Norc bashing is it really warranted?
- Thread starter randyhub
- Start date
Thank you!!
Forgot about my satin/nickel Colt Commander I bought in the 80s and had to replace the sights and do the feed ramp polish, polish the trigger components, and open up the slide port for cases!!
Funny how we just expected to tune our American .45s for comp... Guess some things just don' change.
Does this apply to my Colt Commander or are American guns really all that different?
In the '80s you had little choice, factory Colt, used USGI, or custom, fast forward 35 years and there are dozens of 1911 makers with dozens of different options....kind of a poor example.
Not really - there was Springfield, AMT and others all of which fit nicely in the same boat as Colt - no one complained about having to get 'tuning' (more like full rebuilds) done on $1000 guns, now it's let's get all whiney about tuning a $350 gun? When a frame/slide kit from the US costs more? Do you remember the Springfield "kit" - a complete but disassembled 1911, that was the best deal you could get in the early '90's - instead of paying to have the gun taken apart, you could just drop it off at the gunsmith and have him build it so it would work. The kit was $750, the build was the same.
Last edited:
lejarretnoir
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- 162km from Connaught
I have three Norc 1911's and the AR-15. All work flawless for knockoffs after trigger jobs. 
You seem to care a lot about what other people think about your guns. Why is that? If Norincos satisfy your requirements, why does it bother you so much that other people consider them crap?
P.S. Comparing Norincos to water cooled Porsches is a little rich...
Last edited:
JACKSMYDOG
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Haldimand County, Ontario
Okay, I'll take some suggestions for a 1911 (9mm and 45ACP please) around the $400 mark that are 10 times better than a Norc. I have 2 Norc 1911 Sports (9mm & 45ACP), both were bought new for under $340. I haven't shot the 45 much, but has been flawless. The 9mm I have about 4,000 rounds through it, and it is GREAT. Very accurate and not 1 FTE/FTF/misfire/or any other malfunction, aside from the slide not locking open occasionally. The 9mm has been cleaned once after the very first range trip, since then a few drops of oil every 500 rounds or so, but no cleaning otherwise. I'm not suggesting there aren't lots of better guns out there, just I haven't seen many offerings at the prices you suggest, that are any better than a Norc, let alone 10 fold.
They have their place, and for casual shooters who get out maybe a couple times a month, like my brother, they are just the thing - instead of dumping money into a cheap gun he is learning how to shoot it as is.
I have an m-305. I spent about $200 to correct issues. It's a decent rifle. The AR is a good rifle. They lack refinement and have QC issues, but in of themselves are decent. With the falling price of ARs last year I don't think I'd tell a newbie to buy a norc, unless it was a stupid cheap used one.
The pistols? No... As has been said, when you can buy a substantially better gun for 50% more money I'd not touch the 1911.
The siggish is a decent pistol, in of itself, but does not hold a candle to the real thing. I've shot both, and owned neither.
It's not snobbery to like having a good looking gun. Aesthetics are important in many facets of life. It's part of the whole satisfaction of ownership and I suppose that it is more or less important to you depending on what guns are to you. Are they blasters? Art? A bit of both? Do you take pride in them as you might any beautiful machine or are they nothing more than a tool like a hammer?
There is no wrong answer.
As for the guns themselves? They are worth what they cost if you buy them on sale. Full retail is stretching it from a value standpoint.
Right now the only Chinese gun that appeals to me is the 1897 shotgun, because I like the 1897. I'm going to buy one....when they go on sale
I have an m-305. I spent about $200 to correct issues. It's a decent rifle. The AR is a good rifle. They lack refinement and have QC issues, but in of themselves are decent. With the falling price of ARs last year I don't think I'd tell a newbie to buy a norc, unless it was a stupid cheap used one.
The pistols? No... As has been said, when you can buy a substantially better gun for 50% more money I'd not touch the 1911.
The siggish is a decent pistol, in of itself, but does not hold a candle to the real thing. I've shot both, and owned neither.
It's not snobbery to like having a good looking gun. Aesthetics are important in many facets of life. It's part of the whole satisfaction of ownership and I suppose that it is more or less important to you depending on what guns are to you. Are they blasters? Art? A bit of both? Do you take pride in them as you might any beautiful machine or are they nothing more than a tool like a hammer?
There is no wrong answer.
As for the guns themselves? They are worth what they cost if you buy them on sale. Full retail is stretching it from a value standpoint.
Right now the only Chinese gun that appeals to me is the 1897 shotgun, because I like the 1897. I'm going to buy one....when they go on sale
It does give me a headache - just like the agonizing arguments over berettas and glocks! why do people feel they have to say their opinion for no reason, even if it pisses people off.
I see a lot of norc owners proud of their decisions in buying their firearms, cause they can be good value, so when someone says "they're crap", then yes, it's a bit insulting.
Different firearms fill different roles.
If there was more dangerous quality control issues with norinco, then we'd have a problem. But I haven't heard any. I've had quite a few that work like they're supposed to
I see a lot of norc owners proud of their decisions in buying their firearms, cause they can be good value, so when someone says "they're crap", then yes, it's a bit insulting.
Different firearms fill different roles.
If there was more dangerous quality control issues with norinco, then we'd have a problem. But I haven't heard any. I've had quite a few that work like they're supposed to
Np34 shoots better than my glock and beretta. My onlly real complaint is the finish. I have a m16 norc and the finish looks like a toy. I wish they spend a little more and put t better finishes on the guns. . Make it not look so cheap. Than again it is a poor mans AR. Same thing shoots great but looks like crap
I just sold my Norc 1911 and have a Sig STX 1911. Both are very accurate guns, looking at the targets I couldn't tell which was used. Neither of them had any FTF problems either, they just worked reliably with Norc ammo.
Of course the Sig is a much nicer gun to hold and fit and finish is higher, but for what I paid (basically nothing in the Can Am deal) the Norinco was an excellent value and a great way to get into 1911's for not a lot of outlay. I'd much rather have a $300 Norc and $700 worth of ammo to practice with than a $1000 Sig that sits in the safe because I had no money left for ammo.
Of course the Sig is a much nicer gun to hold and fit and finish is higher, but for what I paid (basically nothing in the Can Am deal) the Norinco was an excellent value and a great way to get into 1911's for not a lot of outlay. I'd much rather have a $300 Norc and $700 worth of ammo to practice with than a $1000 Sig that sits in the safe because I had no money left for ammo.
I buy Norc's to work on. I enjoy modifying budget rifles to be what I want them to be, and I simply don't have the spare cash to do the same with the 'original' manufacturer.
I have 2 M-305's. One I'm trying to make into a DMR, the other is in the process of being worked into a CQB rifle. Total cost to date is @$3,000. With 'original' Springfields I would just have one slightly better than stock rifle.
I have also bought a NS-522, which shall be worked on over the winter (in line with an excellent thread on the rimfire section of the CGN) and I am hoping that this will be my regular range rifle to practice precision rifle shooting.
In short, I enjoy working on rifles, and simply would not have the cash to be able to do this with the 'original' manufacture's units. I would also be hesitant about working on the 'original' as it cost so much in first place. As long as Norinco keep producing 'flawed' gems at a serious discount, i am a buyer.
Candocad.
I have 2 M-305's. One I'm trying to make into a DMR, the other is in the process of being worked into a CQB rifle. Total cost to date is @$3,000. With 'original' Springfields I would just have one slightly better than stock rifle.
I have also bought a NS-522, which shall be worked on over the winter (in line with an excellent thread on the rimfire section of the CGN) and I am hoping that this will be my regular range rifle to practice precision rifle shooting.
In short, I enjoy working on rifles, and simply would not have the cash to be able to do this with the 'original' manufacture's units. I would also be hesitant about working on the 'original' as it cost so much in first place. As long as Norinco keep producing 'flawed' gems at a serious discount, i am a buyer.
Candocad.
Agreed.I don't buy Knock offs....
I'm sure many of them work well...The hard part (the engineering\design work) was done by Western or European companies and are generally proven designs. Not buying a Norinco\knock off doesn't mean you're a snob. It's just voting with your wallet. Personally, I choose to not purchase knock off products to save a couple $$$.
I don't buy Knock offs....
Most guns are knock-offs of earlier designs, if not direct copies.....
Love my Norc for what it is. My DA556 runs like a tank! A new AR with all the furniture and optics I want on it, all in for less than $1K? Can't beat that.
Not ONE failure in over 3K rounds. Runs flawlessly during competition. Plenty accurate
Sure some of the other manufacturer AR's may look shiny (I admit I want to buy one too), but are ALL their owners willing to put it to work?
Example: Be okay to drop it *gasp*, run it hard in competition, rough it up, etc...
Not ONE failure in over 3K rounds. Runs flawlessly during competition. Plenty accurate
Sure some of the other manufacturer AR's may look shiny (I admit I want to buy one too), but are ALL their owners willing to put it to work?
Example: Be okay to drop it *gasp*, run it hard in competition, rough it up, etc...
- Location
- Aaaaaadmontin AB
Errrr...Generally speaking Tiger, you won't see Norcs in the winners circle in the hands of serious competitors. There is a reason for that. There is a reason law enforcement and militaries are spending big money on higher end guns too. They build better rifles, it's just that simple.
Is the Norc bashing warranted? Well, when I bought a Norc M14 the rear sight adjustments were made with pot metal fit for beer cans and nothing else. The adjustments wore off, it wouldn't hold a zero, and to me the whole experience was a write-off. (I later learned this was a common defect). If you buy one, understand that to make it a superlative shooter you WILL have to spend big money on it and even that is no guarantee of accuracy. I know there are any number of guys that invested big coin in their Norcs and ended up with great shooters...but a lot of guys end up throwing good money after bad with Norcs and I have seen it. About the only advantage the Norcs have is that they are cheap and upgradeable...and you can do that slowly over time as finances permit. The guns I buy today shoot well right out of the box...but in the case of the M1A I had to shell out $2000.00 bucks in one big gulp. 20 years ago I would never have been able to do that.
One squaddie I knew put it this way...if you were mountain climbing would you rather stake your life on a bargain basement piton or carabiner made by slave labour with no real QA/QC...or would you rather pay more for one built to specs and proofed with ISO documentation under compliant QA\QC methods? Sure the Chinese carabiner will probably take your weight. Probably...
If I were in the sandbox fighting my way out, or able to seriously contend for medals - I wouldn't give Norcs the time of day. Now that I'm older and can afford some of the finer things in life - I choose to buy good guns right out of the box. I would rather shoot than tinker. Your mileage may vary - so if the Norc works for you, smile and use it. This is just my two cents.
1300_stainless
Regular
- Location
- Nova Scotia, Canada
Haven't read the whole thread but here's my take. Had a Norinco SKS. Worked like a top. Fit and finish was acceptable for a gun that gets used. Had a Chinese 870 copy that was equal or better quality than an 870 express. Finish on that shotgun was thin and a few edges were sharp but it worked well. I currently own a Norinco 1911. I sold a tuned STI Trojan and kept the Norinco and don't regret it at all. It's all I need for what I do and it doesn't break the bank. It's a bare bones basic 1911. The fit isn't top notch but it's really not bad. The finish (bluing) was equal to factory the STI finish. (Not sure if STI has upped their finish but a few years ago it was unimpressive to say the least).
I think a lot of Norinco bashing is from people who want to support North American, and has nothing to do with functionality. They are economical shooters, and in my experience good ones. Comparing them to guns that cost more isn't fair.
I think a lot of Norinco bashing is from people who want to support North American, and has nothing to do with functionality. They are economical shooters, and in my experience good ones. Comparing them to guns that cost more isn't fair.
Last edited:
Taking into account the fact that I paid $1000 for the unfired Colt 6720 off EE I'm not absolutely sure if Norinco AR is such a great deal after all. Good it works for you though.
I've owned several norincos and own several quality firearms as well. I own a Daniel defense m4a1 with all the bells and whistles and it's a beauty, but it hasn't turned me off to the value you get from a norinco. Sure they aren't pretty, they lack in the finishing department, but they are all fun as hell to shoot, and that's why I shoot.
Last I checked, no one was comparing a Norc to a deployment rifle, and although not competing seriously on a national level, the Norc (with norc ammo I might add) has ousted plenty of ppl running expensive setups in the $2K+ range at local multigun and tac rifle matches. It's just a fun gun to shoot without care. It's accurate and reliable for me. For someone looking to run a reliable rifle on a budget, this is a great start. And well worth it IMO. Everyone is entitled to buy what they want. That's what makes this a fun hobby, sport, etc.
