New batch of Type97NSR rifles have arrived!!!

dakaroo said:
Well my older brother was a south paw, until he went to school, his teacher beat his left hand with a ruler so he could only use his right hand. That was 60-70's. I went to school in the 70's and was able to keep my south paw. BTW my brother is efficient using left or right hand.
Click to expand...

did he also become proficient in dodging that ruler?
 
North_Sylva said:
Barrel gouge inspection was part of the final QC process. Non of these rifle's have one. That being said, I still haven't seen one from the last batch.

No changes to how the rifle is configured at this point. Stay tuned however, we will be annoucing in a few weeks a new configuration for the 97NSR.
Click to expand...

We really need an improvement to the T97. After working with some modifications, I find that the T97NSR was never really designed to work well with 5.56/.223 or the AR magazine. There is a huge gap while the bolt is pushing the round into the chamber. Unlike an AR15 where the tip of the front of the round actually goes into the chamber BEFORE the tail leaves the magazine lips, the T97 actually have a gap where the round is unguided and can freely jump into the side of the chamber, causing a major malfunction(unless you use the factory magazine, which the lips are actually longer than any standard milspec AR Mags.)

From my limited knowledge, I think this has something to do with:
1. Length of the bolt lugs, which also dictates the length of the longer space between the barrel extension. So the travel length is now longer, hence the round is unguided at some point, and the round can jump up at a fashion subjected to the magazine's spring force or geometry of the lips.
2. The diameter of the bolt, which requires the round to move up at a steeper angle. AR bolts are actually smaller in diameter so the magazine is higher, so the feeding doesnt require the round to move at too steep of an angle

I don't know if this observation is correct, but if it is, then it would require major changes in the design. I may also like to see the magazine release corrected too. I don't mind the lack of external bolt hold open, one can easily use a finger to push up on the bolt hold open in the mag well.

I still really like the idea of a sub $1000 bullpup that takes AR magazine(Pmags too), but it has to, I mean HAS TO be reasonably reliable to make it a dependable rifle. Please make it happen!
 
Last edited:
Bayonet mount... one of the sponsors on here sells one. Starts with C###xx A###

Edit: Not a sponsor but you'll find them under the gear retailers section.
 
Rick911 said:
corwin arms ffs

Don't think its bad naming it here... They sell complementary items to this product.
Click to expand...

Ah ok. It's a clamp on mount, not an integral mount. I'm still looking for an integral mount model, just like the ones being used by South East Asian special forces~
 
Do you own one?

t_102 said:
We really need an improvement to the T97. After working with some modifications, I find that the T97NSR was never really designed to work well with 5.56/.223 or the AR magazine. There is a huge gap while the bolt is pushing the round into the chamber. Unlike an AR15 where the tip of the front of the round actually goes into the chamber BEFORE the tail leaves the magazine lips, the T97 actually have a gap where the round is unguided and can freely jump into the side of the chamber, causing a major malfunction(unless you use the factory magazine, which the lips are actually longer than any standard milspec AR Mags.)

From my limited knowledge, I think this has something to do with:
1. Length of the bolt lugs, which also dictates the length of the longer space between the barrel extension. So the travel length is now longer, hence the round is unguided at some point, and the round can jump up at a fashion subjected to the magazine's spring force or geometry of the lips.
2. The diameter of the bolt, which requires the round to move up at a steeper angle. AR bolts are actually smaller in diameter so the magazine is higher, so the feeding doesnt require the round to move at too steep of an angle

I don't know if this observation is correct, but if it is, then it would require major changes in the design. I may also like to see the magazine release corrected too. I don't mind the lack of external bolt hold open, one can easily use a finger to push up on the bolt hold open in the mag well.

I still really like the idea of a sub $1000 bullpup that takes AR magazine(Pmags too), but it has to, I mean HAS TO be reasonably reliable to make it a dependable rifle. Please make it happen!
Click to expand...
 
t_102 said:
Yeah

http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/foru...-T97-more-Reliable-(Update-118)?highlight=T97

I even analyzed round feeding under slow motion camera videos. I really wanted it to work.
Click to expand...

Obviously you have put a lot of thought into this. I need to ask, is the problem with the design an actual problem or a perceived problem. In otherwords, theoretically the uncontrolled chambering of the round could lead to stoppages, but does it? The possiblity of feeding problems is one thing, but have we seen reports of wide-scale failures to operate the firearm?

Currently, other than general ergonomic whinging, the only real issues I have heard about is the magazine well being too tight for non-gi mags, and the feed ramp.
 
Last edited:
Was there ever any follow-up/compensation/replacement up for us beta testers that suffered the gouge? Here's a pic of my gouge, additionally it caused a hairline crack in the rifling that rides up the land for about a third of an inch towards the muzzle.

I've only put 5 rounds through the rifle.

 
Moose308 said:
Obviously you have put a lot of thought into this. I need to ask, is the problem with the design an actual problem or a perceived problem. In otherwords, theoretically the uncontrolled chambering of the round could lead to stoppages, but does it? The possiblity of feeding problems is one thing, but have we seen reports of wide-scale failures to operate the firearm?

Currently, other than general ergonomic whinging, the only real issues I have heard about is the magazine well being too tight for non-gi mags, and the feed ramp.
Click to expand...

I had one from the first batch for a very short time and shot around a 100 rounds thru it, and the feeding problem was present. the ammo would not feed properly into the chamber and would cause the gun to jam. the projectile recessed into the casing of the ammo. this appened 3 times in 100 rounds I think. the rest of the time. the feeding was not always smooth, but was still feeding.
I was using LAR 10 rounds mags though
 
Grey LAR-15 10 round mags, I have five, four of the five had feed issues, once - the first time I used them. I worked the springs on them pretty hard after by cycling them with a piece of dowel and now they haven't fed wrong yet couple hundred rounds each. Using all chinese surplus. When it happened for me, it's awesome, the bullet is pushed back into the shell, and the lip is bent. All of them. Maybe they were stiff, don't know. They are OK now.

Gen3 Pmags, no issues, have three, no issues at all.

Factory mag, no issues whatsoever.
 
doczong said:
Grey LAR-15 10 round mags, I have five, four of the five had feed issues, once - the first time I used them. I worked the springs on them pretty hard after by cycling them with a piece of dowel and now they haven't fed wrong yet couple hundred rounds each. Using all chinese surplus. When it happened for me, it's awesome, the bullet is pushed back into the shell, and the lip is bent. All of them. Maybe they were stiff, don't know. They are OK now.

Gen3 Pmags, no issues, have three, no issues at all.

Factory mag, no issues whatsoever.
Click to expand...

What I've learned with LAR-15 mags to put one less bullet in. Rather than 10..try 9 or 8. After I reduced capacity 1-2 bullets all my mags functioned perfectly!
 
Deckard said:
How can one be assured they get a new batch rifle? Dealers will still pass on gouge guns no doubt. Serial number range?
Click to expand...

I would like to hear something official from the NS as to what (if anything) is different from Batch 2.

I can understand that they might want to keep tight lipped so they don't jepordize any Batch 1 rifle sales still in the pipeline. However, it would be nice to know if any "issues" from the first batch have been corrected with the second.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom