T97 vs Tavor Threads Merged

pavmentsurfer said:
Its too bad this thread is going the way it is. We could all have simply enjoyed talking about our new guns. Im done with it.
Click to expand...

I still think the T97 is a piece of crap. ;)

Beyond the ugliness and that it's Chinese built it just burns me that I couldn't shoot one because I'm left handed.

If it was lefty friendly I may have actually considered it.
 
pavmentsurfer said:
Im not %100 sure, but im PRETTY sure its because the number associated with the aperatures is NOT the yardage they are to be used... its a measurement relating to the size of the aperture or the field of view you get with that aperture. Again, not %100 sure about this but I thought I did read it somewhere and it would make perfect sense. Chinese do things differently.
Click to expand...

Sounds likely. I ran into a similar problem sighting in a Russian CM2 22LR rifle with factory aperture sights. Let's just say their markings didn't make sense to me. I had to figure it out with trial and error.
 
pavmentsurfer said:
Im not %100 sure, but im PRETTY sure its because the number associated with the aperatures is NOT the yardage they are to be used... its a measurement relating to the size of the aperture or the field of view you get with that aperture. Again, not %100 sure about this but I thought I did read it somewhere and it would make perfect sense. Chinese do things differently.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but the height of the apertures is stepped as it would be for distances. I will make a trip to China, and investigate one of the rifles at Tiananmen square. I'll be right back.
 
No sense reading the manual, they used google translate for it.
Makes for good toilet seat reading chuckles though.
Click to expand...

Oh I dunno, it is missing a few things, but the breakdown procedure was helpful I reckon.
 
pavmentsurfer said:
Im not %100 sure, but im PRETTY sure its because the number associated with the aperatures is NOT the yardage they are to be used... its a measurement relating to the size of the aperture or the field of view you get with that aperture. Again, not %100 sure about this but I thought I did read it somewhere and it would make perfect sense. Chinese do things differently.
Click to expand...

That is correct. The doctrine/design is meant for the ease of use under low light conditions. Increasing the rear aperture size allows easier shooting at a longer range, and the numbers correspond to the distance one wishes to engage the target.

100m - 1mm
300m - 2mm
500m - 2.2mm

Use the 100m aperture for 100m military qualifications.
However soldiers are advised to use the 500m aperture for CQB, with a lower torso hold for general combat.
 
^ good to know but weird

larger your aperture the harder it is to keep a constant sight picture at long range
 
I thought I would chime in on my thoughts after playing with mine for a couple of hours...

The polymer does NOT feel cheap (to me) no flimsy plastic whatsoever, in fact it is very sturdy and hard.

The magazine release NEEDS replacement, what a horrible POS. I cannot wait until someone makes a replacement ambi release for this rifle.

The sights are counter intuitive, I think I will use the 3 or 5 sights for shooting, the 1 is a tad tiny.

The action is very smooth.

I hate the riveting job on the magazine.

I love this gun.

Aaannndd that is about it.
 
twyeh said:
That is correct. The doctrine/design is meant for the ease of use under low light conditions. Increasing the rear aperture size allows easier shooting at a longer range, and the numbers correspond to the distance one wishes to engage the target.

100m - 1mm
300m - 2mm
500m - 2.2mm

Use the 100m aperture for 100m military qualifications.
However soldiers are advised to use the 500m aperture for CQB, with a lower torso hold for general combat.
Click to expand...

that is so weird!
Very counter intuitive.
 
Now are the sights calibrated for the distances mentioned a la Swiss arms? I'll try zeroing at 25m on the 300m aperture and see if the 100m aperture is ballpark at 100m
 
mildcustom2 said:
I still think the T97 is a piece of crap. ;)

Beyond the ugliness and that it's Chinese built it just burns me that I couldn't shoot one because I'm left handed.

If it was lefty friendly I may have actually considered it.
Click to expand...

I am a lefty and bought one. It is easier to get used to than you think. The recoil buffer is excellent and if you put a red dot on it you will easily be able to transition to the right shoulder. This rifle is worth the effort.
 
Fondled a type97 at a local store the other day and I was HUGELY unimpressed. The butt stock is vertically short so it doesn't shoulder well, the carry handle is pointless, the mag release is laughable, and the overall build looks about what I would expect of a $650 Chinese gun.

Hopefully a good plinker though! Its hard to come up with a similarly priced NR alternative that's for sure.. but personally I wouldn't feel like I was getting my moneys worth at $1200. Some of the design elements just make no friggin sense.
 
Just got a text from a buddy who grabbed one last night, Im happy now :) I will be able to put actual hands on run some rounds thru it this evening well waiting for Can Am to get there shipment in.
 
You're going to like it, it's a solid gun. I personally could care less about the safety - I never use/trust one. The mag release might reduce your mag swap time by .3 seconds - again, don't care.
 
twyeh said:
That is correct. The doctrine/design is meant for the ease of use under low light conditions. Increasing the rear aperture size allows easier shooting at a longer range, and the numbers correspond to the distance one wishes to engage the target.

100m - 1mm
300m - 2mm
500m - 2.2mm

Use the 100m aperture for 100m military qualifications.
However soldiers are advised to use the 500m aperture for CQB, with a lower torso hold for general combat.
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting! You have no idea how much that was bugging me! If you have any more information in this area, please post. I don't suppose you have a cousin over there that can get us the front rail system? ;)
 
Throttle_monkey1 said:
Now are the sights calibrated for the distances mentioned a la Swiss arms? I'll try zeroing at 25m on the 300m aperture and see if the 100m aperture is ballpark at 100m
Click to expand...

This should work well. Please report back if using the 300m aperture works as a 25m battle sight zero. Then verify zero at 100m with 100m aperture.

5440fight said:
Thanks for posting! You have no idea how much that was bugging me! If you have any more information in this area, please post. I don't suppose you have a cousin over there that can get us the front rail system?
wink.png
Click to expand...

I have sourced somebody who has info on the front clamp rail system. Apparently they were an one off manufactured by someone from Hong Kong for a local special police unit in China, and are not a general issue item. Very limited in the wild and are fetching big dollars for collectors. Unit price is not cheap, so it will be better off for somebody here to come up with our own version, or ask somebody in China to clone it.
 
Last edited:
twyeh said:
This should work well. Please report back if using the 300m aperture works as a 25m battle sight zero. Then verify zero at 100m with 100m aperture.



I have sourced somebody who has info on the front clamp rail system. Apparently they were an one off manufactured by someone from Hong Kong for a local special police unit in China, and are not a general issue item. Very limited in the wild and are fetching big dollars for collectors. Unit price is not cheap, so it will be better off for somebody here to come up with our own version, or ask somebody in China to clone it.
Click to expand...

Ah, gotcha. I'm not surprised. The research I did found very few people with access, offering them to the airsoft world for $350-$500, and then disappearing after interest evaporated, at that price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom