Tell us again about your co workers gun
Haha ya I know eh... It's nice what can I say
Norinco type 97 OR kel tech su-16f help?
- Thread starter HvacFridge Apprentice
- Start date
Haha ya I know eh... It's nice what can I say
I have both. t97 is more fun but... Spec are not so good so things like lar-15 mags may require a bit of modification. For mine i had to add a bit of duct tap to the front of the mag to get it to feed properly.
Thats ok if its the only gun u have that uses them.
Thats ok if its the only gun u have that uses them.
Kel tec is definately a risky gun to buy used. New at least if it breaks you are covered by their lifetime warranty. Unfortunately for Canadians it might take a lifetime to get your warranty work done!
If the Importer was smart they would just replace any broken guns right away for original owners but they don't seem to be service driven.... In the US Keltec is fast with warranty repairs and it's simple.
I'd take the T97 if your an impatient person and you don't like to buy plastic guns that have a reputation for breaking.
If the Importer was smart they would just replace any broken guns right away for original owners but they don't seem to be service driven.... In the US Keltec is fast with warranty repairs and it's simple.
I'd take the T97 if your an impatient person and you don't like to buy plastic guns that have a reputation for breaking.
I started out with a $200 SKS... at the time I had NO IDEA what I even wanted out of a gun so I started with something in my budget, shot it alot, figured out what type of shooter I am and moved on to something more expensive that fit me correctly. If I hadn't started with the cheap gun I probably would have spent a pile of money on something that didnt fit me.
Nice thing about buying lightly used guns is if you take care of them, you rarely loose any $$. And if you do its negligible. So theres little risk if you buy right.
I highly doubt a T97 is going to be shot out at 6000 rounds. Its a military spec rifle. I also highly doubt the OP is planning on buying a rifle he'll keep for 10 years and wear out. Why is it so hard for people to understand budgets for new shooters. Not everyone CAN save $2500 or more. Sometimes a $1000 rifle is the max. Instead of making them feel bad about it, why not help them pick the best choice IN THEIR BUDGET. No one with $1000 is going to be disappointed or regret buying a T97.
It says right in the manual the barrel life is 6000 rounds. the t97 is definitely not a mil spec rifle. The Chinese don't use the t97. They use the qbz95 which is chambered in a completely different caliber. And I know 2 different people that bought a t97 and had bullets pushed into the case every few magazines using several different mags including the factory mag. Sold it in 3 weeks of owning it. And now they both own a tavor.
Just expressing my opinion trying to save the op a head ache.
But what ever you buy congrats and I hope you enjoy shooting as much as I do!
Why would anyone sell a newly bought defective gun? Wouldn't the best thing be to return it to the vendor for replacement or refund?
If there are issues then the importer and manufacturer need to be held responsible.
I wouldn't say they were defective. That's just how the t97 is. Not all of them. But I'm willing to bet 80% of t97 owners have had a bullet get pushed into the casing. It happens on every t97 Ive shot. Happens most with lar mags but I've seen it happen with gen 2 p mags and E lander magazines. North Sylva won't acknowledge there is anything wrong with the t97. Even after 50 people said their barrel had a gouge from the gas port being drilled too deep they said it's not a big deal and wouldn't do a thing about it.
I owned a SU16 and enjoyed it. It was more accurate than I expected. Only reason I sold it was I wanted an AR.
Have a look at the CSA VZ58. I own one still and completely lovr it. They are under 1000 on the EE and new and come in 223 and 762x39. I would say its better built than both t97 an su16.
Have a look at the CSA VZ58. I own one still and completely lovr it. They are under 1000 on the EE and new and come in 223 and 762x39. I would say its better built than both t97 an su16.
The trigger is better on the SU-16. Having said that...T97 all the way. Gen 2 PMags work flawlessly in my T97 and with a low mount and a Vortex Strikefire the rifle kicks. I love mine. Crappy mag release and safety no withstanding.
From the sticky
Service life of the rifle is 6000 rounds. I find this to be much underestimated and others have shot T97's with more than 20,000 rounds through them.
It may well be a conservative estimate for a T97A being fired fully auto. The T97 has a hammer forged hard chrome plated barrel and hammer forged barrels tend to last longer than more traditional forms of rifling.
Comparison of T-97 and SU-16F
A bit of a latecomer to this conversation sadly, sorry I didn't see this earlier.
I happen to have both a T-97and a SU-16F. Both were purchased used, the T-97 lightly used, the SU-16F a little longer but still working great.
I've done almost no mods or accessorizing on the SU-16F other than put on a Burris Fastfire III with a quick release mount, and a new takedown pin.
http://www.takedownpins.com/Kel-Tec_Takedown_Pins_Online_Store.html
http://www.burrisoptics.com/fastfire.html
The T-97 is stock. No mods or accessories at all.
My observations: I have shot the SU-16 a fair bit, the T-97 only twice. Both rifles have advantages and both have faults. I also own an XCR-M that I really, really like - and so I'm thinking of selling both of these rifles to finance an XCR-L instead. We'll see.
Ergonomics: The SU-16F wins between the two. The cocking handle is on the right (I'd prefer the left side), but it's got a pretty standard safety and mag release. Maybe because I'm not used to a Bulpup (I spent a good chunk of two decades slinging a C7) the T-97 just doesn't feel right. I like to have my forward hand extended further out than the foregrip on the T-97 permits. The rifle is just too close in – but that could just be me being used to a full length rifle. The cocking handle of the T-97 is in a ridiculous place, and I find the sight plane up on the carrying handle too high. Though a Flat Top Upper would eliminate those problems completely. But regardless, the safety and mag release are a pain in the ass on the T-97, they're way back by your shoulder. The mag release in particular is difficult to use with your left hand.
Cost: Edge goes to the SU-16F on this one – simple math, it's cheaper. Throw in a Flat Top Upper, and the T-97 is now 50% more than the SU-16F. Throw in a Lower Hand Guard to fix the crumby trigger (more on that below) and you're at probably double the price of a stock SU-16F I would imagine.
Build quality: This one goes to the T-97. It's built quite well. The plastic parts are only for ergonomics, the receiver and all the functional bits are solid metal. Conversely the receiver on the SU-16F is plastic. It is a lot lighter than the T-97 because of this, but with the T-97's weight closer to the shoulder, the difference is only minor. My concern is going to the arctic or extreme cold – I would worry about dropping / banging the SU-16F and rather than shattering a handguard, you shatter the receiver rendering the rifle inoperable. But I'm talking Tuktoyuktuk type cold here, not the Ottawa Valley in November type cold.
Portability for transport / storage: SLIGHT edge goes to the SU-16F. The SU-16F folds easily, and can be in action in moments. I got the easy-takedown pin, so I don't even need a tool to break it down. While the T-97 is short on it's own, the folded SU-16F is just slightly shorter.
Trigger: SU-16F wins HANDS DOWN. It's the trigger that is the game-changer here. The trigger on the SU-16F is reasonably crisp (even though it's a polymer trigger, it still breaks sharply with little travel). Conversely, the T-97 trigger is absolutely, iredeemably horrible. I've played with a Tavor once, and people #####ed about that trigger – it's heavenly compared to the T-97. The T-97 trigger is so bad, that one factor would compel me to sell it. It's got a loooooooong travel, you have to pull it back almost a half an inch before anything happens. When the trigger does release the hammer, there's maybe a 10th of a second of a pause for the hammer to travel forward and strike the firing pin. It's really noticeable, I've never encountered a rifle with a trigger / hammer latency time like this. It's disconscerting and frankly, it makes me hate the rifle. For blasting watermelons at 25m it suffices, but I wouldn't go hunting with the T-97, I'm not confident I could hit a moving target - when I pull the trigger, there's just too much time delay before that primer is struck. Seriously, a tenth of a second doesn't sound like a lot, but it seems like too long to me. Maybe there's something wrong with my rifle? Or is this a common thing for these? I don't know...
BUT... There's talk of both the T97.ca Lower Hand Guard (LHG) improving the trigger, but now you're investing into the rifle for another few hundred dollars more. There's also this other potential option:
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/1075956-T97-trigger-pull-UPDATE-on-page-2
Honestly, if they can improve the trigger and the hammer travel, I'll change my tune on the T-97.
Accuracy: SU-16F wins, but it's close. Both are what you'd expect for the price. I can get 2.5 - 3 MoA out of each rifle at 100m using norinco ammo. But the shots with the SU-16F are a couple of second apart, while I have to really REALLY concentrate and pause to get that accuracy out of the T-97. Shooting at a similar pace results in 3 - 4 MOA with the T-97. The trigger on the T-97 is what kills its accuracy, I think with a better trigger it would outperform the SU-16F. For the SU-16F, the barrel is quite thin that you'll get fliers after it heats up from a period of intense shooting. Yeah, barrel heat – if I'm shooting the SU-16F a lot, I wait a while before I put it into a case, I'm afraid it would melt the foam.
Rapid shooting / target acquisition: T-97 wins. Obviously being shorter, the T-97 handles better. The extra weight isn't noticeable since it's closer to the shoulder. Mag changes are more difficult though, so I'd call this one a draw. (Unlike some others who have found problems, my LAR mags fit perfectly). The SU-16F mag changes are quick. I'm used to a bolt release on a C7, that would have been nice, but you just #### it and you're back in action. Same with the T-97, but that cocking handle on the top is really not jiving with me.
Reliability: Tie. Despite being old, the SU-16F feeds, shoots and extracts quite reliably. So does the T-97, I got it just after the previous owner ran it through a break-in period. I'm quite impressed with both of them in that regard. No issues with either. I'll get the occasional stoppage with either of them (an empty casing got pinched between the ejection port and the bolt, once with the XU-16F, that was weird, but 'stovepipes' like that don't occur regularly. Only seen two of 'em in loads of shooting).
Ease of maintenance: Both of them kind of suck. Stripping the T-97 is a bit of a pain (but again, I'm used to a C7 or an XCR, which is break it open, remove the bolt carrier, and you have access to everything you need in there... So maybe I'm just spoiled). But once the T-97 is stripped, you have access to everything you need to get to. The SU-16F is easier to strip, but you can't look down the barrel from behind the action since the rear of the plastic upper receiver is in the way. Getting in to the guts of the action is more difficult. The chamber is virtually inaccessible without contortionist fingers or some clever tool-use. I'm the sort of guy who cleans his rifles after EVERY shooting, so this is a concern for me. Might be easier with a pull-through string vice a rod I suppose.
Misc points for the SU-16F: The extra mag pouches in the stock of the SU-16F are pointless (LAR mags don't fit tight, they drop out if you bang the rifle around). The bipod is equally poor quality, but it doesn't get in the way and I suppose it's a good backup to have. Don't use it much myself. If I keep the SU-16F I'll add in one of these stocks (no idea how if I can get one in Canada, but I'll keep my eye out).
http://www.keltecweapons.com/su-16-...-and-su-22-accessories/charlie-folding-stock/
Misc points for the T-97: The rear sight on the top of that carrying handle is junk. For the rifle itself, I used froglube CLP on it, and the first time out I must have put it in the wrong places, because that rifle smoked and steamed like a warm dog poo in a snowbank. But that could be my human error, lubing up the wrong parts.
Hope that helps. Again, these are just my observations, I'm not an expert with either rifle, and I can only report my observations, and neither of my rifles are new so they might have come with "gremlins".
Cheers!
A bit of a latecomer to this conversation sadly, sorry I didn't see this earlier.
I happen to have both a T-97and a SU-16F. Both were purchased used, the T-97 lightly used, the SU-16F a little longer but still working great.
I've done almost no mods or accessorizing on the SU-16F other than put on a Burris Fastfire III with a quick release mount, and a new takedown pin.
http://www.takedownpins.com/Kel-Tec_Takedown_Pins_Online_Store.html
http://www.burrisoptics.com/fastfire.html
The T-97 is stock. No mods or accessories at all.
My observations: I have shot the SU-16 a fair bit, the T-97 only twice. Both rifles have advantages and both have faults. I also own an XCR-M that I really, really like - and so I'm thinking of selling both of these rifles to finance an XCR-L instead. We'll see.
Ergonomics: The SU-16F wins between the two. The cocking handle is on the right (I'd prefer the left side), but it's got a pretty standard safety and mag release. Maybe because I'm not used to a Bulpup (I spent a good chunk of two decades slinging a C7) the T-97 just doesn't feel right. I like to have my forward hand extended further out than the foregrip on the T-97 permits. The rifle is just too close in – but that could just be me being used to a full length rifle. The cocking handle of the T-97 is in a ridiculous place, and I find the sight plane up on the carrying handle too high. Though a Flat Top Upper would eliminate those problems completely. But regardless, the safety and mag release are a pain in the ass on the T-97, they're way back by your shoulder. The mag release in particular is difficult to use with your left hand.
Cost: Edge goes to the SU-16F on this one – simple math, it's cheaper. Throw in a Flat Top Upper, and the T-97 is now 50% more than the SU-16F. Throw in a Lower Hand Guard to fix the crumby trigger (more on that below) and you're at probably double the price of a stock SU-16F I would imagine.
Build quality: This one goes to the T-97. It's built quite well. The plastic parts are only for ergonomics, the receiver and all the functional bits are solid metal. Conversely the receiver on the SU-16F is plastic. It is a lot lighter than the T-97 because of this, but with the T-97's weight closer to the shoulder, the difference is only minor. My concern is going to the arctic or extreme cold – I would worry about dropping / banging the SU-16F and rather than shattering a handguard, you shatter the receiver rendering the rifle inoperable. But I'm talking Tuktoyuktuk type cold here, not the Ottawa Valley in November type cold.
Portability for transport / storage: SLIGHT edge goes to the SU-16F. The SU-16F folds easily, and can be in action in moments. I got the easy-takedown pin, so I don't even need a tool to break it down. While the T-97 is short on it's own, the folded SU-16F is just slightly shorter.
Trigger: SU-16F wins HANDS DOWN. It's the trigger that is the game-changer here. The trigger on the SU-16F is reasonably crisp (even though it's a polymer trigger, it still breaks sharply with little travel). Conversely, the T-97 trigger is absolutely, iredeemably horrible. I've played with a Tavor once, and people #####ed about that trigger – it's heavenly compared to the T-97. The T-97 trigger is so bad, that one factor would compel me to sell it. It's got a loooooooong travel, you have to pull it back almost a half an inch before anything happens. When the trigger does release the hammer, there's maybe a 10th of a second of a pause for the hammer to travel forward and strike the firing pin. It's really noticeable, I've never encountered a rifle with a trigger / hammer latency time like this. It's disconscerting and frankly, it makes me hate the rifle. For blasting watermelons at 25m it suffices, but I wouldn't go hunting with the T-97, I'm not confident I could hit a moving target - when I pull the trigger, there's just too much time delay before that primer is struck. Seriously, a tenth of a second doesn't sound like a lot, but it seems like too long to me. Maybe there's something wrong with my rifle? Or is this a common thing for these? I don't know...
BUT... There's talk of both the T97.ca Lower Hand Guard (LHG) improving the trigger, but now you're investing into the rifle for another few hundred dollars more. There's also this other potential option:
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/1075956-T97-trigger-pull-UPDATE-on-page-2
Honestly, if they can improve the trigger and the hammer travel, I'll change my tune on the T-97.
Accuracy: SU-16F wins, but it's close. Both are what you'd expect for the price. I can get 2.5 - 3 MoA out of each rifle at 100m using norinco ammo. But the shots with the SU-16F are a couple of second apart, while I have to really REALLY concentrate and pause to get that accuracy out of the T-97. Shooting at a similar pace results in 3 - 4 MOA with the T-97. The trigger on the T-97 is what kills its accuracy, I think with a better trigger it would outperform the SU-16F. For the SU-16F, the barrel is quite thin that you'll get fliers after it heats up from a period of intense shooting. Yeah, barrel heat – if I'm shooting the SU-16F a lot, I wait a while before I put it into a case, I'm afraid it would melt the foam.
Rapid shooting / target acquisition: T-97 wins. Obviously being shorter, the T-97 handles better. The extra weight isn't noticeable since it's closer to the shoulder. Mag changes are more difficult though, so I'd call this one a draw. (Unlike some others who have found problems, my LAR mags fit perfectly). The SU-16F mag changes are quick. I'm used to a bolt release on a C7, that would have been nice, but you just #### it and you're back in action. Same with the T-97, but that cocking handle on the top is really not jiving with me.
Reliability: Tie. Despite being old, the SU-16F feeds, shoots and extracts quite reliably. So does the T-97, I got it just after the previous owner ran it through a break-in period. I'm quite impressed with both of them in that regard. No issues with either. I'll get the occasional stoppage with either of them (an empty casing got pinched between the ejection port and the bolt, once with the XU-16F, that was weird, but 'stovepipes' like that don't occur regularly. Only seen two of 'em in loads of shooting).
Ease of maintenance: Both of them kind of suck. Stripping the T-97 is a bit of a pain (but again, I'm used to a C7 or an XCR, which is break it open, remove the bolt carrier, and you have access to everything you need in there... So maybe I'm just spoiled). But once the T-97 is stripped, you have access to everything you need to get to. The SU-16F is easier to strip, but you can't look down the barrel from behind the action since the rear of the plastic upper receiver is in the way. Getting in to the guts of the action is more difficult. The chamber is virtually inaccessible without contortionist fingers or some clever tool-use. I'm the sort of guy who cleans his rifles after EVERY shooting, so this is a concern for me. Might be easier with a pull-through string vice a rod I suppose.
Misc points for the SU-16F: The extra mag pouches in the stock of the SU-16F are pointless (LAR mags don't fit tight, they drop out if you bang the rifle around). The bipod is equally poor quality, but it doesn't get in the way and I suppose it's a good backup to have. Don't use it much myself. If I keep the SU-16F I'll add in one of these stocks (no idea how if I can get one in Canada, but I'll keep my eye out).
http://www.keltecweapons.com/su-16-...-and-su-22-accessories/charlie-folding-stock/
Misc points for the T-97: The rear sight on the top of that carrying handle is junk. For the rifle itself, I used froglube CLP on it, and the first time out I must have put it in the wrong places, because that rifle smoked and steamed like a warm dog poo in a snowbank. But that could be my human error, lubing up the wrong parts.
Hope that helps. Again, these are just my observations, I'm not an expert with either rifle, and I can only report my observations, and neither of my rifles are new so they might have come with "gremlins".
Cheers!
Last edited:
