the Norinco 95 assault rifle
- Thread starter northwind
- Start date
- Location
- Edmonton, AB
Don't go there, Tootall! 
- Location
- South Cariboo, BC
Polyshot said:They do....... the Type 97, and it is chambered for 5.56mm NATO and uses STANAG mags...
..... and the post is in wrong forum......
Nope, it may be evil and black, but us norinco junkies infest this forum more than any other.
Now if we can just get the us to put in some huge orders for norinco firearms, then cancel them once the parts are built, maybe we can get some great prices on a new selection of norincos.
- Location
- Keswick, Ontario
SOF has two French Foreign Legionaires using them (or what looks to be an older model of them) during deployment in Africa on the cover this month.
- Location
- Surrey, B.C.
You sure it's not a Famas G1? Why would France buy Chinese rifles and deploy them? Doesn't make sense.
Blackthorne said:
It's a FAMAS, which in and of itself isn't that great either. The cyclical rate is way too high and uncontrollable. Gaullic stubborness prevents them from adopting a G3 or M16. The SAS didn't make the same mistake. There's no way those troops will use that crap Enfield BP when they can run a working A2.
The bullpup was a solution for a problem that never really existed: The rifle being too long. This is never really an issue for hardened, quality infantry troops who handle a rifle as easily as you or I might handle a fork. All infantry troops at one point learn to drive on with 60lbs worth of kit and 30-50 lbs worth of machine guns and ammo, so you can imagine even a full length A2 feels light as a feather and fast as a dream. In the event a rifle is just too long (Spc purpose, con space, FIBUA) shorties like the CAR exist. Any range that is tighter and close should be handled with a SMG anyways.
Bullpup issues are: Too much mass near the rear end, decreased balance, less fore and aft symmetry, weaker longitudingal rigidity, increased chance of barrell warpage (in some models), and the need for mechanical modification for ambidextrous fire. Anyone can pick up an M14 or M16 and get into the fight right away either right on left side. The same can't be said of a BP without modification. Currently, no BPs on the market are as accurate as a standard grade A2, and certainly none are as reliable or mechanically simple.
I am of the opinion that the BP was a great "70s" idea of the future of weapons...just like all those other great science ficton ideas of the past. Time and testing have pretty much shown that the world's stock of BPs (aside for the Steyr AUG) are basically innovative but functionally flawed compared with more robust and traditonal systems. It seems most militaries are moving away from them. This is not to say the concept has no merit. A lot has been learned from the noble BP experiment, and there may be a return to them in the future if and when we move to newer alloys and synthetics and perhaps caseless cartriges. The Brit troops I worked with were enamoured with our M16s. I know the SAS won't touch the Brit BP with a 10 foot pole.
Last edited:
- Location
- Keswick, Ontario
You're right...the FFL are using the FAMAS. Goddman they look alike, but the FAMAS is a bit longer as is the carry handle.
You ca't really see it well here but this si the bigest picture I could find:
You ca't really see it well here but this si the bigest picture I could find:
Last edited:
