Do you have your Type 81?

Do you have your Type 81 rifle?

  • Yes, fixed stock from TI, its a keeper.

    Votes: 72 40.7%

  • Yes, folding stock from TI, its a keeper.

    Votes: 61 34.5%

  • Yes, fixed stock from TI, its defective.

    Votes: 12 6.8%

  • Yes, folding stock from TI, its defective.

    Votes: 26 14.7%

  • Yes, fixed stock from Tenda, its a keeper.

    Votes: 1 0.6%

  • Yes, folding stock from Tenda, its a keeper.

    Votes: 2 1.1%

  • Yes, fixed stock from Tenda, its defective.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Yes, folding stock from Tenda, its defective.

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • Total voters
    177
Handled one today, observed a ("light") bent from barrel end to butt stock
The action was very gritty (even the person standing beside me noticed it from the sound) and the wood was of typical "Norinco softwood quality".

All in all a $450.00 at max. gun, which would never see the inside of my safes.
 
Deathrawt said:
A lot of the guns that are being called "defective" are not really defective at all
All the guys putting laser lines on their guns should give their heads a shake as most of them are perfectly usable. If everyone did the laser line on a m-305 then 100% of them would be defective

Yes there has been a few that are legitimately bad but the numbers on the poll are misleading as most of the bad ones are probably fine
If you want something built perfectly then go buy a product that is CNC machined as opposed to being folded around on a metal brake in the middle of China
Click to expand...

I would say they are defective . 1000 bucks is a lot of money for something that that should be produced with some kind of quality. I dont understand how some are ok with it or or shrug off . I havent bought the rifle , but after all this , i have no interest in it . I would be pissed if my 1000 rifle had some kind of bend in it! unbelievable.
 
polaris said:
Handled one today, observed a ("light") bent from barrel end to butt stock
The action was very gritty (even the person standing beside me noticed it from the sound) and the wood was of typical "Norinco softwood quality".

All in all a $450.00 at max. gun, which would never see the inside of my safes.
Click to expand...

Troll much? You've cross posted this in 2 threads already.
If you got no money in the game, it isn't your game.
 
polaris said:
Last time I checked it was called CGN and not ricohman's fake news.
Don't like the truth very much, do you?
Click to expand...

These will be the cheapest new rifles I own.
And I expect very little for the money I spent.
That said, what benefit do you receive for insulting what others have or may purchase?
 
ricohman said:
These will be the cheapest new rifles I own.
And I expect very little for the money I spent.
That said, what benefit do you receive for insulting what others have or may purchase?
Click to expand...

Better start working on your comprehension skills.

Where and when did I insult anybody or anything?

What I wrote was a review, even if you don't like it.
I handled the gun today, and you DID NOT!!!!
 
ricohman said:
These will be the cheapest new rifles I own.
And I expect very little for the money I spent.
That said, what benefit do you receive for insulting what others have or may purchase?
Click to expand...

I guess it gets down to what we expect for the money . I would expect better quality. That is all.
 
polaris said:
Better start working on your comprehension skills.

Where and when did I insult anybody or anything?

What I wrote was a review, even if you don't like it.
I handled the gun today, and you DID NOT!!!!
Click to expand...

And therein lieth the problem. My gun is either vaporware or still sitting at ti waiting for them to finally ship it. It might be fine or it might be junk, but right now it might as well not even exist.
 
Deathrawt said:
A lot of the guns that are being called "defective" are not really defective at all
All the guys putting laser lines on their guns should give their heads a shake as most of them are perfectly usable. If everyone did the laser line on a m-305 then 100% of them would be defective

Yes there has been a few that are legitimately bad but the numbers on the poll are misleading as most of the bad ones are probably fine
If you want something built perfectly then go buy a product that is CNC machined as opposed to being folded around on a metal brake in the middle of China
Click to expand...


I think you are absolutely correct.

Sure, there are going to be some that are actualy defective or messed up or something. But I doubt the majority of "bent" ones are actually defective.

A rifle like this needs to go bang every time, feed, extract and eject every time and be acceptabley accurate (about SKS accuracy or better would make sense) And it should have a reasonable finish and fit for a new firearm of this pedigree, no dremel to fit parts, but don't expecthigh end North American or European standards.

It would be interesting to see how many SKS rifles out there that have been in use for decades are "bent" when introduced to a laser line. :)

The cost of the rifle to the Consumer ($1000) has no bearing on what the rifle actually is.

Mine has been on loan since it showed up in the mail a couple of weeks ago, I'm going to shoot it myself for the first time tomorrow and I'll check to see if it's "bent." Since it's been in use already and seems to have acceptable function and accuracy, it's probably fine, even if it is deemed defective according to a laser. :)
 
Last edited:
polaris said:
Better start working on your comprehension skills.

Where and when did I insult anybody or anything?

What I wrote was a review, even if you don't like it.
I handled the gun today, and you DID NOT!!!!
Click to expand...

I just went back and read your various posts in these threads.
Writing that people are "suckers" and telling others "comprehension is not your forte". How you are confused that people would "pay money such garbage" and on it goes.
It's ok. I understand now.
 
Well TI fvcked up, they fvcked up large!!!!

They need to own up to the real issues or lose all credibility (which in some minds I'm sure is already dead) but to be kept strung along for shipping #'s seems like there is a deeper issue they do not want to tell us about
 
ricohman said:
I just went back and read your various posts in these threads.
Writing that people are "suckers" and telling others "comprehension is not your forte". How you are confused that people would "pay money such garbage" and on it goes.
It's ok. I understand now.
Click to expand...

So did you handle one? Yes/No
 
Gatehouse said:
I think you are absolutely correct.

Sure, there are going to be some that are actualy defective or messed up or something. But I doubt the majority of "bent" ones are actually defective.

A rifle like this needs to go bang every time, feed, extract and eject every time and be acceptabley accurate (about SKS accuracy or better would make sense) And it should have a reasonable finish and fit for a new firearm of this pedigree, no dremel to fit parts, but don't expecthigh end North American or European standards.

It would be interesting to see how many SKS rifles out there that have been in use for decades are "bent" when introduced to a laser line. :)

The cost of the rifle to the Consumer ($1000) has no bearing on what the rifle actually is.

Mine has been on loan since it showed up in the mail a couple of weeks ago, I'm going to shoot it myself for the first time tomorrow and I'll check to see if it's "bent." Since it's been in use already and seems to have acceptable function and accuracy, it's probably fine, even if it is deemed defective according to a laser. :)
Click to expand...

Sure, some "bent" ones may be OK and functional. But surely there must be tolerance, some kind of QC spec, of what that acceptable limit is. laser line or stringline, or not. Some of the pics shown are clearly f'd up. Maybe still functional bullet hoses. But will they have the endurance of the "straight" rifles, as in round count? If the T81 is designed for say a life of 20,000 rounds, will the "bent" ones be used up at 15,000 rounds, being as the forces applied to the receiver are no longer applied in line with the receiver?

I'd say bent is likely scrap, and understand the guys sending them back. Wonder what the PLA spec is for allowable tolerance of delection between receiver and barrel? Good thing these are a battle proven rifle piggybacked on a military order. Can't imagine what they would be like if they were produced separately.
 
Gatehouse said:
I think you are absolutely correct.

Sure, there are going to be some that are actualy defective or messed up or something. But I doubt the majority of "bent" ones are actually defective.

A rifle like this needs to go bang every time, feed, extract and eject every time and be acceptabley accurate (about SKS accuracy or better would make sense) And it should have a reasonable finish and fit for a new firearm of this pedigree, no dremel to fit parts, but don't expecthigh end North American or European standards.

It would be interesting to see how many SKS rifles out there that have been in use for decades are "bent" when introduced to a laser line. :)

The cost of the rifle to the Consumer ($1000) has no bearing on what the rifle actually is.

Mine has been on loan since it showed up in the mail a couple of weeks ago, I'm going to shoot it myself for the first time tomorrow and I'll check to see if it's "bent." Since it's been in use already and seems to have acceptable function and accuracy, it's probably fine, even if it is deemed defective according to a laser. :)
Click to expand...

The only real issue is if you ever want receiver mounted optics. Fwiw.
 
Claven2 said:
The only real issue is if you ever want receiver mounted optics. Fwiw.
Click to expand...

Good point, haven't even thought of that.

In any case, a bent rifle is unacceptable. If you ever go to sell it and fail to mention it, the buyer will probably accuse you of fraud; if you do mention it, you just lost 50% of the value.


This is what you call a "no win scenario".
 
Sunchild2071 said:
Sure, some "bent" ones may be OK and functional. But surely there must be tolerance, some kind of QC spec, of what that acceptable limit is. laser line or stringline, or not. Some of the pics shown are clearly f'd up. Maybe still functional bullet hoses. But will they have the endurance of the "straight" rifles, as in round count? If the T81 is designed for say a life of 20,000 rounds, will the "bent" ones be used up at 15,000 rounds, being as the forces applied to the receiver are no longer applied in line with the receiver?

I'd say bent is likely scrap, and understand the guys sending them back. Wonder what the PLA spec is for allowable tolerance of delection between receiver and barrel? Good thing these are a battle proven rifle piggybacked on a military order. Can't imagine what they would be like if they were produced separately.
Click to expand...


It's likely the majority of the "bent" ones we are seeing here are within military specs and all end up having the same round count lifespan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom