I wonder how many people buy AKs, VZ58s or fixed carry handle AR15s because they think they have good optic mounting capabilities. Like those rifles, the QBZ has other strong points for those with other priorities... or it should. Buying a T97NSR today is like buying an AK with the rear notch welded to the receiver so you can't adjust for range. It still works, technically, but it's not as capable as it's supposed to be.
T97 reciever
- Thread starter slyty
- Start date
I wonder how many people buy AKs, VZ58s or fixed carry handle AR15s because they think they have good optic mounting capabilities. Like those rifles, the QBZ has other strong points for those with other priorities... or it should. Buying a T97NSR today is like buying an AK with the rear notch welded to the receiver so you can't adjust for range. It still works, technically, but it's not as capable as it's supposed to be.
SquidMeister
CGN Regular
- Location
- New Soviet Albertistan
it is based off an early 90s design to be fair.
And the AR is based on a 60's design, and the AK is based on a 40's design. New versions of both feature updates which facilitate mounting of optics.
Mumbles Marble Mouth
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Lower Mainland
The AR is actually 1950's.
I just went with service date lol
And you can get those. But people still sell and people still buy ARs with triangular front sight gas blocks and are willing to pay good Money for a good A2 carry handle.
I've never understood why whenever I mention I want this rifle with the sights it was designed to have (which is reason enough to want it, even if they weren't more effective), there's always a guy or two ready to pounce on me. "YOU HAVE NO REASON TO WANT THAT!" They try to convince me with desperation, as if I'll take away their FTU if I don't change my mind. I just don't understand it.
Last edited:
The design change was sort of snuck in. The sights on the demo unit were correct, the production ones were not. I think most people wouldn't notice the change, and just assume the design was that bad to begin with. I didn't notice until months after I had owned it, and I discovered it by chance. When I pointed this out, yeah there were plenty of people who wanted it changed!
And then on occasion there's someone like you, whose apparent firm opposition to a higher quality of product and greater variety of options leaves me completely baffled.
Everyone wants a better product but they don't want to pay for it.
If I had the option obviously I'd choose the better sight, but if it's $100 more... No. And at this point most have a FTU and the demand wouldn't be there to change and bring in the other one.
If I had the option obviously I'd choose the better sight, but if it's $100 more... No. And at this point most have a FTU and the demand wouldn't be there to change and bring in the other one.
I agree with Jarvy.
I do like sights on some rifles, but I also like irons too.
Some rifles are meant to be used with irons. This is one f them.
My Swiss Arms and FAMAE are others.
Mine is a 13 ### ### serial, around five hundred rounds total.
No failures to either feed, extract or eject.
Sights are centered to start and accurate, in my hands and as tried out in the hands of several friends too.
Hitting a figure eleven sized target at 300m is not a problem.
We did that at five hundred meters with carry handle sight C7s in the late eighties.
I can't see why this should be any more of a challenge.
I feel for you Jarvy.
I love everything in 5.56 and this is the SKS of the 5.56 world.
As much as I would love to try this with optics, I could never bring myself to butcher this for a conversion.
I am tempted to get a second rifle, but it would probably be another iron sight version too.
I used to own a Merkur XR4Ti, it was a fun car until you had to find a part.
I still see a lot of Civics on the road though.
I do like sights on some rifles, but I also like irons too.
Some rifles are meant to be used with irons. This is one f them.
My Swiss Arms and FAMAE are others.
Mine is a 13 ### ### serial, around five hundred rounds total.
No failures to either feed, extract or eject.
Sights are centered to start and accurate, in my hands and as tried out in the hands of several friends too.
Hitting a figure eleven sized target at 300m is not a problem.
We did that at five hundred meters with carry handle sight C7s in the late eighties.
I can't see why this should be any more of a challenge.
I feel for you Jarvy.
I love everything in 5.56 and this is the SKS of the 5.56 world.
As much as I would love to try this with optics, I could never bring myself to butcher this for a conversion.
I am tempted to get a second rifle, but it would probably be another iron sight version too.
I used to own a Merkur XR4Ti, it was a fun car until you had to find a part.
I still see a lot of Civics on the road though.
Exactly! I loved it's simplicity, and clearly AK and SKS-inspired innards. It was very slim, extremely light and utterly reliable. While I'm sure many love their FTUs and LHGs, they are the antithesis to what I like about the T97.
