Winchester 1897 clones ... how are they?
- Thread starter City Boy
- Start date
Gritty operation and as such, not nearly as smooth as the original. With a bit of fine stoning they can be made to function smoothly. They feed well enough but IMHO, they wear quickly with the hotter loads.
HassanZeDragon
Member
- Location
- Quebec City
Like most older norinco products.
They get the job done, the material is decent, but the finish might need some love to make them smooth.
So it's perfect for a project gun.
They get the job done, the material is decent, but the finish might need some love to make them smooth.
So it's perfect for a project gun.
I've had a few years experience with both, and IMHO a new clone is better than most of the worn out stuff that seems to be available. I shoot Cowboy, and the top choice of shotgun is the 1897 or 97 as it was later known as.
The clones, at least mine made by Jianshe, is not an exact copy. IOW small parts and screws especially are not interchangeable. There are small design changes, some are improvements, others are just changes to make manufacturing simpler. The metal is not soft or poor quality, and the internals seem properly sized. It does take a bit of cleaning and such to make it smooth, but it will work. Parts may be hard to find when they break. They will break, the real ones broke, the clones will as well.
I've resurrected a "C", and did learn a bit about the inner workings in the process. Unless you know someone that can check over an old one for you, I'd avoid them. They will still shoot even though there are issues.
Some of the issues are:
There are about 100 parts in these guns, the operation is involved.
FYI: To resurrect this one I put about 20 hours into it and used a fair number of "new or salvaged" parts. Not worth the $ or time, but it's a shame to just take it down for parts. The bore is smooth and shiny !!!
There is a ton of info on the Winchester 1897 online, that's a plus.
The clones, at least mine made by Jianshe, is not an exact copy. IOW small parts and screws especially are not interchangeable. There are small design changes, some are improvements, others are just changes to make manufacturing simpler. The metal is not soft or poor quality, and the internals seem properly sized. It does take a bit of cleaning and such to make it smooth, but it will work. Parts may be hard to find when they break. They will break, the real ones broke, the clones will as well.
I've resurrected a "C", and did learn a bit about the inner workings in the process. Unless you know someone that can check over an old one for you, I'd avoid them. They will still shoot even though there are issues.
Some of the issues are:
- Dirt in the action, oil and powder residue caked hard and hindering proper operation. Unfortunately to address some of it screws that defy removal have to be removed.
- Timing of the interlock, around 4 or 5 parts involved in this operation.
- Firing pin length, and hammer spring stiffness.
- Alignment and clearance issues on takedown models.
- Magazine spring usually broken.
- Hammer and sear issues.
- Firing pin block and trigger stop issues.
- Pitted bores (black powder?, neglect)
- Cracked forend, especially on 3 screw models. 3 screw forends are not available. Mine was in 4 pieces, and it was a challenge to get it repaired.
- Magazine tube worn out, new tubes are available but fitting them can be an issue.
- Broken hammer, I don't know why, but I've bought 2 with this malady.
- Frozen screws, some seem to defy removal.
There are about 100 parts in these guns, the operation is involved.
FYI: To resurrect this one I put about 20 hours into it and used a fair number of "new or salvaged" parts. Not worth the $ or time, but it's a shame to just take it down for parts. The bore is smooth and shiny !!!
There is a ton of info on the Winchester 1897 online, that's a plus.
theeasterner
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Treasure Island
That's a great looking old Western gun.
first one I got had issues with the action slide, to the point where you could not pump the gun. Returned it for and picked up the Marstar exclusive, modeled after the trench version instead of the riot. Added the bayo lug and put on a 1917 sling. Looks good, but still cycles rough. In comparison my Maverick 88 feels like its insides are made out of soft butter coated in oil. But it works, and one day i'll hang it on a wall with the bayonet fixed 
Last edited:
John Moses Browning was an amazing designer. His concepts, such as the 1897 and the 1911, were dramatic departures from the mechanical designs at the time. The 1897 in particular is one of the most reliable and durable repeating shotguns ever designed. In addition to it's rugged functionality, it was designed to be user-adjustable, if it should begin to develop play (takedown version). Because this design was such a radical departure from the norm, it intimidates novice and sometimes even experienced smiths. But, it's easy to learn and easy to work on.
A discussion such as this thread is missing the boat completely if you fail to take into account the fact that you're comparing 70 to 125 year old guns against new clones. I think it's fair to say that most Winchester 1897s will need stock work after 100 years. Some will require a new right side extractor, and a few need a #2 adjustment ring. If it needs all 3, that's $160 in parts and the gun's good for another 100 years.
IMO, the only reason anyone would buy a '97 clone is price. In today's market, a severely trashed Winchester 1897 is worth $200-300; one in average condition $450-750; and one in very good to excellent condition can go for over a grand. When you consider that you may pay $500 for one and then have to fix the extractor, you scare off everyone who doesn't do their own repairs. Even without the added cost of labour, many would not be interested. The clones fill a niche market - that of shooters who don't know enough about 1897s to feel comfortable investing the money that they command in the market, as well as shooters who are early in their careers and with young families and simply can't justify $750 for a shotgun.
But, the Norinco and the Chaparral clones are clearly inferior. They are made from poor materials, the parts are rough and poorly finished, as are the overall guns. That they work at all is a testament to the genius of John Browning, not to the build on these clones.
This doesn't mean they're useless - they'll work most of the time, for a while. It does mean you get what you pay for.
A discussion such as this thread is missing the boat completely if you fail to take into account the fact that you're comparing 70 to 125 year old guns against new clones. I think it's fair to say that most Winchester 1897s will need stock work after 100 years. Some will require a new right side extractor, and a few need a #2 adjustment ring. If it needs all 3, that's $160 in parts and the gun's good for another 100 years.
IMO, the only reason anyone would buy a '97 clone is price. In today's market, a severely trashed Winchester 1897 is worth $200-300; one in average condition $450-750; and one in very good to excellent condition can go for over a grand. When you consider that you may pay $500 for one and then have to fix the extractor, you scare off everyone who doesn't do their own repairs. Even without the added cost of labour, many would not be interested. The clones fill a niche market - that of shooters who don't know enough about 1897s to feel comfortable investing the money that they command in the market, as well as shooters who are early in their careers and with young families and simply can't justify $750 for a shotgun.
But, the Norinco and the Chaparral clones are clearly inferior. They are made from poor materials, the parts are rough and poorly finished, as are the overall guns. That they work at all is a testament to the genius of John Browning, not to the build on these clones.
This doesn't mean they're useless - they'll work most of the time, for a while. It does mean you get what you pay for.
billbmcleod
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Back very close to Bruce County
I sold my '97 a couple of years ago after hunting with it for 50+years and it never failed me. It took the skin off the top of the odd thumb though by people borrowing it who didn't know how to hold it.
