$vboptions[bbtitle]

Page 4 of 32 FirstFirst 1234567891011121424 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 318

Thread: T97.ca | Official Thread of the T97NSR Flat Top Upper (FTU) | PART I

  1. #31
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    42
    can't wait for any other accessories or mods planned.... nice to support a local canadian company

  2. #32
    HELP! I sold my soul to the internet Stevo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    ....and we will call it… “This Land.” (or NW Alberta)
    Posts
    13,582
    Quote Originally Posted by Stevo View Post
    The opening is either too small to get your fingers into, or too big and the rail too high if a side charging handle is in the works.

    The rail opening is 1" at this location. It is just high enough to get your hand into and just high enough to use the original charging handle. This offers the simplest and most troublefree installation for the end user however I will take this comment under advisement at our next meeting.

    Much better than stock, not as good as it could be.
    1" is barely enough to fit one finger in. Plus you've shaped the opening to be smallest ahead of the CH, with that angled cut.
    I agree it's certainly simple, but you can do better. If you offer a fixed charging handle that extends out the side, it will address the CH opening issue.

    Understood. I will print this comment now and have it reviewed by 4 people at our next meeting.
    Last edited by M14.CA; 10-12-2013 at 10:44 AM.
    Whatever

  3. #33
    Big Mouth Slowbalt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,677
    Tagged

  4. #34
    HELP! I sold my soul to the internet Stevo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    ....and we will call it… “This Land.” (or NW Alberta)
    Posts
    13,582
    Understood. I will print this comment now and have it reviewed by 4 people at our next meeting.
    Thank you.

    Edit: My hands don't work as well as they used to and having to use a single finger to charge a .223 rifle isn't an attractive thought.
    Last edited by Stevo; 10-12-2013 at 11:01 AM.
    Whatever

  5. #35
    GunNutz mytiburon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Saskatchewan
    Posts
    653
    This has been mentioned however I want to reiterate some thoughts. Its current prototype design looks like an "blocky industrial level" which serves a dual purpose as a "post pounder" sits atop the 97. If we can sexy this up a bit I will be all in. Now take my money!!

    It will not look the same. This is only a stage 1 part being set up for fitment of attachment methods. It is a blank canvass right now.
    Last edited by M14.CA; 10-12-2013 at 07:22 PM.

  6. #36
    CGN Regular TRich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Courtice, Ontario
    Posts
    826
    Quote Originally Posted by mytiburon View Post
    This has been mentioned however I want to reiterate some thoughts. Its current prototype design looks like an "blocky industrial level" which serves as dual purpose as a "post pounder" sits atop the 97. If we can sexy this up a bit I will be all in. Now take my money!!
    I was looking at it again this morning and I was thinking to myself if the front of it was even slightly angled back instead of being at a right angle, it would improve the aesthetics greatly.

    It would reduce the length of an already short sight plane but I have not ruled this aesthetic out. Added to meeting discussion for next week.
    Last edited by M14.CA; 10-12-2013 at 12:45 PM.


    I'd rather be a peace maker than a peace keeper

  7. #37
    Big Mouth bjs7293's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    B.C. Lower Mainland
    Posts
    1,119
    It is nice to see that there is going to be modifications produced to enhance the T97. I purchase the T97 because it was a non-restricted bullpup for a $1000.00. I knew it fell short on ergonomics ect ect ect before I brought it. My concern is the overall cost of these coming mods. After all is said and done will I be close to the price range of a engineered rifle like the Tavor.

    Our new FTU or Flat Top Upper optics mount is the first component of an ambitious project of 11 modifications M14.ca will be developing for the Type 97NSR. One goal for this project is to offer you a choice of military grade parts at a reasonable price and a choice of how you want to build your rifle. The FTU is a good place to start. I think it will be a cost effective upgrade.
    Last edited by M14.CA; 10-12-2013 at 12:58 PM.

  8. #38
    GunNutz mytiburon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Saskatchewan
    Posts
    653
    Quote Originally Posted by TRich View Post
    I was looking at it again this morning and I was thinking to myself if the front of it was even slightly angled back instead of being at a right angle, it would improve the aesthetics greatly.
    Absolutely

    A second vote noted.
    Last edited by M14.CA; 10-12-2013 at 12:58 PM.

  9. #39
    I have no life drifter dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    B.C.
    Posts
    2,403
    Very cool that a Canadian company is wading into this. My requests would be as follows:

    Price: Can it be reasonable as compared to the cost of the rifle? Not sure if you saw all of the reaction to the Magwedge rail for the SKS?

    At this stage, it would not be unreasonable to compare this part to our M14.ca SHG in terms of price, but this rail is longer, wider, higher and with additional machine time for lightening cuts, angular cuts forward and to the side, an optically precise mounting mechanism, 4" picatinny rails and a separate process for the new charging handle, I would expect the part to cost more than an SHG. This is the best answer I can offer you at this early stage.

    Gas System: Currently the plastic cover/carry handle needs to be slid back about a cm to allow the selector to go horizontal and be removed. If there is any way to allow the gas system to be removed without moving the new upper (losing zero in the process) this would be a key issue.

    Noted for our next meeting.

    Charging Handle: This will be great! My #1 complaint about the gun right now.
    Height of rail: I think the proto looks fine: we don't want to have to add a riser (a la AR15) to get a comfy rise for an optic. Prefer to have TRS-25, Strikefire, Aimpoint Pro etc pop on there and keep a good cheek weld.

    Yes, exactly.

    Nice work guys and thanks for responding to people's ideas.
    Last edited by M14.CA; 10-12-2013 at 01:15 PM.

  10. #40
    HELP! I sold my soul to the internet Can-down's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    B.C.
    Posts
    15,201
    I agree the rail height doesn't look to high or monolithic, with some optics or iron sights mounted it's going to look great!
    Nice work.

    You will be able to use any AR15 BUIS here as the stock comb to top rail height will eventually be identical to the AR.
    Last edited by M14.CA; 10-12-2013 at 07:24 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •