T97 NSR Sight Question

[Jarvy]

I really liked my T97 NSR, except for one thing: The front sight.

The front sight on rifles currently available for sale is basically an SKS sight:



The front sight post drifts left and right inside the hood. This makes the sights unusable, as your eye doesn't know if it wants to center the post or the hood inside the rear aperture. The sight picture ends up looking like one of the two below:



The design makes no sense, and sabotaged the entire rifle. I sold mine off because of this one problem.


However, in your own T97NSR announcement thread, the rifle pictured has a completely different front sight.



The entire front sight base drifts left and right, keeping the front sight post in the center of the hood. This solves the problem (or rather, the new sight creates a problem where there wasn't one before), and is how all the original QBZ rifles are configured.


So why was it changed? Will we ever see the properly designed T97 in Canada?


I want to be the owner of a T97 rifle again, but only if the sights are usable.

[Stupidmonkey]

get a T97 FTU and ignore the ####ty iron sights. FTU makes the T97 a very fun to use firearm. Now just to fix the mag release and safety and BAM

[Jarvy]

Because I liked the fact that it was slim, light, rugged, simple and inexpensive. I enjoy shooting with irons.

The FTU is a nice bit of kit if you want to mount optics but for me the FTU negates all the things I like about the T97.

[Sudsy15]

Because I liked the fact that it was slim, light, rugged, simple and inexpensive. I enjoy shooting with irons.

The FTU is a nice bit of kit if you want to mount optics but for me the FTU negates all the things I like about the T97.

I would argue the only characteristic you listed a T97 with an FTU mounted isn't/doesn't have is inexpensive. And really, an FTU isn't that expensive. My FTU is still in great shape and it rides along in my truck with me whenever the situation dictates.

[jakester]

I agree completely. When I first saw the prototype at P&D in Edm (when it was making the rounds), I marveled at the front sight base system they used. The base itself was adjustable for windage. Finally, some forward thinking!

When the rifle finally hits production, they go with the same old tired Ak/SKS type sight and base.

Maybe the next variation will be better. While they're at it, they need to provide a bit better back sight aperture system as well.

I really liked my T97 NSR, except for one thing: The front sight.

The front sight on rifles currently available for sale is basically an SKS sight:



The front sight post drifts left and right inside the hood. This makes the sights unusable, as your eye doesn't know if it wants to center the post or the hood inside the rear aperture. The sight picture ends up looking like one of the two below:



The design makes no sense, and sabotaged the entire rifle. I sold it because of this one problem.


However, in your own T97NSR announcement thread, the rifle pictured has a completely different front sight.



The entire front sight base drifts left and right, keeping the front sight post in the center of the hood. This solves the problem, and is how all the original QBZ rifles are configured.


So why was it changed? Will we ever see the properly designed T97 in Canada?


I want to be the owner of a T97 rifle again, but only if the sights are usable.

[Jarvy]

I would argue the only characteristic you listed a T97 with an FTU mounted isn't/doesn't have is inexpensive. And really, an FTU isn't that expensive. My FTU is still in great shape and it rides along in my truck with me whenever the situation dictates.

"If you want to shoot irons, you should buy a dremel, cut the irons off, then pay a few hundred dollars to replace plastic parts with heavier metal ones, then attach some flip up irons."

Can you please understand why I don't see this as a solution?

All I want to know is why the original front sight design, which is a perfectly good system, which is found on every version of the QBZ rifle in existence except the T97 NSR, wasn't used.

[ShawnC6]

Because it's a sub $1000 NR black rifle and cutting costs is a thing.

Edit, fixed spelling

[Phat Eagle]

^^ yup, though I think he meant NR...

[Jarvy]

It's probably cost cutting, but I'm also curious if NS even knew about the change, and if it's possible to get proper rifles made.

[7offsuit2]

It's probably cost cutting, but I'm also curious if NS even knew about the change, and if it's possible to get proper rifles made.

I think I would have run my T97 as a strictly irons gun if it looked "better" - ie more FAMAS like, and had a diopter set that did not run counter to how they normally are. A pin hole for 100 seems asinine.

If a carry handle was attached to a picatinny rail, that would have been ideal. Oh! And folding, whilst I am still wistfully wishing!