Norinco Type 97 - Yay or Nay?
- Thread starter gord1986
- Start date
canucklehead
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Calgary, AB
There are no other bullpup alternatives in the price range. Worth it? That's a decision you alone can make.
Its a fairly cheap semi auto blaster. It's not a precision rig. The irons SUCK donkey balls. But its reliable and a fun shooter.
Its a fairly cheap semi auto blaster. It's not a precision rig. The irons SUCK donkey balls. But its reliable and a fun shooter.
I don't see these being worth $1000.....
I mean you can get a Colt 6920 for $1000, vs a made in China rifle with bad ergonomics, terrible sights, and add $300+ option for the FTU to really make the rifle optics ready.
If you put a premium of $500 for being NR then I guess you might say it's worth it....I see it as a $500 rifle basically.
I mean you can get a Colt 6920 for $1000, vs a made in China rifle with bad ergonomics, terrible sights, and add $300+ option for the FTU to really make the rifle optics ready.
If you put a premium of $500 for being NR then I guess you might say it's worth it....I see it as a $500 rifle basically.
Depends on what you want. I liked the T97 a lot more than I thought I would. For it's terrible ergos and lack of modularity, it gets some important things right:
-It has a great trigger (for a bullpup) MUCH better than the Tavor.
-Ultra-simple takedown, with big, uncomplicated parts and captured pins. It's an AK bolt with VZ58 striker.
-Lightweight and very well balanced
-Strong return spring and striker spring working in conjunction dampens the recoil well.
I was getting good accuracy out of mine, a hair under 4 MOA and I didn't have an SKS sight drifter with me so I was having to aim entirely off target! I think it's capable of pretty decent accuracy. I'm looking forward to sighhting it in properly to find out.
The irons sights are less than stellar but I didn't have a problem with them. I didn't find them to be nearly as bad as people say. They work.
That's really the best way to describe it. "It works." It's not amazing, it's "F**kin' good enough."
-It has a great trigger (for a bullpup) MUCH better than the Tavor.
-Ultra-simple takedown, with big, uncomplicated parts and captured pins. It's an AK bolt with VZ58 striker.
-Lightweight and very well balanced
-Strong return spring and striker spring working in conjunction dampens the recoil well.
I was getting good accuracy out of mine, a hair under 4 MOA and I didn't have an SKS sight drifter with me so I was having to aim entirely off target! I think it's capable of pretty decent accuracy. I'm looking forward to sighhting it in properly to find out.
The irons sights are less than stellar but I didn't have a problem with them. I didn't find them to be nearly as bad as people say. They work.
That's really the best way to describe it. "It works." It's not amazing, it's "F**kin' good enough."
Last edited:
If you have a Tavor why the heck would you want a Nork t97??? lol
- Location
- East of Home, West of the Rest
Yes there is. In stock form there is the M17s which is comparable in price to the Type 97 even when you factor in import costs using IRG when buying one out of the US.
Stock forms...
Type 97
M17s
And when you customize them, they still run the same ballpark when you factor in the mods.
For the OP, I enjoy both very much. With the FTU mod to the Type 97, the gun is very much worth it.
I would recommend it.
The Tavor is less exciting, and m14/t97.ca are making the system comparable to a Tavor for less... I find those prospects more exciting than attaching a couple of irons and a sight. Big whoop.
I am shocked with people disparaging the quality - I was shocked at how much better it was than expected. It is miles ahead of a kel tec or those rough looking famae models.
Assuming the t97 lower is comparable to the upper in price, with irons, you can get a comparable rifle with a free crate of .223 for the same price as a stand alone Tavor; with the added bonus of being able to space apart the upgrades and the financial burden in reasonable portions. Economically, you will not own a expensive anchor that you can't shoot frequently; but it will not weigh you down with its moderate price.
I couldn't be happier with mine, so I would give it a resounding approval.
The Tavor is less exciting, and m14/t97.ca are making the system comparable to a Tavor for less... I find those prospects more exciting than attaching a couple of irons and a sight. Big whoop.
I am shocked with people disparaging the quality - I was shocked at how much better it was than expected. It is miles ahead of a kel tec or those rough looking famae models.
Assuming the t97 lower is comparable to the upper in price, with irons, you can get a comparable rifle with a free crate of .223 for the same price as a stand alone Tavor; with the added bonus of being able to space apart the upgrades and the financial burden in reasonable portions. Economically, you will not own a expensive anchor that you can't shoot frequently; but it will not weigh you down with its moderate price.
I couldn't be happier with mine, so I would give it a resounding approval.
Phat Eagle
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Fraser Valley, BC
If you already have a Tavor you are CRAZY to consider getting a T97...
Use the money to get an EoTech and magnifier if that's what you want... I run an EoTech RDS with the EoTech G33 magnifier and it's GREAT for CQB. If you're more into 100 plus yards you'd be better off with a conventional scope. If you get a 1-4X you can use it as a RDS for CQB.
- Location
- East of Home, West of the Rest
It is NEVER crazy buying another gun.
But yes, scopes and stuff are important too. But seriously, buy more guns too haha.
