anyone use the t97 gen 3 yet?

G

garrett8781

Member
Rating - 100%
21   0   0
ive always wanted one of these things and im about to pull the trigger on getting one, is there any reason to not get one? i dont imagine the gen 3 is much different than gen 2

how are the included irons on these? and where can i find some magpul pmags in black 5/30 preferably, all sold out every where i have looked
 
They work fine, but the ergonomics are terrible. If you don't already own a semi rifle in 5.56, then definitely grab it.
 
I will have mine soon and will post my observations. My experience with t 97 I owned One with the flat top upper upgrade. It ran fine was accurate as other rifles of this style. The position of the safety and mag release are not Very ergonomic And limits its usefulness for high speed low drag shooting competition. Outside of that it is accurate and reliable. If you want one you should buy now when they are available. Here in Canada We seem to only get one shipment every five years or so. Who knows when we Or if we will get more.
 
"gen 2" and "gen 3" are abortions.

Get the real thing instead of bubba'ed crap.

Its like calling a tapco'ed SKS a gen 2 SKS.
 
This is a norinco type 97. It came like that from the factory. It is like that and it is a coherent semi auto version of the chinese military version (QBZ-97A)

All the other versions are directly from Bubba. As i said, a tapco'd sks does not make it a Gen 2 SKS.

That's my opinion. Point is i prefer the type 97 "Gen 1".

norincotype97_1.jpg
 
Last edited:
Gen 1 is bubba'd as well to use 5.56.... bubba is what bubba is.... gen 1-2-3 pick you flavour bubbalicious.
 
These Gen 2s and 3s came that way from the factory, too, along with a host of other improvements like ambi mag release, improved springs and M4 freed ramps. There's nothing bubba about it.

It's like calling a C7A2 a "bubba'd" rifle because the original C7 had A1 carry handle sights.
 
Last edited:
is there much that can be done to these in terms of modifications? is the muzzle device welded? and how are the triggers? youtube content on these are a little lacking
 
Jarvy said:
These Gen 2s and 3s came that way from the factory, too, along with a host of other improvements like ambi mag release, improved springs and M4 freed ramps. There's nothing bubba about it.

It's like calling a C7A2 a "bubba'd" rifle because the original C7 has A1 carry handle sights.
Click to expand...

Anything after the original musket is "Bubba"
 
garrett8781 said:
is there much that can be done to these in terms of modifications? is the muzzle device welded? and how are the triggers? youtube content on these are a little lacking
Click to expand...

Muzzle devices are press fit and pinned. A few people have removed them and threaded the muzzle but it's a process. Triggers are light and smooth but have no "wall" so it's not clear when they break. They also have a linear hammer, so if you run them dry, they have a perceptible "lock time" - which is the space of time between the trigger pull and the shot. I recommend greasing the rails, which eliminates the issue.
 
Rick911 said:
This is a norinco type 97. It came like that from the factory. It is like that and it is a coherent semi auto version of the chinese military version (QBZ-97A)

All the other versions are directly from Bubba. As i said, a tapco'd sks does not make it a Gen 2 SKS.

That's my opinion. Point is i prefer the type 97 "Gen 1".

norincotype97_1.jpg
Click to expand...

I don't want the ugly original with a useless carry handle lol. I enjoy my flat top gen 2 lol. If this was the only model I definitely wouldn't have picked one up. All depends on your taste of bubba. I like having my scope low, so flat top works for me.
 
Last edited:
I still don't know why we can't get the PLA re-worked version, at least as far as the ergos go - the PLA has been using these with a safety over the pistol grip for years. The rear safety version lasted about as long in PLA service as it would in CF service, maybe slightly less.
 
enefgee said:
I still don't know why we can't get the PLA re-worked version, at least as far as the ergos go - the PLA has been using these with a safety over the pistol grip for years. The rear safety version lasted about as long in PLA service as it would in CF service, maybe slightly less.
Click to expand...


That's not really the case. The QBZ-95-1 only entered trials in 2010 and was first issued in 2012, so that's a solid decade+ of production and issue of the old rifle, which was designed to be fast and easy to make. They already had tooling for a 5.56 version of the original because they wanted military sales. When they didn't really get any, it seems likely they didn't bother with a conversion of the new rifle. We really only got a commercial 5.56 version of the original because they already had the tooling.

While PLA units that get media exposure overseas (Training in Australia, peacekeeping in Africa) get the newer 95-1s, it looks like the bulk of the QBZs in service are still the originals.

I'd REALLY like a T97-1 but I don't think we're going to get it.
 
enefgee said:
I still don't know why we can't get the PLA re-worked version, at least as far as the ergos go - the PLA has been using these with a safety over the pistol grip for years. The rear safety version lasted about as long in PLA service as it would in CF service, maybe slightly less.
Click to expand...

The pistol grip safety is a deal breaker if the rifle is to be used in any action shooting games. There is no way anyone can manipulate that armpit safety nearly as fast as people running with thumb safety, if every step and a half needs to have the safety engaged they are lots of seconds on the clock. In the military , you gotta wonder if the PLA troops are running around with safety on or safety off. In real UN op with live ammo, I hope they have the type-95-1 and the safety engaged.

The Type 95-1 also has a better pistol grip angle. The back of the pistol grip is filleted upwards ( like an AR ) so you can grip with a high tang grip. The lower is also thinner with the grip interfaces. The current older Type 95 is almost like sticking a grip to a thick folded AK metal receiver box that is made of plastic. You can kinda tell it was originally designed by people that don't really know how to shoot ( or all they know is shooting the old Type 56 and 81) who just copied the ergonomics of whatever they had been using.

If NS can import the -1 style Type 97, they will sell way more (and probably sell a second copy to people who have already own one)

The future of Type95/97 is already known. The new QZ 131 will be replacing all in the years to come.
 
Last edited:
greentips said:
The pistol grip safety is a deal breaker if the rifle is to be used in any action shooting games. There is no way anyone can manipulate that armpit safety nearly as fast as people running with thumb safety, if every step and a half needs to have the safety engaged they are lots of seconds on the clock. In the military , you gotta wonder if the PLA troops are running around with safety on or safety off. In real UN op with live ammo, I hope they have the type-95-1 and the safety engaged.

The Type 95-1 also has a better pistol grip angle. The back of the pistol grip is filleted upwards ( like an AR ) so you can grip with a high tang grip. The lower is also thinner with the grip interfaces. The current older Type 95 is almost like sticking a grip to a thick folded AK metal receiver box that is made of plastic. You can kinda tell it was originally designed by people that don't really know how to shoot ( or all they know is shooting the old Type 56 and 81) who just copied the ergonomics of whatever they had been using.

If NS can import the -1 style Type 97, they will sell way more (and probably sell a second copy to people who have already own one)

The future of Type95/97 is already known. The new QZ 131 will be replacing all in the years to come.
Click to expand...

To be honest the pistol grip was a concerning factor from looking at it, I don’t know how comfortable it is but it certainly doesnt look too comfortable, would of been nice if it wasn’t directly part of the lower and you could fit your own pistol grip on there
 
Last edited:
garrett8781 said:
To be honest the pistol grip was a concerning factor from looking at it, I don’t know how comfortable it is but it certainly doesnt look too comfortable, would of been nice if it wasn’t directly part of the lower and you could fit your own pistol grip on there
Click to expand...

It is not uncomfortable, but modern shooting technique calls for gripping high. The downwards line of the original 95 is the reverse of what modern designer will do. In prone shooting, people tend to grip low so that design may come from people who do more KD range military prone shooting The more beefy area next to the trigger also affects the trigger finger coming down to the trigger. The thinner the better. The 95-1 lower fixes a lot of these issues in the original 95, which probably came from feedback off shooters.

Making the grip interchangable will cost way more because it gets way more complex, more labour and more parts.

I think some of the problems can be fixed with aftermarket parts. An oversized tactile safety lever will make putting the rifle on and off safe much easier
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom