Thoughts on a Norinco CQA as a first 223 rifle purchase
- Thread starter GeorgeJure
- Start date
What ^^^^ he ^^^^ said ! This is my approach to all firearms I purchase off the EE here. Buy it low , give it a go , if it don’t flow then let it go. Insert some sorta rap dancing emoticon here.
As a newbie what the hell do we really know about what is good and what isn”t ? Log some time at the range firing rounds and decide for yourself ... the internet does not provide all the answers.
As a newbie what the hell do we really know about what is good and what isn”t ? Log some time at the range firing rounds and decide for yourself ... the internet does not provide all the answers.
All he needed was a new barrel after 10-12K rounds, as the barrel was starting to scrape off tiny bits of copper from the bullets and send them back through the gas tube and into the gas key and into the BCG. He said the lower was fine. Could have just replaced the barrel and maybe the gas tube and got it back working but decided to buy another rifle and use the Norinco as a PAL training tool.
I'll try to remember to take my rifle with 15K rounds to the range some time and see if it is doing the same thing with bullet shavings.
Similar results? Where does he say that every component is completely worn out?
So I went and watched his “definitive” review where he absolutely gushes over the rifles and doesn’t have a single negative comment as to their function and durability. Then, 0-2k rounds later he declares it “dead” and replaces it with an Olympic. No offence to Mr. Giltacca but after watching his vids it doesn’t appear that he knows much about the AR platform.
A simple barrel swap and he’d be good to go for another 10-12k. I believe complete Norc barrels can be had from Marstar for approx $200.
An Olympic? Seriously? Their ARs have about the worst reputation in the industry, second only to Hera. It looks like he simply buys whatever is cheapest. Nothing wrong with that at all but I’ll be surprised if the Olympic serves him anywhere near as well as the Norc.
You’re right about one thing though, you do get what you pay for. With a Norc you’ll get a lot of bang for your buck. Would it be my first recommendation? Likely not with the current market. Used perhaps, I’ve seen them as cheap as $450 in the EE.
My first and only AR so far is the CQA because i was on a budget and that was 2 years ago. Price being what the M&P is it's probably better to buy that as many have said already. I am happy with the Norinco so no reason to sell. Rod Giltacca got 12k rounds out of his and im only at 300ish!!
I think he also stated that he passed 10-12000 rnds of copper washed steel jacked at a fairly rapid pace through that rifle. I remember many a discussion about that ammo when it was available in quantity and how it wore the barrel faster than copper jacket in rapid fire.
I also wonder... 12,000 rounds of .223 or even surplus 5.56 would have been a minimum of $3000-$5000. Did anyone ever fact check his video? I mean, with that kind of cash outlay, why not just buy a nice rife and not brutalize the barrel? I'm starting to wonder if there's shenanigans.
If I remember correctly, that is exactly what he did with it. I cant remember what the norinco ammo sold for but it was CHEAP. So cheap even if you factored in the cost of the barrel it still payed to used if for action style shooting.
As a guy who owned one, the only thing I ever upgraded on the Norc was the trigger (the trigger was extremely gritty - typical for a Norc AR). I also had a scope for it, but I used the iron sights just as much as the scope. That rifle shot just fine, and was good enough for the price (I got it on sale $599)
It's a good rifle mechanically, but finish-wise, well, you get what you pay for. I've not owned a Smith & Wesson M&P Sporter II, so I can't say anything about reliability, but I have held them and shot them, and they're a decent rifle for the price.
Another option could be the Colt Expanse M4 rifle for about the same price.
It's a good rifle mechanically, but finish-wise, well, you get what you pay for. I've not owned a Smith & Wesson M&P Sporter II, so I can't say anything about reliability, but I have held them and shot them, and they're a decent rifle for the price.
Another option could be the Colt Expanse M4 rifle for about the same price.
He clearly states 12000+ rounds. If memory serves he made a follow up as well. Explaining how it’s not just the barrel. I don’t know what worlds you are in.
The Norc manual states 6000rds of milspec ammo. I would bet that means that means 30rd mags with some full auto.
As for the previous poster Joel I don’t know how a Norc barrel of inferior steel will outlast a colt USA barrel.
Last edited:
The sportier II does in fact have receivers forged of 7075 T6. According to Wikipedia the Norc CQa uses a Metal Injection Moulded receiver made from 6061. Is that still the case for the Norc? I couldn't tell you I'm just not interested in them to keep up on their manufacturing processes and specs. If it is still how they're made. Then at the very least the sporter II's receivers are made from superior materials and processes by a fair margin.
The colt barrel is made out of 4150 ordinance grade steel. I'll go out on a limb and suggest the Norc barrel isn't made out of similar grade material. The colt barrel will no doubt have several advantages over the cqa. Whether the end user cares, needs, or has to rely on them or not, is really what's at issue here.
Can you post a link to the source of that information for everyone’s benefit here?
Last edited:
