I am looking into getting my first bullpup to break up the collection a little bit. I want to know which of the 2 is most durable and reliable. I have researched both the Tavor X95 and Steyr AUG and found pros and cons to both. Tavor is modern, more customizable, uses AR mags, more ergonomic and intuitive AR style controls but is newer without much of a battle proven history. The AUG has a battle proven history, quick change barrels, less customizable, different controls, uses proprietary mags unless you can find one with a NATO stock and burning your hand on the gas block is a factor if you grab the foregrip too high. Which of the 2 is the better choice from a durability & reliability aspect?
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Well, I’ve had 3 AUG’s including factory full autos. All shoot better than you can hold and I cannot recall ever having a malfunction. Couple mods needed, do the trigger tamer, the Corvus Defensio mag catch and ejection port deflector. There’s a flush cup sling swivel takedown button, can’t recall from whom, but it’s nice to have.
....the stated criteria of "durability & reliability" is going to be greater with the newer platform if either one is going to be used regularly and not safe-queens all the time. Parts for the AUG are going to be hard to acquire, only because of it's age. Lack of readily available parts impacts "durability & reliability".
Since AUG’s are in current production, and have many years of military use, I think durability and reliability are pretty well worked out. What makes you think parts are hard to acquire.
May i suggest the desert tech mdr or keltec rfb. Your lefty friends do not like to eat brass.
Do you own and regularly shoot a DT MDR?
From what I understand from a lengthy thread here, their reliability can vary wildly.
They are not a refined design yet.
Last edited:
I do not own and regularly shoot the mdr. I shot one at a buddies place. Put about 5 mags through that day. No hiccups and i was impressed. Not sure if it was the older mdr or the mdrx though.
As far as the rfb i do own and shoot often. (Well when ammo wasnt a pain to find) some trouble in the beginning but after about 100-150 rounds and some gas setting adjustment it smoothed out. Now i would not hesitate to grab that gun.
The corvus case deflector solves that issue with the AUG without making the chamber uncheckable like the others.
I am clearly biased towards the Steyr but in 3 years I have never had any malfunctions or problems with my A2.
I dont have any experience on the aug. to me it seems even if you put a case deflector on the aug the ejection port itself seems too close. Other than that i have no complaints and it looks like a good gun. Hell its been in service longer than ive been on the earth.
As far as the rfb i had problems in the beginning. But i figure it was the knuckledragger behind the gun monkeying around with the gas system. When i bought a fal it took me a solid 2 months to figure out the gas settings.
I own a Tavor , Nato AUG and MDR..
MDR runs like crap!!! Super heavy, I had to remove the forward eject Plate, it would just eat the brass and malfunction the rifle!
Tabor, upgraded the sear pack, love it, super fun but heavy...
AUG love it the most. It just looks cool and has some awesome history. There are some upgrades to the front pull down forearm that you can do so you won't burn your little hand.
Overall my Tavor and AUG run flawless, wish my MDR did...
MDR runs like crap!!! Super heavy, I had to remove the forward eject Plate, it would just eat the brass and malfunction the rifle!
Tabor, upgraded the sear pack, love it, super fun but heavy...
AUG love it the most. It just looks cool and has some awesome history. There are some upgrades to the front pull down forearm that you can do so you won't burn your little hand.
Overall my Tavor and AUG run flawless, wish my MDR did...
Last edited:
I own both the Tavor X95 and Steyr AUG (Nato Stock).
From my own normal usage and my dataset of one, I believe durability and reliability is equivalent for both rifles. Having used the same ammo in both (Wolf Gold), I haven't had any malfunctions/issues in either.
From InRangeTV's mud tests as shown below, the AUG doesn't do as well as the X95. However, the X95 doesn't do too well in the mud either.
From my own normal usage and my dataset of one, I believe durability and reliability is equivalent for both rifles. Having used the same ammo in both (Wolf Gold), I haven't had any malfunctions/issues in either.
From InRangeTV's mud tests as shown below, the AUG doesn't do as well as the X95. However, the X95 doesn't do too well in the mud either.
You are a bit further back when you use the case deflector as a faceshield, so if your optic has a tight eye relief this could be an issue. Other than that it works fine.
IWI all the way... The HTI is a .50 BMG, for simi-auto I love my Tavor although the trigger sucks, but that's easily replaced..
Super Sabra trigger pack with matching lightening bow trigger will clean that right up.
It sadly is true. From what I understand, it's nothing to do with the Tavor's performance, it's just financially more feasible and easier to source parts for the M4 instead of putting all production on their one small arms company for the Tavor.
Additional edit: I also read somewhere that the Tavor was going to be for spec-ops type units and M4's for standard military. But another article said that the Tavor was to be pulled from primary military units and issued only to reservists.
lots of conflicting intel.
Last edited:
well the longer barrel bullpup design does have it's advantages but financially, it's a no brainer imho. I was always suprised by their move to go tavorIt sadly is true. From what I understand, it's nothing to do with the Tavor's performance, it's just financially more feasible and easier to source parts for the M4 instead of putting all production on their one small arms company for the Tavor.
Additional edit: I also read somewhere that the Tavor was going to be for spec-ops type units and M4's for standard military. But another article said that the Tavor was to be pulled from primary military units and issued only to reservists.
It sadly is true. From what I understand, it's nothing to do with the Tavor's performance, it's just financially more feasible and easier to source parts for the M4 instead of putting all production on their one small arms company for the Tavor.
Additional edit: I also read somewhere that the Tavor was going to be for spec-ops type units and M4's for standard military. But another article said that the Tavor was to be pulled from primary military units and issued only to reservists.
...OPSEC, keep their multiple adversaries off balance ....
I can see the advantages they were going for in their overall design and performance, and it was by no means lagging anywhere except in the financial department.
Magpul makes Steyr AUG style magazines that don’t require a NATO AUG stock.
I’ve owned a couple of AUGs (A1 and A2) since 1992. Ran one (A1) from 1992-1995 instead of an MP5 on an LE SWAT team.
Same OAL as an MP5 A2, better cartridge against soft body armor wearing bad guys. (Yeah we had one in 1985, prior to our team formation.)
I have zero issues using an AUG for what it was designed for. Plenty of YouTube videos on various options how to change mags.
The A3 has the most rail space for accessories.
FWIW, to me, the AUG is far more ergonomic than the Tavor.
I’ve owned a couple of AUGs (A1 and A2) since 1992. Ran one (A1) from 1992-1995 instead of an MP5 on an LE SWAT team.
Same OAL as an MP5 A2, better cartridge against soft body armor wearing bad guys. (Yeah we had one in 1985, prior to our team formation.)
I have zero issues using an AUG for what it was designed for. Plenty of YouTube videos on various options how to change mags.
The A3 has the most rail space for accessories.
FWIW, to me, the AUG is far more ergonomic than the Tavor.
my recollection from the reviews, users, is that the Tavor has never been described as an accurate gun, in comparison to the M4. it's good enough for CQB and probably 100yd engagements, and that's probably where most of the IDF engagements occur.It sadly is true. From what I understand, it's nothing to do with the Tavor's performance, it's just financially more feasible and easier to source parts for the M4 instead of putting all production on their one small arms company for the Tavor.
Additional edit: I also read somewhere that the Tavor was going to be for spec-ops type units and M4's for standard military. But another article said that the Tavor was to be pulled from primary military units and issued only to reservists.
I realize this is a bit of a dated thread, yet for all the negatives that you’ll read about for both the Tavor & the Aug (not necessarily in this thread, but on the internet), you’re generally reading from guys in their mom’s basement as both the Aug and the Tavor have plenty of real world combat experience. Sure, the M4 far outpaces both with the # of units deployed and probably shots fired in anger, yet keep in mind that the Aug design is almost 50 years or so (1977, I believe).
I own both, as well as a safe full of M4s and they’re really designed for different purposes. You either like bull pups or not, i guess, yet I have zero problems with cqb type stuff with any of the three, and with the right sights, you can easily reach out to 300-400 yards with typical solider issued sights, further with SDMR type sights. Steyr came out with a NATO stock for the Aug which allows you to use all those PMags you’ve got squirreled away, yet both of my Augs are the “Aug mag” (The Aug is a proprietary polymer box mag - not sure if it has a name). I can tell you I’ve never damaged one, although I’m also not humping my Aug and its associated mags through challenging conditions. The OP in this thread (years ago) said he was looking at branching out and trying something new, so go ahead and do the Aug mag. Lol.
The manual of arms is different for both the Aug & the Tavor, and the balance is different than what we’ll all probably used to, yet you can get used to them with practice. If I were going in harms way, I’d probably take an M4 but that’s only because of personal experience and likely supply chain issues. For a range toy? Absolutely, you should get an Aug. And a Tavor. I have both an original Tavor, the X95, and a Tavor 7. I routinely hit steel silhouette targets at 300 yards with them.
I own both, as well as a safe full of M4s and they’re really designed for different purposes. You either like bull pups or not, i guess, yet I have zero problems with cqb type stuff with any of the three, and with the right sights, you can easily reach out to 300-400 yards with typical solider issued sights, further with SDMR type sights. Steyr came out with a NATO stock for the Aug which allows you to use all those PMags you’ve got squirreled away, yet both of my Augs are the “Aug mag” (The Aug is a proprietary polymer box mag - not sure if it has a name). I can tell you I’ve never damaged one, although I’m also not humping my Aug and its associated mags through challenging conditions. The OP in this thread (years ago) said he was looking at branching out and trying something new, so go ahead and do the Aug mag. Lol.
The manual of arms is different for both the Aug & the Tavor, and the balance is different than what we’ll all probably used to, yet you can get used to them with practice. If I were going in harms way, I’d probably take an M4 but that’s only because of personal experience and likely supply chain issues. For a range toy? Absolutely, you should get an Aug. And a Tavor. I have both an original Tavor, the X95, and a Tavor 7. I routinely hit steel silhouette targets at 300 yards with them.
Did you just necro a thread just to say “i like bullpups” ??I realize this is a bit of a dated thread, yet for all the negatives that you’ll read about for both the Tavor & the Aug (not necessarily in this thread, but on the internet), you’re generally reading from guys in their mom’s basement as both the Aug and the Tavor have plenty of real world combat experience. Sure, the M4 far outpaces both with the # of units deployed and probably shots fired in anger, yet keep in mind that the Aug design is almost 50 years or so (1977, I believe).
I own both, as well as a safe full of M4s and they’re really designed for different purposes. You either like bull pups or not, i guess, yet I have zero problems with cqb type stuff with any of the three, and with the right sights, you can easily reach out to 300-400 yards with typical solider issued sights, further with SDMR type sights. Steyr came out with a NATO stock for the Aug which allows you to use all those PMags you’ve got squirreled away, yet both of my Augs are the “Aug mag” (The Aug is a proprietary polymer box mag - not sure if it has a name). I can tell you I’ve never damaged one, although I’m also not humping my Aug and its associated mags through challenging conditions. The OP in this thread (years ago) said he was looking at branching out and trying something new, so go ahead and do the Aug mag. Lol.
The manual of arms is different for both the Aug & the Tavor, and the balance is different than what we’ll all probably used to, yet you can get used to them with practice. If I were going in harms way, I’d probably take an M4 but that’s only because of personal experience and likely supply chain issues. For a range toy? Absolutely, you should get an Aug. And a Tavor. I have both an original Tavor, the X95, and a Tavor 7. I routinely hit steel silhouette targets at 300 yards with them.
Also I like bullpups…well honestly just because of Halo.
M16A2 clone ftw!
Well, yeah, I guess. Lol. But mostly to say that the Aug & Tavor were equally reliable/durable imho.
