[TomGervasio]

I'm looking for some of you experts' advice on this. I currently have an 18-inch Barrel IWI Tavor SAR . I'm about to put a Leupold D-EVO and LCO on it, but I was thinking I could put the money into the AR-10(B-series) that I wanted, just because every "shooter" needs or has an AR platform, and I really want to use the 6.5 Grendel so I may consider a barrel swap.

My problem is, I can't decide which one to do. Buy a Leopold for 2 grand and have an awesome sight that allows me the versatility that I'm looking for with a quality piece of glass, or perhaps, buy a rifle for 1-grand that performs better at mid-long ranges, and is versatile in many facets of shooting.

The Tavor 18 5.56x45 NATO caught my eye at first, but I'm starting to realize that it's not all it's cracked up to be. It's a pea-shooter compared to the AR-10 and a 6.5 Grendel round, as the Grendel was specifically made to outdo the 5.56. Because of this, I'm not even sure if the capability of the Tavor can match the 600m range I can get out of the Leupold D-EVO. With an 18-inch barrel and 77 grain BTHP ammo, the bullet wouldn't have the muzzle velocity needed at even 400m to begin to yaw, so the terminal ballistics would be terrible even if I slung that undersized 5.56x45 400m. It's really a 50-90m rifle. Essentially, my scope would severely outdo my rifle's capabilities if I put the D-EVO on the TAVOR.

This is why I wanted the AR-10, because critical shots out to 600m wouldn't be a problem; however, would I be giving up a good scope? And do I need 2 rifles in a defense/survival situation where I have no shelter, and have to carry my own belongings? Is that even practical? (It's likely not).

I'm starting to realize that the Tavor was a BAD BAD 2-grand purchase. It's a toy essentially, with no potential for practical application other than in close-quarter situations where you may as well buy a shotgun.

Please, your thoughts.

D-EVO & LCO or AR-10 B-Series with 2 cheaper scopes. I just don't want to be the guy that has 10 $2,000 guns, but can't hit a target at 50m because his scopes cost $50. If I were to get the AR-10, I'd likely invest in a High-Powered low-price Leupold scope for the AR, and a Vortex Spitfire for the Tavor.

Thanks.

 

[Stevejet]

You seem to have identified your "quandary". "Essentially, my scope would severely outdo my rifle's capabilities......" " I just don't want to be the guy that has 10 $2,000 guns, but can't hit a target at 50m because his scopes cost $50". ??????????

There's an answer there somewhere. You'll arrive at it. In the mean time, don't become "that guy" you describe!

 

[TomGervasio]

You seem to have identified your "quandary". "Essentially, my scope would severely outdo my rifle's capabilities......" " I just don't want to be the guy that has 10 $2,000 guns, but can't hit a target at 50m because his scopes cost $50". ??????????

There's an answer there somewhere. You'll arrive at it. In the mean time, don't become "that guy" you describe!

You know what? You're right. I practically answered my own question. I said, my scope would be too good for my rifle, which is preferred rather than the opposite. This would ensure that my rifle's ability is always being maximized, all things the same. Then I said, I don't want to buy multiple guns and not be accurate on any of them, which is another argument in favor of the scope. Then I said, it wouldn't be practical to carry two full-frame rifles, which is another argument in favor of the scope. I guess my desire for the AR-10 was blinding me.

Thanks for the wake-up Steve.

 

[Rivervalley0311]

No need to build a 6.5 Grendel on an Ar10 platform,,,,,it was designed to work just fine on the Ar15 platform.

 

[TomGervasio]

No need to build a 6.5 Grendel on an Ar10 platform,,,,,it was designed to work just fine on the Ar15 platform.

Yeah, there'd be no point in me buying an AR-15 when I already have a Tavor. The Tavor, in my opinion, is superior to the AR-15. It's hard to compare the AR-10 to the Tavor simply because they're not intended for the same uses, so I shouldn't have done that.

 

[Popeye]

Your Tavor SAR is the semi-automatic version of the Israeli designed Tavor TAR-21 which is currently issued to their military. This bullpup carbine was specifically designed for close-in fighting in what passes for cities in that part of the world. Its design makes it a superb weapon for maneuvering in tight spaces, such as inside armored transport vehicles, aircraft, ships, alleys or tight hallways. It is unbelievably reliable and will go bang every single time and under the most extreme circumstances. It may be the best home defense carbine manufactured today.

This is not a weapon for ranges in excess of 100 yards (really, 60 yards). For extended range or competition shooting it has what can be best described as a 'crappy' trigger. Its creepier than an uninvited clown at a 12-year-old girl's birthday party and it’s exceedingly heavy (8 lb pull?). Its butt heavy weight and the short overall length means that this rifle is most definitely not intended to leave the realm of the red dot.

Putting any scope over 2X on this rifle is a waste of scope. More scope magnification will not make it shoot any more accurately than its capable of shooting.

 

[TomGervasio]

Your Tavor SAR is the semi-automatic version of the Israeli designed Tavor TAR-21 which is currently issued to their military. This bullpup carbine was specifically designed for close-in fighting in what passes for cities in that part of the world. Its design makes it a superb weapon for maneuvering in tight spaces, such as inside armored transport vehicles, aircraft, ships, alleys or tight hallways. It is unbelievably reliable and will go bang every single time and under the most extreme circumstances. It may be the best home defense carbine manufactured today.

This is not a weapon for ranges in excess of 100 yards (really, 60 yards). For extended range or competition shooting it has what can be best described as a 'crappy' trigger. Its creepier than an uninvited clown at a 12-year-old girl's birthday party and it’s exceedingly heavy (8 lb pull?). Its butt heavy weight and the short overall length means that this rifle is most definitely not intended to leave the realm of the red dot.

Putting any scope over 2X on this rifle is a waste of scope. More scope magnification will not make it shoot any more accurately than its capable of shooting.

Lol, thanks for the reply, but I just put a 4x Trijicon ACOG on it. I realize magnification won't make me more accurate, but I'd imagine the farther out you're shooting, the more tiny movements of the gun matter. And if the image you're getting through your scope is larger (more magnified), it's only axiomatic that that would equate to better shot placement, assuming you already know how to shoot straight. Obviously there's a point at which magnification becomes too much, but I'd imagine that would have just as much to do with the average distance of your engagements, as it has to do with the gun's range capabilities. I'm probably not going to be using it REAL close-quarters, as I've always thought pistols were made specifically for that, and will be far more maneuverable than any rifle and even SBR. With that being said, most of my engagements, will likely be 50-80 yards. Having looked through a red dot at 50 yards, you can practically see a targets upperbody, lowerbody, and heady, and that's the extent of that, simply because the image is so small. The 4x ACOG at 50-80 yards gives me the true 1x magnification at 15-25 yards that is optimal for precise shot placement. That makes sense considering, 1x is good a 15, and 4x15=60 yards. The other side to it is, even if a target was 100 yards out, I'd much rather engage that person with a 4x sight than a 2x, especially if what you say is true, and the rifle is out of its range at anything in excess of 100 yards. I believe I chose the right optic, and if worse comes to worse and I find most of my engagements to be too close for my scope, I throw an RMR on the ACOG or at a 45-degree offset and all will be well with the world.

Thank you though.