The T97 Thread!
- Thread starter Clobbersauras
- Start date
Question: What would be the best way to increase the length of pull? I've tried removing the buttplate aside from the two screws, it seems to be glued or fused on the stock as well. I was going to add a one inch rubber chunk (shaped) or a couple of half inch composite chunks (shaped) but am having difficulty getting that buttplate off.
Also, does anyone know who might be willing to discuss with me, the possibility of manufacturing replacement upper and lower front hand guards in the same composite material, with perhaps colour options and a few small modifications?
Anyway, here's mine:
Also, does anyone know who might be willing to discuss with me, the possibility of manufacturing replacement upper and lower front hand guards in the same composite material, with perhaps colour options and a few small modifications?
Anyway, here's mine:
Try Dlask Arms if you want the stock flash hider removed & re-threaded so that it can accept other AR-15 type muzzle devices. I believe, they charge under $100 to remove & get it threaded.
Here is something that might be interest to all T97 lovers.
The article is from 2014 Trade Show about a variant of the T97, A long-range shooting version of the platform, sporting a 25.2 inches barrel that is to be sold in Europe currently. the long-range rifle model instead features a proprietary five-rounds, non compatible detachable magazine, conceived to reduce bulk and make the gun easy and not uncomfortable to fire from the prone position.
It would be awesome if it can be imported to Canada.
Here is the link to the article
http://www.all4shooters.com/en/specials/Trade-shows-2014/IWA-2014/rifles/Norinco-Type-97-NSR/
Interesting but considering the article is a year old tomorrow I am not too optimistic.
If I am not mistaken that long barrel version is call the Type 88 or QBU88 and it has been mentioned on the CGN before and Tactical Import has imported a few into the Country already.
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/624159-Type-88-Sniper
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/624159-Type-88-Sniper
I hollow ground a Magpul rail (bottom side) to match the upper hand guard after cutting it to length, then roughed up the UHG with sandpaper, applied some epoxy and bolted the rail to the UHG.
Basically glued and screwed. The used a two-sided riser rail to get the height and functionality, then the sight.
I was only able to use 3 of the 4 rail bolts though as the rifle bolt wouldn't close with the fourth one in place.
Mine, defender RIS rail (qbz95 version, so a piece of the rail can not be installed due to different shape of the front sight, but the rail does the job)
EOTECH 552 holographic sight, UTG light, Magpul XTM rail
[/URL][/IMG]
nice setup! hows the cheek/chin weld with the EOTech? Ive seen a few of your videos on Youtube. You should do another one with your current setup!
Some interesting results after yesterday's range trip.
So I'm trying to figure out what my preferred bulk FMJ is by comparing results in different rifles. Yesterday I fired XM855 and XM193 side by side.
Rifle was zeroed using AE .223 55gr
100yd
Prone Unsupported
Stock Irons, obviously
First up is some XM855 - Federal 62gr Green Tips. On target, though veers to the left, minute of man. I shot a few targets, this is typical of what I was getting. More of a pattern than a group.
XM193 - Federal 55gr. Aside from a few flyers, which I'm pretty sure were lapses in concentration on my part (and what looks like someone else shooting my target with a larger calibre, but I included them in the group just in case), grouped noticeably better. This is similar to what I saw with the 55gr commercial .223, except impacting much higher, which makes sense except for one thing:
The T97 has a 1:7 twist. I confirmed it myself with a cleaning rod after seeing these results. So why does the 55gr group better than the 62gr? It's my understanding that Norinco ammo is basically a copy of the M193 cartridge, but what could they have done to optimize the rifle for it that has more of an effect than the twist rate?
Another, unrelated issue:
My biggest problem with the T97 iron sights is the front post. All adjustments are made using the front sight post, like you'd see on an AK or SKS. The problem is that the front sight is fully hooded and drifting the post for windage makes the post off-center inside the hood. When looking through the rear peep, my eye can't decide if it wants to center the post or the hood. It takes a lot of concentration
It looks like the PLA issue QBZ drifts the entire sight base for windage instead of just the post, which would largely solve the issue:
Why did they change it for the commercial version?
So I'm trying to figure out what my preferred bulk FMJ is by comparing results in different rifles. Yesterday I fired XM855 and XM193 side by side.
Rifle was zeroed using AE .223 55gr
100yd
Prone Unsupported
Stock Irons, obviously
First up is some XM855 - Federal 62gr Green Tips. On target, though veers to the left, minute of man. I shot a few targets, this is typical of what I was getting. More of a pattern than a group.
XM193 - Federal 55gr. Aside from a few flyers, which I'm pretty sure were lapses in concentration on my part (and what looks like someone else shooting my target with a larger calibre, but I included them in the group just in case), grouped noticeably better. This is similar to what I saw with the 55gr commercial .223, except impacting much higher, which makes sense except for one thing:
The T97 has a 1:7 twist. I confirmed it myself with a cleaning rod after seeing these results. So why does the 55gr group better than the 62gr? It's my understanding that Norinco ammo is basically a copy of the M193 cartridge, but what could they have done to optimize the rifle for it that has more of an effect than the twist rate?
Another, unrelated issue:
My biggest problem with the T97 iron sights is the front post. All adjustments are made using the front sight post, like you'd see on an AK or SKS. The problem is that the front sight is fully hooded and drifting the post for windage makes the post off-center inside the hood. When looking through the rear peep, my eye can't decide if it wants to center the post or the hood. It takes a lot of concentration
It looks like the PLA issue QBZ drifts the entire sight base for windage instead of just the post, which would largely solve the issue:
Why did they change it for the commercial version?
Last edited:
Will do, just need to wait till the snow melts and I can see gate to my shooting range
Do you like the EOTech over the TRS you had before?
Lobster_pot
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- On the shores of the Bay of Fundy
