Norinco Type 97 FAQ (small update 01/04/09)

Dr.Lector said:
Well, judging after the amount of threads he started on the subject,
the number of posts in every T97 thread and all the noise he's making,
I believe Deckard is the man to answer such a question. I can't wait.




On a different matter,
I think the mods/admin can compress all the T97-related threads
in one big Consolidated T97 Thread.
I suggest we call it "Type 97 thread ...and more" or "Ask Deckard"
or something like that. What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

Sure, would save me time hoping from one to another.

P.S. I'll post pics of cleaning the striker after I take it out again this weekend.

P.P.S. Deckard asked me to stop teasing him :(. I was having fun too. Oh well.
 
Last edited:
Kaiser_Sose said:
I asked this question before but I think the post was lost: Does anybody know why the life of this gun is only 6000 rounds? What gives up first? The barrel? If not, then what?
Click to expand...
Take this as IMHO. I was wrong before.
If somebody has a different opinion,
I will not start a pissing contest over this.


I am aware of what a lot of people said about the barrel,
but from what I’ve seen, the Chinese are making
reasonably good chrome-lined barrels.

I know that some people may want to argue that statistically,
the barrels with a fast twist do not last as long
as barrels with a slower twist (theoretically I kinda agree, but...)

However, generally speaking, if you don’t do stupid things with it,
the barrel is supposed to last long time, way over 6k rounds.



The receiver is the one that wears out first,
making it the weakest link in the Type 97.
 
H Wally said:
I heard that they were discontinuing use of the 97... could the weak reciever design be a reason why?
Click to expand...
In the last 25 years, the Chinese designed and tested
over 30 service rifles that are variations of 11 main platforms.
It appears that what they change their mind like women
about what they give to their own troops.

I said that the receiver appears to be the weakest link
(in any design, some component has to be the first to fail).
But I do not necessarily consider the receiver to be straight garbage.




This is what I meant when I said that receiver is the weakest link.

The rails of Type 97 are aluminum, machined into the receiver.
They are used to guide the bolt carrier and the striker.
Also, the bolt uses the left rail
for alignment and indexing during cycling.
All these are made of steel but the rails are aluminum.


Sure, some may argue
that there are semi auto aluminum receivers out there
that withstand a large amount of rounds without wearing out,
which is true.
However, receivers like, say, 10/22 or Ar15 upper
use a different design to guide the bolt or bolt carrier
and most important they have no rails.
Well, Type 97 has.



Regarding how long the T97 receiver may last,
I’m not going to bite that question :)


Bolt carrier, main recoil spring, bolt, striker.
97a_110.jpg

kp_flop_16.jpg



These are brand new receivers, never fired.
Kp_r04-1.jpg

Kp_r05.jpg





The bolt carrier on the rails.
Kp_r03-1.jpg




The striker.
Kp_r010-2.jpg

Kp_r012-2.jpg

Kp_r011-1.jpg






The striker on the rails.

Cocked:
Kp_r08-1.jpg



Fired:
Kp_r09-1.jpg




Bolt riding the left rail for indexing:
Kp_r07-1.jpg



I will post pictures with Deckard later on :D
 
Dr.Lector said:
In the last 25 years, the Chinese designed and tested
over 30 service rifles that are variations of 11 main platforms.
It appears that what they change their mind like women
about what they give to their own troops.

I said that the receiver appears to be the weakest link
(in any design, some component has to be the first to fail).
But I do not necessarily consider the receiver to be straight garbage.




This is what I meant when I said that receiver is the weakest link.

The rails of Type 97 are aluminum, machined into the receiver.
They are used to guide the bolt carrier and the striker.
Also, the bolt uses the left rail
for alignment and indexing during cycling.
All these are made of steel but the rails are aluminum.


Sure, some may argue
that there are semi auto aluminum receivers out there
that withstand a large amount of rounds without wearing out,
which is true.
However, receivers like, say, 10/22 or Ar15 upper
use a different design to guide the bolt or bolt carrier
and most important they have no rails.
Well, Type 97 has.



Regarding how long the T97 receiver may last,
I’m not going to bite that question :)


Bolt carrier, main recoil spring, bolt, striker.



I will post pictures with Deckard later on :D
Click to expand...

I find most of your posts fascinating. Your in depth knowledge of the T97 is very helpful (and humbling). I (once again) never thought of the aluminum rail issue. One would think that the rails should be inspected periodically for cracks. Time will tell how they hold up. I wonder what series of Aluminum they used and the method they used for anodizing?

Sig Pistols have had success with aluminum rails in their pistols, but admittedly for a different application. I do note that the striker and bolt ride fairly loosely on the rails, and that there is a steel insert at the forward left portion of the rail, probably to strengthen the area?

You can see it in this pic. Also the verbiage on this picture (and the date) is particularly fascinating...
Kp_r05.jpg
 
Last edited:
That's the ejector.
I had to remove it temporarily on a couple of guns for some mods
and taking the rivets out was a pain in the fukken butt.


The aluminum would be very similar to the North American 7000 series.

Everything I know I learn it from Deckard.

The pics are gathered from what I found in different old files,
cropped and so on.
I am not sure about the dates, actualy I can't even see the dates.


From what I've seen on few 97's,
rails wear out but they don't seem to crack.
When they start to wear,
you will probably notice it when cleaning it.
They seem to have some preferential spots
where they wear more.
Cleaning and lubbing may slow down the wearing.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom