cycling the action so this is not a unique situation, but proper practice needs to be followed to break this habit.
With the above said, I find when I’'m shooting prone that the sight picture and position cycling the DTA is almost always disturbed much more than a traditional bolt action rifle of any kind. It kind of takes me out of the groove if engaging targets quickly. Your rear elbow supporting the rifle is moving a lot on the DTA and that just shakes things around more.
Magazine Changes
Magazine changes for me are faster with the AI. I think the magazines on the AI insert cleaner and the central magazine release catch is more ergonomic to me. The AI mag-well is all metal and the magazines insert easier and always drop free. The DTA mag-well is part of the polymer stock and the sharp edges of their magazines tend to catch on it and fight a bit. The plastic gets chewed up as well. The DTA magazine release drops free which is good, but realize the release buttons are at different positions on each side of the rifle so you need to train your hands to move to the right location. I think it is a huge mistake to have button positions for right vs. left hand in different areas for rapid magazine changes on the DTA.
The AI just seems faster to me due to how it is laid out and how the mag release works in one central location (other rifles like the Sako TRG follow a similar pattern). I wish the DTA mag release was at one central location like the AI so there is no muscle memory issues on left vs. right side releasing.
Maintenance
The DTA bolt field strips easily, but you do need a 1/2" drive tool to do it. The bolt internals are simple and you can tell they put a lot of thought into the design. The AI bolt field strips without tools, but there are a lot of small bits for the firing pin adjustment, etc. that could be lost if you start taking things apart out in the field (which is not recommended anyway). The DTA bolt is really a thing of beauty internally and is almost Glock like in simplicity ( a good thing). The AI bolt is finished better, but the DTA bolt simplicity is very good and fewer parts means likely fewer problems.
With DTA you can buy a spare firing pin and striker spring to carry in your field repair kit. These items weigh a couple ounces at most. With AI you can't buy these parts easily. It could be argued that the AI will not break a firing pin, etc. But experience with other rifles tells me that having an option to carry a spare firing pin and spring would be a good idea with any rifle you need to use in the field.
Sling and Rifle Ergonomics
The DTA has good sling mounting options with flush cups front and rear. The new AX and AT do as well so this is a draw. I tend to use a simple sling so the AIAW central sling mount is fine.
I can'’t find a single comfortable way to carry the DTA in a sling. The rifle has ton of stuff sticking out all over it. From the pistol grip, to the rear stock, to the sharp magazine, to the abrasive forearm, to the big bolt handle. It also likes to flop and roll around a bunch and just won’t sit flat. I can’'t carry the DTA rifle comfortably and am constantly being poked, rubbed, snagged, or scrapped with the thing.
The AI isn’t much better in all fairness, but at least there are a few less places for it to grab onto me when hiking and it tends to stay flat instead of flopping around. I’'m wondering if the rifle makers have ever gone on a serious bush bashing hunt with these weapons just to see how much they snag on things when being carried and how comfortable they to hold for many hours at a time?
For me I prefer less things on my rifle so I like the relatively clean lines of the AIAW over the DTA without all the rails all over the place. The DTA, like most modern tactical rifles such as the AX, has too much metal exposed for use in really cold weather. I tend to grab forward on the handguard for positional shooting in some cases and would want to cover this metal area with something to keep my hands warmer (yes even with gloves you’ll feel the cold). Same for carrying the rifle in hand. Aside from both rifles being far too heavy, the exposed metal on the DTA makes it uncomfortable to carry in colder temps. In fairness, the AX series has the same problem.
The AW and AT have more plastic up front and is more comfortable to hold when it is cold. The AX has as much metal on the fore grip as the DTA so again it’s a draw. I taped some foam over the DTA rail to cover it up to keep the cold at bay.
Field Carrying and Usage
The overuse of exposed metal and rails on rifles is completely unnecessary for most people and ruins the ergonomics of the system. Outside of mounting gear for military users on the top rail and front sides, the overabundance of rail space lowers the usability of a rifle.
From a field shooting perspective, the metal tubes and rails are uncomfortable to hold, freezing cold for carrying, snags on gear, collects debris when bush bashing, cuts into your hand from recoil when you hold it outside the plastic areas, and generally ruins the ergonomics of the rifle in all regards compared to simpler stocks. Rifles with heaps of mounting rails are like carrying a freezing cold cheese grater in your hand all day. I guess they are more useful now for PRS shooters attaching barricade stops and other tricks. But mostly for field shooting these kinds of rails are pretty uncomfortable.
I wish that DTA would offer an alternative front rail system that would allow you mount a bipod for instance, but would otherwise be some kind of reinforced synthetic (or carbon fiber) that was not freezing cold to hold and didn’t have sharp edges all over it. Also it would be nice if it had a real palm swell area that ran the length of the fore grip to the bipod/sling attachment area instead of the 2-3 inches of plastic area they have now. Again, this is not just a DTA flaw, but came out of the PSR contract bids from all makers where they got rid of useful foregrip space and replaced it with metal rails. Why not make this area comfortable to hold with your hand as it should be?
Reliability
Both rifles have been reliable and feed reliably to me. Sometimes I do not put the DTA bolt in full battery when running the rifle and I'll get a light strike/no fire on a round. I will then have to run the bolt to reset things. So in this way the DTA is sensitive to the bolt handle being all the way down. The AI on the other hand will still fire a round in that condition as the spring can pull the bolt down into full battery and still strike the primer with sufficient force. The DTA bolt must be run fully and hard so this is a training issue and I’ve had fewer issues with bolt being in battery now that I have 1500+ rounds with the rifle.
The AI has always worked for me in all weather and conditions with minimal maintenance. I keep the action wiped down and lubed and it always works. The DTA has been reliable so far, but I wonder how the rear receiver area where the bolt slides will be working when it gets dust, ice, snow, etc. in it? The AI has less areas exposed to collect dirt and debris vs. the DTA with the large exposed opening behind the bolt into the butt of the weapon. Debris or snow getting in the DTA bolt raceway is going to pack up. I have had leaves and debris already get into the raceway and I could just imagine it turning into a problem eventually. I would like to see DTA have an option so this rear bolt area is covered when not being actively cycled.
In terms of build quality, to me the AI is the winner. I feel the overall construction of the AI is a step above most all rifles I’ve used including the DTA. The exposed bullpup raceway for the bolt on the DTA is a debris magnet and needs to be covered somehow. Also, the fact that the DTA was throwing metal filings into the receiver for a bit didn’t inspire confidence in the overall finish of the weapon. I just trust the AI more due to the overall fit and finish being so much better.
Bullpup vs. Traditional Bolt Rifle Safety
People get freaked out of the bullpup and rounds near their face of the DTA, but actually I think the design is safer than a traditional bolt action rifle like the AI.
With the DTA you have around 5" of thick barrel mounting area forward of the chamber where the quick change clamping takes effect. This area is FAR thicker than the typical bolt action rifle. Further to this, your face is next to more metal that is the receiver where the bolt slides further protecting you. Finally, in the event of something catastrophic, your face is not directly behind the bolt of the weapon as it is on a traditional bolt gun. I think people worried about using the DTA due to the location of the chamber are overstating the problem and likely outcome vs. traditional bolt location.
Accuracy
Accuracy wise it's a draw. I shoot my AI better and this is because I’ve not fully adapted to the DTA ergonomics. But the DTA is easily a 0.3MOA rifle with handloads and I think accuracy between the two is basically identical if the shooter has good technique. I am however more consistently accurate with my AI for whatever reason.
Switch Barrel
The DTA switch barrel is a nice feature, but the new AI rifles have that as well. I have an AW which needs a barrel wrench to do the same thing. I don’t switch barrels a lot so the caliber conversion feature in 60 seconds I could give or take myself with either platform. I doubt either platform is that much better than the other on barrel swaps for it to matter to most shooters. I don’t think any particular switch barrel system has that much advantage over another. I’'m actually happy with my AW even though it takes me a little longer to do a barrel swap.
When playing with the DTA switch barrel I find it doesn't go exactly back to zero. Usually there is a 0.1-0.4 mil shift in zero from what I've experienced so far. I don't know how the AI handles this on the new AT and AX models. Regardless of what the companies tell you, I'd still re-verify zero on any switch barrel rifle to be sure.
Switch caliber is fine, but it probably shouldn’'t be a major buying factor for most shooters that want consistency and repeatability in their performance. Switch barrels can actually promote inconsistency with their ease of major component swapping all the time. I’'d focus on ergonomics before switch barrel speed.
Suppressed Shooting
Shooting suppressed the DTA wins. The DTA is easily 12”" shorter in most suppressed use in my experience vs. the AI. The DTA is also far more maneuverable due to the length with a suppressor (especially with an overbarrel suppressor). I think the DTA muzzle brakes work great and are small and unobtrusive for the calibers used for shooting unsuppressed as well. The AI muzzle brake works fine, but they are larger and heavier than the DTA versions and recoil reduction between the AI and DTA brakes seems about the same to me.
Weight
The DTA wins on weight being about 2 lbs. lighter than the AI. However the AI weight I think can make it a bit more stable in weird positions because it tends to dampen movement. I wouldn’'t recommend taking either of these rifles on a serious hunt on foot, but the DTA has a clear advantage in terms of weight.
Still, DTA should make the rifle lighter. The compact size, firepower, and lighter weight would be a really compelling package.
AI should stop worrying about putting on another 5,000 sq. ft. of rail mounting space and drop 3-4lbs. off their rifles.
If someone wants a heavier rifle, DTA and AI can ship them a picatinny mountable brick to put on it.
Mechanical Problems
The DTA trigger weight set screw worked itself loose and almost came out. If I didn’t happen to inspect it, it would have fallen out completely. The trigger still worked, but this screw should be secured from factory, or staked at the bottom so it simply can’'t fall out. My AI trigger has never given me any trouble after 5000+ rounds of use plus that many dry fires easily. I trust the AI trigger more than the DTA trigger.
Conclusions
All in all, the DTA and AI each have good and bad points. The ergonomics of the DTA need to be tried out beforehand if you are able. And I'd say give it a good go and not just a few minutes. When I first tried the DTA I wasn't sure about it, but after lots of dry firing and live rounds I got more used to it. Although if I’'m honest, I shoot my AI better and faster for comps (and most traditional bolt guns). Each has pros and cons and if you can try both that is best.
With all of the above said, I sold the DTA. I just wasn’'t shooting it well compared to my AI and the bolt throw was always wrecking my position vs. a traditional rifle. Truth be told, I still have the AI but mainly shoot a Sako TRG due to the better ergonomics and much lighter weight. If AI were to release a rifle under 10lbs. I’'d sell my AW and do an upgrade.
Get the DTA if you want compact size and don't mind the drawbacks above. Get the AI if you want a well finished rifle and can handle the significant weight penalty.
Thanks for reading.
Last edited:
