The Type 97 is back . . .
- Thread starter TV-PressPass
- Start date
- Status
I love these comments on "why would you buy one?", especially when coming from other "enthusiasts!" You don't like it, look away. The sole reason your are able to buy the XCR and the like, is because people like us, (I am new, but always supported), the ones who want to buy a "crazy abortion," like a scary CHI-COM BullPup, let you. Dealers recognize the need/want and fight for it. If it was left up to the majority of wishy-washy gun owners, nothing would happen. MOst talk a good game, but are cowards when it comes right down to it. The day our money runs out for items like this, is the day things like the Mini-14, M14/M305 and other "acceptable" rifles become extinct, mark my words.
I see it happening in the US already. Milsurp owners, hunters etc, are turning on their fellow enthusiast, mainly Black Rifle owners. Divide and conquer works very well. Get behind it, or get out of it, is now my motto.
I see it happening in the US already. Milsurp owners, hunters etc, are turning on their fellow enthusiast, mainly Black Rifle owners. Divide and conquer works very well. Get behind it, or get out of it, is now my motto.
In the end if its just a trigger pull diffrence the Type 97 wins imo and a trigger can be worked on. Preliminary groupings from previous version are promising.
Interesting.
At this point my biggest concern for T97NSR is which version of safety selector location it inherits, QBZ95 or QBZ95-1?
Dave_Shotgun
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Ford Nation! :)
It would be awesome if the Type-97 NSR is just as accurate and reliable as the overpriced Tavor.
^^ To driller212
But how do you know this if you haven't compared them side by side? From what your saying the tavor will outperform the T97 overall in a side by side shooting comparison. If thats the truth, I wouldn't mind dishing out the extra money on the tavor, but I would need to see it first instead of assuming just because its less than half the price its less than half the quality.
But how do you know this if you haven't compared them side by side? From what your saying the tavor will outperform the T97 overall in a side by side shooting comparison. If thats the truth, I wouldn't mind dishing out the extra money on the tavor, but I would need to see it first instead of assuming just because its less than half the price its less than half the quality.
What I mean is that the tavor is probably much more ergonomic in its controls and likely built to a higher standard. It has a bolt release, and an efficient magazine release. It is easy to utilize optics as that is what it was designed for. The T97 lacks some of these things. I am by no means bashing the reliability or accuracy of the T97. I am simply stating that they are different generations of bullpup rifle, and should not be held on the same level as far as "tactical utilization" goes.
This being said I cannot wait to hold my T97NSR in my grubby little hands and blast away with it
Meh, "haters gonna hate", as they say.
I'm getting one, I can't afford 3K for a rifle right now but can swing a grand. There're lots of guns I find fugly as hell but if you wanna own them, more power to ya.
Seems some people need to bash a cheaper rifle to make themselves feel better about taking it in the tailpipe and spending 3K on a rifle that they should be paying 2 for.
I think the more bullpups and black rifles that come out the better, because it'll make it a more competitive market. Do you really only want a couple of different models of non rest black rifles out there? Really? We should be welcoming these with open arms.
I'm getting one, I can't afford 3K for a rifle right now but can swing a grand. There're lots of guns I find fugly as hell but if you wanna own them, more power to ya.
Seems some people need to bash a cheaper rifle to make themselves feel better about taking it in the tailpipe and spending 3K on a rifle that they should be paying 2 for.
I think the more bullpups and black rifles that come out the better, because it'll make it a more competitive market. Do you really only want a couple of different models of non rest black rifles out there? Really? We should be welcoming these with open arms.
Kind of a loaded question based on what type of match and who's running it. If I didn't know the stages or who was designing them, then the distances would be a complete gamble. From my experience, most shots are inside 100 so a CCO/Reddot sight is fine. That being said, a CSA rifle in 5.56 with mag adaptor would be ideal as far as cost is concerned. However, the adaptors are poorly made and not overly robust. XCR I wasn't impressed with, especially not for the money. The Keltec SU16 is garbage. Mini 14 is over priced and garbage(see below for details). Your only real option is the Swiss. Its big coin but it comes with big performance. The Tavor like all bullpups has issues that make it completely unsuitable for serious work or serious competitive work. Namely the fixed LOP, non ambi setup, high mechanical offset and awkward reloads are what do it. In addition, the performance from the trigger and the design in general does not validate the cost. Support as in parts and accessories are scarce/limited as well which plays against it.
So heres how I see it. If you're looking for something on the cheap(price wise, not quality wise) then the CSA rifle is my choice. Reliable(magwell adaptor notwithstanding) with acceptable accuracy. Low mechanical offset, relatively easy to mount a CCO/reddot to, and lightweight. The downside is the availability of magazines if you don't run the adaptor(not to mention the 5 round limit). If you're looking for the ideal non-res rifle then the Swiss is the winner, enough said. Magazine capacity can be altered with an NEA lower or other AR ma adaptors. Personally, all matches are held at the range, and aside from service rifle matches all the others involve restricted firearms like your handgun. So if you're going to be running a handgun you might as well open up the rifle side to restricted options. In that case, the AR takes the title without a doubt.
The Ranch rifle label was for guns with scope mounts if I'm not mistaken. The original Mini14 was simply a scaled down version of the M14 with irons only. What makes them garbage? Any rifle with a wood stock is 60 plus years behind the technology curve. Wood is great for cooking campfire meals and making furniture like tables and chairs. The triggers are generally poor, the mag system sucks as does the safety system. Mounting competitive optics like a CCO/reddot is a bit of a chore. The barrel can't be free floated which impacts performance, and their reliability is far from rock solid. Aftermarket adjustable stocks are simply Ar style stocks that have been altered to "work". Last but not least, they're grossly over priced for what they offer. The "target" model is grossly over weight, over priced and not suitable for action matches or field work that doesn't involve a static shooting position.
Do tell how a shorter OAL is a benefit unless you shoot in or from a confined space? I understand the balance is slightly more aft than conventional designs, but if you can't hold up your rifle you need to do one or more of the following. Take some s**t off the gun that isn't serving a real purpose, adjust your grip(support hand), adjust your stock(if possible), practice getting on target and making the shot quicker, and hit the gym.
The price point is only an issue if you have no idea what level of performance and quality you wish to obtain for a given purpose. Again, we're back to the basic question. WHAT IS YOUR INTENDED PURPOSE. Only after you answer that question can you begin to concern yourself with any of the pros or cons of a specific system. Price point should never be the first criteria used in selecting a firearm, sadly its usually only second to "cool factor" for many when it comes to buying a firearm.
I'm going to take a stab in the dark and say your post is directed towards me as I'm one of the more vocal forum members. Regardless, I'll answer it anyway.
First off, vendors don't really care about introducing new products. They're concerned about profit, money. They are afterall a business and money turns the world. If a new gun serves both purposes than so be it, but "options" for the consumer is not a concern for any vendor, ever. If that were the case we would see a lot more selection.
As for my distaste for bullpups or any other firearm. I clearly illustrate and support why they're unacceptable for specific tasks/roles. I couldn't give a flying f**k what anyone does with their possessions. Its the ignorant misinformed opinions related to the firearm that I wish to dismiss. Physical attributes and performance issues are hard fact, not speculation or personal experiences. If a rifle is incapable of being fired from both shoulders when compared to another design, then it would be inferior. In the case of the type 97, an optic cannot readily be attached and when it can be the mechanical offset is insane, making it far from ideal when compared to other designs. These are hard facts and it appears many would sooner ignore these than accept them.
A final note and thought. In reviewing bullpup rifles in general I've noticed another issue that many feel is an issue but have yet to mention with regards to bullpups. That issue would be sight radius. In my opinion, the sight radius issue is grossly over played, even between rifles and carbines the change in radius is too small to really notice any appreciable difference in performance. Sight radius on a rifle does play a factor, especially as range increases. That being said, there is a large following of "sight radius should be as great as possible". With that in mind, why has no one mentioned the fact that bullpups have a very short sight radius. Just food for thought. I guess when a bullpup is the latest flavor the laundry list of negatives is to be ignored..
TDC
Last edited:
Sounds like you have good opinion of the AR mag adaptor for the SAN, reliability etc. I need to find some info on that.
One benefit a NR rifle offers is when there is a half day match etc, the freedom to go somewhere else without a detour to get home first if I have time constraints.
One benefit a NR rifle offers is when there is a half day match etc, the freedom to go somewhere else without a detour to get home first if I have time constraints.
I will admit, I have not shot a Swiss with the adaptor. I played with one and watched another guy at the range run his and it seemed to work well. The one in question is the replacement lower from NEA. I'm not sure if the mag adaptor from Calgary shooting Centre is available but I did see it in action and it ran like a champ. It involved a magwell adaptor only, so less effort and likely less money too.
TDC
- Status
