among the firearms i recently inherited was a Norinco 213 9mm. it was missing its magazine, but I acquired another. However, the manual safety has been removed from this gun. from what i understand the Tok was never intended to have such a safety, but they had to be added in order to be meet import requirements or some such thing? everything else seems to be functional, but the safety is wholly absent. the gun should still be safe to fire, using the half cock as safety?
Norinco 213 safety question
- Thread starter Davek1977
- Start date
- Status
lsudave
Member
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2007
- Messages
- 1,042
should be absolutely safe to fire; if anything it is safer now. I had a T-54 that I removed the remnants of the safety from, to improve functionality.
The safety is cheap and poorly made; it would bounce to and from safe to fire easily. One of the screws holding it in place eventually crumbled, causing tiny bits of metal 'sand' to jam up the slide. Removing it and a good cleaning restored complete functionality.
If you're hesitant about the appearance, then check into aftermarket grips that cover the safety holes. Grips4U sells them, I think others do too.
Half-cock is okay, or carry condition 3 (empty chamber). As you would have to thumb the hammer back anyway, racking the slide isn't that much slower, and a lot surer of a safety.
I had (and still have one) the T-54, which has the wider magazine. What I understand about the 213 is that there is a spacer in the magwell, that if knocked out, will allow for regular Tokarev mags to be used. My T-54 was in 9mm and all I ever used was standard (7.62) mags, never an issue feeding, cheaper and easier to find the mags too.
The safety is cheap and poorly made; it would bounce to and from safe to fire easily. One of the screws holding it in place eventually crumbled, causing tiny bits of metal 'sand' to jam up the slide. Removing it and a good cleaning restored complete functionality.
If you're hesitant about the appearance, then check into aftermarket grips that cover the safety holes. Grips4U sells them, I think others do too.
Half-cock is okay, or carry condition 3 (empty chamber). As you would have to thumb the hammer back anyway, racking the slide isn't that much slower, and a lot surer of a safety.
I had (and still have one) the T-54, which has the wider magazine. What I understand about the 213 is that there is a spacer in the magwell, that if knocked out, will allow for regular Tokarev mags to be used. My T-54 was in 9mm and all I ever used was standard (7.62) mags, never an issue feeding, cheaper and easier to find the mags too.
After a good scrubbing, it should be safe to fire. Actually, it's not uncommon to find 213's as "gunsmith specials" due to a removed safety.
I'm not convinced the half-cock is suitable for use as a safety. Carry should probably be on an empty chamber.
I'm not convinced the half-cock is suitable for use as a safety. Carry should probably be on an empty chamber.
lsudave
Member
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2007
- Messages
- 1,042
Yeah, hammer fail on half-cock isn't something I've heard of on true Tokarevs (the military issued ones), and everything I've read is that the half-cock notch is a lot more pronounced and stronger than, say, a 1911. But I still wouldn't trust it. There's questions about the quality of the commercial Norincos (ie the 213) and soft steel.
I'd treat it as though it is what it is: a SA gun without a safety. Carry it unchambered; rack the slide when you need to. From what I can tell and remember, the half-cock would block racking it too, so you'd need to be sure and solid with thumbing the hammer back.
- Status