Inherited Norinco 5.56

What an Awesome Uncle....damn!
I agree with GoNoGo,
It also has the /66\ arsenal trunnion marking and the Norinco star stamp near on the side (some had them underneath, by the mag-well, others not at all)
The correct sight block adds desirability. Non-Chrome lined barrel - as only Chinese versions in 7.62 cal were lined. This is a slightly more desirable of the Post ban models.

It may have threads under the muzzle cap for the proper slanted muzzle brake, the fact its "capped" and probably tack welded on, means there is a really good chance.
Looks like it may have original double hook trigger group in the 1 pic, if so, leave it!
Its one of the best factory FCGs out there and very sought after.

Better value will come, if its has numbers matching on the major components (trunnion, bolt, bolt carrier being the the priority, followed by others if possible (gas tube, selector, etc)
I don't recall if its factory Norinco furniture put on for ban era importation, aftermarket put on to distribute them by the importer or what, but a genuine blonde chu wood set will put ya back several hundred $$ but would be worth every penny. Green web Chinese sling (amazon) would round it out nicely and really give it a more authentic look & feel.

If you want to go all in on the correct original bits & pieces, Original flat back blued steel mags, probably a black non-military bayonet, green square plastic oil bottle and various green canvas mag pouches/chest rig would complete the kit. All of these things are out there to grab while ya still can. Original Chinese AK cleaning kits are elusive, simply because the Mak90's & NHM91's never had a place for them, so not nearly as many came in with them included as the guns themselves and those that did were often lost or failed to travel with the guns ownership chain.

Everything Chinese AK has climbed in value of recent years and while yours is not a pre-ban, it sits nicely in among the post ban configurations and can easily be brought back to more original configuration if you so desire...

Indykid said:

Also first I have ever heard of only 56S series having chrome lined barrels. Sooooo....

Just pulled out my 84S-1 and it sure appears to have a chrome lined barrel.

Click to expand...

The .223 cal Chinese type 84 was never intended for any military use.
China never even used the .223 round, in anything for themselves.
The 84s was specifically made for what the Chinese called "commercial export" for U.S. consumers, thus they realized there was zero need to chrome line the barrels - at some point.

As far I recall it all, (I could be wrong, I almost always post from near 60yrs of stored firearms memory, not search to find the 1 internet post to support my stance)
That all of the Pre-ban barrels in .223 and many of the post bans had chrome lined barrels, but some of the late post bans absolutely did not, for the above reasons.

Op rifle may have it, or it may not. Pics would confirm either way. My current 84s (still a kit) also has a chrome lined barrel, but its a pre-ban.
I stated that because it does look like a late ban model to me.
Forgive me if I assumed so in my initial reply and if the above recollection is actually proven to be incorrect, then I will retract my statement - for the record - and of course for the forums fact checkers...( no reference to you Indykid - we're good! )

Bullitt0088 said:

I am not aware of a Chinese small arm from this era that did not feature chrome lining.

Click to expand...

Chinese SKS, (7.62x39 caliber) for example could be had in both chrome & non-chrome barrels.
Dont believe me, contact SARCO, as they once sold both versions of Chinese SKS barrels at the very same time and non-chrome ones can still be found out there. That alone would suggest alot of so called "flukes" made it out of quality control...

Chinese Type 53 (Mosin Nagant) also can be found with both barrel versions.

That just two examples of China deviating from the "rule" in regards to chrome lining barrels, even before the production of the AK...which then entirely negates the statements made that "china chromed all barrels". Point of historical fact, is they didn't!
Is it really such a stretch to imagine the lowly 84s may have suffered from the same inconsistencies?
If so, so what?
Its not like they would be the only nation manf to have done so. Yugo, some Russian guns of various models and probably others I'm forgetting about, often didn't have chrome lined barrels in and around that era. I believe Romanain AKS can have either as well, but I digress. Chrome lining is a preservation method for corrosive primers and aids in cleaning, nothing more. Foregoing that to cut manf cost & production time, could have easily been done.
Given the fact some 60+ factories were involved in producing Chinese firearms at one point, for both military & export, the one thing they do have in common is there were inconsistencies, both large & small, even from the very same arsenal.
As a side note, China also included detachable bayonets with ban era exported AKs, that had no means of actually mounting it.... like the Mak90.
Go-figure.

Not sure why this has become the singled out point of contrast in this thread anyway. I swear, someone can state the sky is blue, and someone will come back to simply argue that it isnt, and then go into melt down that someone had the audacity to state that it ever was...FFS!
OP hasnt even been back to it either way and personally probably couldn't care less.
I know I really dont.

Bullitt0088 said:

The reason this point was brought up was because you made an incorrect blanket statement. If we do not make correction, false information begins to spread and people get misled. If you can produce pictures or some kind of evidence that is not totally anecdotal, I will be happy to retract my statement.

Click to expand...

First, If you had bothered to read beyond the apparent flash point my initial post, I actually offered to retract my statement of memory, in a follow up post as well, IF real proof that each & every barrel coming from China was chrome lined. There is plenty of proof they all were not. My memory is that the 84s was no exception.

You want proof from me?
Where's your 100% factual proof that they were?? Yes, I can ask the same of you.
Perhaps we can both admit, chances of either one of us providing that absolute verification, is pretty slim at this point in history. All we have is reference. References from a country who often mixed things all up, for no known reason, to us. Coming along decades later.

I do have news for you though, as politely as I can put it at this late hour.
I have always treated you with respect and valued your input on this forum. However you do seem to pop up and directly and deliberately refute what I post for some odd reason. I've almost come to expect it. Shit you not.
You are very well informed on this subject, there are many others that are as well. But, you are not now, nor ever will be the absolute definitive & final authority on all things Kalashnikov that you apparently believe yourself to be. No such person exist that is living today.
Just because you state it, write it or think it, doesn't make it biblical text.

In fact, there have been at least a couple of times my friend, that you've written things on this forum - that were absolutely 100% incorrect. To the point, one time I got up, left the computer, went out to the shop (that holds literally hundreds of gun, parts & parts kits from nearly every country & era) located and held in my hands the very proof that was opposite to what you stated "as a fact".
Yet I did not come back and publicly tie you down and pick apart the post you made and every post by you, to then ever follow, under the guise, of course, of historical correctness.
"Internet-Faktenpolizei" I am not. Respect for you & the little known concept that you can be wrong, was another.

People can be wrong. I can be wrong. Have admitted as much more than once. I'm a student of life, contributing to this forum (and about a dozen others) in an effort (for the most part) to learn & maybe help others and pass along my years of knowledge & skill, to those who may benefit from it. My post reflect that. A beacon of all knowledge I will never claim to be, even in subject matters that I am actually officially recognized and even designated, as such.
AFAIK, no one out there on the internet however, is using this forum to write their master degree thesis to which all their life's work is to be based on. I read that Abraham Lincoln stated that once.
I suspect has nothing to do with "correctness" (the leftist favorite word BTW) however, but more of one of maturity.
Either way, I'll agree to disagree here and move on with my life. Some how. Some way...
Have a good nite.