Norinco T97 and Dominion Arms T97?

The Norinco is the T97NSR, the Dominion Arms is the T97NRR. CanadaAmmo was the first to import the T97, but the RCMP deemed it prohib because it was compatible with the full-auto trigger group, so it was a non-starter. They went back to Norinco to redesign it for the Canadian market, and North Sylva managed to get them imported first, they brought in the T97NSR and it is currently the only T97 available. CanadaAmmo now has plans to bring in an improved version with their T97NRR which should be hitting our shores late this year.

So to answer your question, no they're not quite the same, but apparently the T97NRR has not yet been finalized so I can't say exactly what will be different. They are however both manufactured by Norinco, Dominion Arms is CanadaAmmo's brand for Norinco products.
 
I'm not even going to call you names, tell you to use the search function, or inform you that this question has been asked too many times to count.
Dominion arms T97 is Canada ammo's import version of the rifle and there is no difference except 1. the price is lower. 2. it's not available yet and the T97 NSR is.
 
I think the price is cheaper because Canada Ammo promised to bring them in at that price 4 years ago and possibly because CanAm is a believer in the market based approach to undermine draconian gun laws in Canada and bring about reform - that is, create a market that is large and healthy and that exploits every loophole in the laws to completely observe the letter, while completely violating the spirit of it.

I really like CanAm.
 
I think the difference could be a rifle with most of the bugs fixed @ a lower price... Could be, but still is pure speculation at this point... JP.
 
adriel said:
We'll see what comes over. Some QC issues on barrel drilling would be nice if they were fixed, but I think the bigger issue is the magwell.
Click to expand...

guys....
there is only a handful of "QC issues" with a small number of the rifles. Mine has none of these issues, as do many others you will see. i have not "modded it", and it is a great fun gun to shoot. buy one, and see what alll the fuss is about. Will can am ever get theirs in? Maybe, maybe not. They were suppose to be here in october, but they are not even built yet, so... keep waiting for something that may or may not even happen, or buy one of the ones that are.
 
Personally, I've never looked straight down the gas port on the barrel of any of my gas operated semi-auto's (SKS, 858, AR-15's, SU-16's). It's just not as easy to do on most guns as it is the T97 - for all I know they may ALL have touchdowns on them and I probably would never know. If I look strait down the barrel of my T97's with a bore light, I cannot see the mark that's on there right now.

What I DO know is in a hurry, with a high heart rate, breathing heavy, and with one of the cheapest, most questionable scopes I have, I can get a 5 shot, 3.5-4" at 100 yards sitting supported. Not the most accurate I've ever shot - but accurate enough for me. As I've said before - a perfect score with the old Canadian military personal weapons test would means the best 4 out of 5 shots in a 6" group at 100 yards from a prone unsupported position. Even the NEW PWT (I believe) is a 6" 5 shot group at 100 yard.

With the T97 - I don't know that I can do that yet, but I DO know the rifle can - and that is all that matters to me.

As for the magwell and all the complaints about the controls, I wrote this in CanAm's forum:

harbl_the_cat said:
I think the placement of the controls actually makes sense with basic military doctrine kept in mind. Even though the STANAG magazine well/mag release was an afterthought - if you try to apply Canadian military tests of elementary training (TOET's) and Canadian military immediate actions and stoppage drills - it's not unreasonable having the controls where they are even though it's a completely different rifle.

It's a bit fuzzy, but when I was in, Canadian soldiers were taught upon a stoppage to immediately cant the weapon to the right and inspect the ejection port. If the bolt is fully to the rear (mag empty) conduct a magazine change. If the bolt was partially to the rear (failure to extract, failure to feed/double feed), to attempt to clear it (attempt to engage the slide stop, remove the magazine, cycle the action, load the magazine, cycle the action, shoot). If the bolt was fully forward (failure to feed, misfire), to cycle the action and attempt to fire again.

I don't recall the training for rundowns (I only ever did 2), but I believe the key component was to engage the safety before advancing (maybe an infantryman can correct me). While this is awkward with the T97, there was a video in the black rifle forum showing the Chinese Army shooting team doing run downs and chambering a round AFTER they had run down and were at their firing position - even though it appeared they were shooting the newer QBZ-95-1 with the improved fire selector switch above the pistol grip.

It's different - but realistically, nothing is safer than running with a loaded mag in the magwell with no round in the chamber. That does add the complication that an infantryman would have to do a full unload/reload (minus chambering a round) if advancing from one position to the other (or engage the safety which, with the older model QBZ's is as awkard as it is with our T97's). I do think the older QBZ-95's fire selector was inverted from the one's North Sylvia delivered - maybe that's the mod that had to be made to get these things approved as non-restricted. (I don't know). Either way, while not optimal, I don't think the positioning of the safety is as big of a deal as everyone is making it out to be.

Furthermore, to the magazine release, if you adopt the doctrine to always inspect the chamber through the ejection port by canting the rifle to the left, the positioning of the right sided magazine release button actually isn't too awkward to reload from. Try it if you have one - shoulder the rifle with an empty mag, cycle and lock the action to the rear, cant the rifle to the left and look down the ejection port. Try doing a reload from that position using your STRONG (or weak hand) - it's not nearly as awkward as trying to do a reload with the rifle shouldered in a ready position, fumbling around to try to press the mag release, and from there, trying to do a reload with your weak hand. Both are doable, but it feels more natural to do the cant the rifle, strong hand reload.

Furthermore, without inspecting the chamber, there's no way to immediately identify what issue may have caused the stoppage - and if you go through the sequence of "firing, firing, firing, firing STOPS!" the time involved to attempt a magazine change without inspecting the chamber, realize the issue is a misfeed, remove the magazine, clear the misfeed, and reload the magazine is much more than upon stoppage, cant to the left, inspect the chamber, observe a misfeed, attempt to rack the action to attempt to clear the stoppage (as opposed to lock the action back - as this is not possible on a T97 with a loaded mag), if the stoppage doesn't clear, remove the magazine, cycle the action to clear, replace the magazine, cycle shoot.

I know this is also quite a bit different than the US army IA drill with the M16/M4 - which is some variant of Tap/Rack/Bang/Oh noes my rifle doesn't work, call a tech! (just kidding - it's here: http://www.armystudyguide.com/content/army_board_study_guide_topics/m16a2/m16a2-study-guide.shtml) - but honestly, I do think Canadian soldiers are held to a higher standard than American's (and I'm sure most Canadians will corroborate that claim).
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
garybusey said:
I'm not even going to call you names, tell you to use the search function, or inform you that this question has been asked too many times to count.
Dominion arms T97 is Canada ammo's import version of the rifle and there is no difference except 1. the price is lower. 2. it's not available yet and the T97 NSR is.
Click to expand...

Thanks for not calling me names, my pride and feelings would have been hurt so bad.... So, is the dominion arms 5.56 the same as the Norinco CQ garybusey? :D
 
jdman said:
yes
Click to expand...

I am well aware , just answering an obnoxious comment with another one , he says to many times to count, but go ahead and search for it, if by : One thread they mention this, is "Asked countless times" and gets him that worked up, maybe the internet is not for him and he should ignore questions that make him respond like that.
 
The real answer is no one knows, production haven't even started on the DA ones, because Canada Ammo is waiting to see what the feedback is from the NSR and ask the State Arsenal to tweak the product.
 
So, the newer revised (NRR) Type 97 is still the old type 97? Kinda disappointed that the G variant wasn't used.

In regards to the magwell and magrelease: I'm fairly certain the gun was designed for a paddle release system where the mag are supposed to rock in (QBZ-95), The magwell idea was probably the easist way to create an export version. Would be interesting if they ever produce a 5.45 version using '74 magazine so you can go with the QBZ95 may system
 
The biggest difference is, one exists and you can buy it, the other is much like Sasquatch, some claim it exists but few have seen it.
 
As refer to my connection in China.

They are from same factory, at least both from Jianshen Factory, (CODE296), located in Chongqing.

Norinco T97-NSR has EMEI logo on there, from Jianshen Factory too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom