Floro MK9/Type-81/Mendoza HM3s

Would you purchase any of the following at the given price range?

  • Floro MK9

    Votes: 163 21.9%

  • Type 81

    Votes: 639 86.0%

  • Mendoza HM3S

    Votes: 111 14.9%
  • Total voters
    743
Status
Not open for further replies.
very nice.................

count me in on 2nd and 3rd models..........................

please advise as decisions are made

many thanks

keep up the good work!!!
 
MegaMonkeyChunk said:
I'd prefer the 9mm export version but I see where you're coming from. Even though it only externally looks like the Type 97, it'll get prohibited.
Click to expand...

dont be so negative! we wont know until we try! it likely has no mechanical likelyness with the t-97. despite the fact that the t-97 shouldnt be prohib anyways..
 
driller212 said:
dont be so negative! we wont know until we try! it likely has no mechanical likelyness with the t-97. despite the fact that the t-97 shouldnt be prohib anyways..
Click to expand...

I'm not negative on purpose, its the RCMP lab that has a history of incorrectly classifying things even though there's no possible way they should ever get that classification. I'd be really interested in the Type 05 if it came with an 18.6" barrel :D
 
The Type 81 looks definitley the more promising out of all 3 thats for sure :D

However chances are the RCMP already has the 'Type 81' in the FRT registry under its original LMG classification of a "Converted Automatic" / 'Fully Automatic' ; (as the Type 81 is a Chinese copy of the Soviet RPK LMG) It will definitley be interesting to see if the RCMP accepts the semi-auto sporting version as not a 'variant' of the Prohib and grant it Non-Res status...

Trust me Im not raining on anyones parade, Im just a wee bit skeptical on how this is going to play out in Non-Restricted favor here, only time will tell :)...
 
CST Grad C.Nixon said:
However chances are the RCMP already has the 'Type 81' in the FRT registry under its original LMG classification of a "Converted Automatic" / 'Fully Automatic' ; (as the Type 81 is a Chinese copy of the Soviet RPK LMG) It will definitley be interesting to see if the RCMP accepts the semi-auto sporting version as not a 'variant' of the Prohib and grant it Non-Res status...
Click to expand...

If the Type 81 LMG was actually a copy of the RPK, we wouldn't have a chance. Was the Type 81 LMG influenced by the RPK? Most likely, but it isn't a copy.
 
MegaMonkeyChunk said:
If the Type 81 LMG was actually a copy of the RPK, we wouldn't have a chance. Was the Type 81 LMG influenced by the RPK? Most likely, but it isn't a copy.
Click to expand...

The RCMP would already have the Type 81 down as a copy of the RPK in the FRT, regardless of 'influence' of the design, the final product (the rifle itself) is a copy of the RPK; We would all hope the RCMP would use 'influenced' as credit to aide this classification, but they just go on the information from the final rifle itself; granted the 858 got through without a problem and that too is a semi-auto copy of the VZ 58 prohib; however with that victory in hand for us gun owners we were dealt a surprising blow when they labelled the Akdal 1919 as an AR variant.... this Type81s future is going to be very interesting to watch... :D

We basically have a copy of the CZ 858s arrival to Canada here to potentially play out with (hopefully, knock on wood, fingers & toes crossed) the same for the Type 81; however with the RPKs included status also that could be a bit of a burden; being that if this Type 81 arrives is in any sort of shape or form a spawn of the Kalashnikov operating design... Id have to say good night to the Type 81 in Canada...

The breakdowns would probably happen as such...

VZ58 (Prohib/Original Design/No Kalashnikov Style Operation) -------== ---->> CZ858 Semi-Auto Sporter (NonRestricted/Epic Win for Canadian Gun Owners)

Soviet RPK (Prohib) ---(Copy)---->> Type 81 (Prohib) ------==---->> Type81 Semi-Auto Sporter (???)

Nothing really -----==---->> Akdal 1919 12Gauge Shotgun (RESTRICTED!?!?! :eek:)

Breakout the popcorn ladies and gents Tactical Imports is gona put on quite the show for us! :D

:popCorn:
 
Last edited:
The type 81 is NOT a copy of an RPK...... in any way other than possibly the furniture. I don't know where you are getting this stupid ####. Did you even look at those pictures?
 
cadgo said:
The type 81 is NOT a copy of an RPK...... in any way other than possibly the furniture. I don't know where you are getting this stupid s**t. Did you even look at those pictures?
Click to expand...

Interesting useage of wording... My information sources for this so called "stupid s**t" you speak of are from the FRT Database itself, and yes I did look at the pictures with no real translation of the text included in said picture(s); None of us can confirm the classification of this firearm, regardless of what ever pictures or media is shown, and I find it tremendously immature for others to classify someone's opinion(s)/view(s) on this matter as "stupid s**t"...
 
CST Grad C.Nixon said:
Interesting useage of wording... My information sources for this so called "stupid s**t" you speak of are from the FRT Database itself, and yes I did look at the pictures with no real translation of the text included in said picture(s); None of us can confirm the classification of this firearm, regardless of what ever pictures or media is shown, and I find it tremendously immature for others to classify someone's opinion(s)/view(s) on this matter as "stupid s**t"...
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? The only reason the type 81 would be listed in the FRT as prohibited is because it was originally select fire, not because it is a "copy" of the RPK, which it clearly is not. I have a problem with people making up garbage and stating it as fact. It is not immature, what is immature is trying to act like you know something when you don't.
 
This kind of ignorance is similar to saying that a variant of the type 97 would be prohibited when in reality unless there was an OIC that no one knows about the type 97 could still be brought in as non-restricted with changes to the design.
 
cadgo said:
What are you talking about? The only reason the type 81 would be listed in the FRT as prohibited is because it was originally select fire, not because it is a "copy" of the RPK, which it clearly is not. I have a problem with people making up garbage and stating it as fact. It is not immature, what is immature is trying to act like you know something when you don't.
Click to expand...

PM sent to your inbox, rather then continuing this in the thread...
 
Ever look into the STKinetics CPW submachine gun, the Mexican FX-05 Xiuhcoatl, the Singapore Technologies Kinetics SAR-21?
 
CST Grad C.Nixon said:
PM sent to your inbox, rather then continuing this in the thread...
Click to expand...

Well, it appears it is noted to be a copy of an RPK, So I apologize. There is VERY often people on this forum commenting on things with little to no proof and very little understanding of the laws. Maybe Tactical Imports should look into this since the rifle is clearly not a copy of the RPK.
 
cadgo said:
Well, it appears it is noted to be a copy of an RPK, So I apologize. There is VERY often people on this forum commenting on things with little to no proof and very little understanding of the laws. Maybe Tactical Imports should look into this since the rifle is clearly not a copy of the RPK.
Click to expand...

It appears that I would be that person this time :p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom