T97NSR; Range Trip, 2nd Time Updated With New Pics!
- Thread starter Travis Bickle
- Start date
Travis Bickle
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Upper Lower Middle Alberta
I have the front post filed down already to a nice thin post.
Previous owner did an excellent job of it.
What diameter do you recommend to increase the rear sight hole to?
I make McGyver look like a retarded 5 year playing with a half complete Lego set!!!
lol No just a joke.I think a slightly larger rear aperture might actually help, it's hard to get the front aperture hood to perfectly line up with the rear aperture, you have to get your nose/eye right up to the thing until it's almost touching the rear handle. I suppose you could also cut the front hood in half, then bend the sides out to form the "dog ears" of an AR15 type front sight, then zero the irons with an AR15 sight picture if that makes sense.
You would only get one shot at it though lol There are no spare parts to be had
I'm hesitant to make any permanent changes to the rifle as there are zero chances to put it back to stock condition if it turns out bad or if I totally f**k it up
I have the front post filed down already to a nice thin post.
Previous owner did an excellent job of it.
What diameter do you recommend to increase the rear sight hole to?
I make McGyver look like a retarded 5 year playing with a half complete Lego set!!!
I think a slightly larger rear aperture might actually help, it's hard to get the front aperture hood to perfectly line up with the rear aperture, you have to get your nose/eye right up to the thing until it's almost touching the rear handle. I suppose you could also cut the front hood in half, then bend the sides out to form the "dog ears" of an AR15 type front sight, then zero the irons with an AR15 sight picture if that makes sense.
You would only get one shot at it though lol There are no spare parts to be had
I'm hesitant to make any permanent changes to the rifle as there are zero chances to put it back to stock condition if it turns out bad or if I totally f**k it up
Well its a risk to take, you could measure the rear aperture of an AR-15 100 meter sight with a caliper and see if its physically possible to bore the T97 rear sight to the same diameter? Or perhaps bore it just enough so that a spec of dust or a snowflake won't blocks your sight picture no more... happened to me while coyote hunting...
Travis Bickle
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Upper Lower Middle Alberta
Aye, it's a good point, the aperture is ridiculously small on the T97, I'll find out what a standard AR15 A1 "precision" aperture is and maybe start from there.
The issue I found that had the greatest impact on the accuracy of the T-97 was the looooooong trigger pull (for me at least). You have to be VERY disciplined in pulling that trigger over half-an-inch before it fires. And when it does fire, there's a barely noticeable 1/30th of a second delay for the primer to be struck. (I'm an amateur audio engineer, used to sussing out latency in digital audio - I'd say it's about 30 milliseconds).
An improved trigger would make a big difference for me. There's some guys looking at cutting alternative trigger bars to shorten that lenth of the draw for that trigger. Hopefully that becomes an option in the future.
An improved trigger would make a big difference for me. There's some guys looking at cutting alternative trigger bars to shorten that lenth of the draw for that trigger. Hopefully that becomes an option in the future.
Travis Bickle
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Upper Lower Middle Alberta
Yeah me too!
Actually on the internet I'm a Master Sniper who can shoot 2" groups with my TT33 at 150 meters.
Sometimes on the internet (especially when my claims are impossible to confirm) I'm actually the best shot in the country, maybe the Western hemisphere!
I'm interested in any small mods to get more out of the factory sights. Last trip to the range I used electrical tape to cover the open areas around the rear sight, seemed to be easier to line up the sights without that extra light around the aperture. The hood over the front post seems to complicate the view.
Travis Bickle
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Upper Lower Middle Alberta
I drilled out the rear sight aperture with a steel bit to exactly 0.070" to be exactly like the M16A2 rear sight aperture for distance/accuracy.
The stock 100 meter T97 rear aperture was way way smaller than that, no wonder it's so hard on the eyes!
Seems to be way easier on the eyes now and much easier to get a proper sight picture.
Range trip this weekend, will confirm, shoot again with better targets and reamed out rear sight aperture to 0.070"/M16A2 size hole.
Results/updates to follow.
tactical870
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Buckhorn, Ontario
I haven't had the chance to shoot mine beyond a pistol range, however I loaned it to a friend and he had no issues shooting a .5" 5 round group at 50 yards.
Travis Bickle
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Upper Lower Middle Alberta
Is that a five shot, half inch group at 50 yards with the stock iron sights on a T97 you say?
Travis Bickle
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Upper Lower Middle Alberta
Alright.
So I decided to bore out the 100 meter/"1" rear sight aperture to the M16A2 precision aperture diameter of 0.070".
The original aperture on the T97 was almost half that size! Very tiny.
On top of that I made some small upside down triangle spray paint targets as well as a large one for the 100 meters trial.
Used older 1980's surplus US Green Tip M855 62gr again as it seemed to like it the best last time out.
It was a lot easier to get a clear sight picture. It also felt like it was straining my eyes less but that may have been the old placebo effect....
So I shot 10 round groups again as it's easier to read what you're doing right and wrong on the trigger.
Here is the best I could get out of many groups at 50 meters. The shell I picked up is a fired 2 3/4" shotgun shell for size reference:
I then pushed the target back to 100 meters. And again, this is the best I could do after about 9-10 groups of ten shots:
A little bit better than my last results.
So I've come to some conclusions on the T97.
The main issue with the stock iron sights is primarily that the aperture at the "1" is way too small, it's very hard on the eyes. With it opened up to A2 aperture size I shrunk my groups considerably although nothing mind blowing. But the other actual issue with the sights is that it's almost impossible to keep a consistent sight image with the front and rear sight. The round peep sight with a round front sight ring and a post in the center gives no easy reference as to whether or not your post is actually center of the ring for windage/elevation with proper eye relief. It makes for a hard strain on the eye, too much time to focus on the alignment of the sights which fatigues your eye by the time you think you're lined up and ready to focus on target hold, breathing, trigger pull etc etc.
That coupled with the long soft trigger pull makes for a bad recipe for trying to attain competent accuracy. Although for a bullpup trigger it's good.
All that being said; the rifle is probably capable of much better accuracy but only after dropping hundreds more on FTU rails and quality scopes or irons that's compounded onto a rifle that is already well over $1K after taxes!
It's just my personal opinions and observations here but my SKS shoots the same as this rifle accuracy wise comparing them based on accuracy alone in stock condition. It's not my skill level, I can consistently shoot 2-3" groups with my Norinco M14 at 100 meters all day long.
I can't bring myself to invest way more money into this rifle not to mention permanently chopping parts off it to mount the upgrades etc. The new upgrades that are available/upcoming in my opinion look horrendous aesthetically not that I put much importance on looks alone but.....
I guess in summary the T97 to me is another rifle that is almost typical of the Canadian market. In stock condition it's outperformed or equaled in accuracy and reliability by a 70 year old russian milsurp that costs about 1/6 of the price. It just happens to have some qualities that we as Canadians are forced to seek out because of our ### laws. It's "tactical looking" it's a bullpup, it's Non Restricted, it takes STANAG magazines/10 round LAR mags. Like a lot of rifles in this country we have to buy because we can't shoot AR's outside of a range, we swallow the crazy price tag and all the negative aspects, get a gun that is about average accuracy wise in stock condition, then have to chop it up, modify it, drop hundreds more dollars on it to try really hard to make just a little better
It's depressing when you think about it lol It's not a bad rifle don't get me wrong, it's relatively reliable, well built, well finished, averagely accurate, ergonomics are a little wonky, but in stock condition and for the price these things go for....I'm on the fence about the rifle personally. I'm probably a minority on this. I understand we have to accept this gun the way it is and hope we can make it something it probably won't be because this is Canada and we are under oppression lol.
So I decided to bore out the 100 meter/"1" rear sight aperture to the M16A2 precision aperture diameter of 0.070".
The original aperture on the T97 was almost half that size! Very tiny.
On top of that I made some small upside down triangle spray paint targets as well as a large one for the 100 meters trial.
Used older 1980's surplus US Green Tip M855 62gr again as it seemed to like it the best last time out.
It was a lot easier to get a clear sight picture. It also felt like it was straining my eyes less but that may have been the old placebo effect....
So I shot 10 round groups again as it's easier to read what you're doing right and wrong on the trigger.
Here is the best I could get out of many groups at 50 meters. The shell I picked up is a fired 2 3/4" shotgun shell for size reference:
I then pushed the target back to 100 meters. And again, this is the best I could do after about 9-10 groups of ten shots:
A little bit better than my last results.
So I've come to some conclusions on the T97.
The main issue with the stock iron sights is primarily that the aperture at the "1" is way too small, it's very hard on the eyes. With it opened up to A2 aperture size I shrunk my groups considerably although nothing mind blowing. But the other actual issue with the sights is that it's almost impossible to keep a consistent sight image with the front and rear sight. The round peep sight with a round front sight ring and a post in the center gives no easy reference as to whether or not your post is actually center of the ring for windage/elevation with proper eye relief. It makes for a hard strain on the eye, too much time to focus on the alignment of the sights which fatigues your eye by the time you think you're lined up and ready to focus on target hold, breathing, trigger pull etc etc.
That coupled with the long soft trigger pull makes for a bad recipe for trying to attain competent accuracy. Although for a bullpup trigger it's good.
All that being said; the rifle is probably capable of much better accuracy but only after dropping hundreds more on FTU rails and quality scopes or irons that's compounded onto a rifle that is already well over $1K after taxes!
It's just my personal opinions and observations here but my SKS shoots the same as this rifle accuracy wise comparing them based on accuracy alone in stock condition. It's not my skill level, I can consistently shoot 2-3" groups with my Norinco M14 at 100 meters all day long.
I can't bring myself to invest way more money into this rifle not to mention permanently chopping parts off it to mount the upgrades etc. The new upgrades that are available/upcoming in my opinion look horrendous aesthetically not that I put much importance on looks alone but.....
I guess in summary the T97 to me is another rifle that is almost typical of the Canadian market. In stock condition it's outperformed or equaled in accuracy and reliability by a 70 year old russian milsurp that costs about 1/6 of the price. It just happens to have some qualities that we as Canadians are forced to seek out because of our ### laws. It's "tactical looking" it's a bullpup, it's Non Restricted, it takes STANAG magazines/10 round LAR mags. Like a lot of rifles in this country we have to buy because we can't shoot AR's outside of a range, we swallow the crazy price tag and all the negative aspects, get a gun that is about average accuracy wise in stock condition, then have to chop it up, modify it, drop hundreds more dollars on it to try really hard to make just a little better
It's depressing when you think about it lol It's not a bad rifle don't get me wrong, it's relatively reliable, well built, well finished, averagely accurate, ergonomics are a little wonky, but in stock condition and for the price these things go for....I'm on the fence about the rifle personally. I'm probably a minority on this. I understand we have to accept this gun the way it is and hope we can make it something it probably won't be because this is Canada and we are under oppression lol.
Last edited:
- Location
- Behind a large rock
Wow, he must be good. That's friggin amazing.
That's exactly where I sit with mine. Decent AR in hunting trim would sit in my safe if it could be NR. Not willing to give up that space and $$$ for something I can't take in the woods.
Thanks for the report on the .070" sight. I'll put that in the maybe pile. Did you make any effort to block light from those inside corners of the rear post?
Travis Bickle
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Upper Lower Middle Alberta
Yeah....I don't buy it. Sounds like horsesh*t to me lol
There's no end to magical shooting power stories on the anonymous internet
I could see it maybe if he had a scope mounted to it.....
All that being said; the rifle is probably capable of much better accuracy but only after dropping hundreds more on FTU rails and quality scopes or irons that's compounded onto a rifle that is already well over $1K after taxes!
It's just my personal opinions and observations here but my SKS shoots the same as this rifle accuracy wise comparing them based on accuracy alone in stock condition. It's not my skill level, I can consistently shoot 2-3" groups with my Norinco M14 at 100 meters all day long.
I can't bring myself to invest way more money into this rifle not to mention permanently chopping parts off it to mount the upgrades etc. The new upgrades that are available/upcoming in my opinion look horrendous aesthetically not that I put much importance on looks alone but.....
I guess in summary the T97 to me is another rifle that is almost typical of the Canadian market. In stock condition it's outperformed or equaled in accuracy and reliability by a 70 year old russian milsurp that costs about 1/6 of the price. It just happens to have some qualities that we as Canadians are forced to seek out because of our ### laws. It's "tactical looking" it's a bullpup, it's Non Restricted, it takes STANAG magazines/10 round LAR mags. Like a lot of rifles in this country we have to buy because we can't shoot AR's outside of a range, we swallow the crazy price tag and all the negative aspects, get a gun that is about average accuracy wise in stock condition, then have to chop it up, modify it, drop hundreds more dollars on it to try really hard to make just a little better
It's depressing when you think about it lol It's not a bad rifle don't get me wrong, it's relatively reliable, well built, well finished, averagely accurate, ergonomics are a little wonky, but in stock condition and for the price these things go for....I'm on the fence about the rifle personally. I'm probably a minority on this. I understand we have to accept this gun the way it is and hope we can make it something it probably won't be because this is Canada and we are under oppression lol.
Thanks for the time you took to do this review. I, too, am on the CanAm waiting list (since 2009
). I've always been a sucker for anything that pisses off 'the man' which is why I have an XCR-L, XCR-M, 180-B, SL8, NR CZ858, JR Carbine and will get a T97 when (if?) they finally show up. I've also been sorely tempted to get a Tavor and RFB because they are NR bullpups but the high cost has held me back a bit.Omitting the RFB (just so we're comparing .223 apples to .223 apples) what is the typical accuracy of a stock Tavor? Are they significantly better than a stock T97? I only ask because you seem put off by the mediocre accuracy vs. the cost of the T97 but Tavors run in the mid $2000's and I'm wondering if they are much more accurate than the T97 for the extra $1500. If not, then maybe the $300 for an FTU would not be a bad investment as you would have a gun that, from your report is reliable, well built and well finished for at least $1000 less than what an equivalent equipped Tavor would cost.
And just so everyone knows, I'm not knocking the Tavor (want one myself) but I'm just trying to get a feel for quality vs. accuracy vs. cost between the two.
As an aside, if the T97 has a 1:7 barrel you might want to try 69 gr. ammo as well. I know Federal and Winchester make match ammo in that weight and while you probably wouldn't use it as a steady diet it would widen your parameters in terms of accuracy potential in the T97.
Thanks again for your report.
