Last edited Tue Aug 25, 2015, 09:36 PM - Edit history (1)
How did you assess that it was a Chinese variant, how was it lubricated, and what magazines did you use? Was this a civilian non-automatic, or a clapped out military full auto, and were you getting double feeds, bolt over base, failure to cycle/eject, or feed ramp hangups? Were they x39's, or .223 conversions?
I shot a SAR-1 (Romanian non-automatic AK derivative, 7.62x39mm) competitively in the early 2000's, mostly with steel-case ammo, and never once had a failure of any kind in ~2,000 rounds. Trigger pull wasn't as good as an AR or a nicer bolt action, but certainly as good as a Glock and better than my Ruger Ranch Rifle. Accuracy is as good as a Winchester .30-30 if you stuck to the fundamentals and used the sights like you're supposed to instead of trying to shoot like some idiot in a B-movie, and the safety was secure and very well designed. The Soviets considered them effective out to 300 meters, and mine would keep every round in the black at 200 yards with decent ammo and a 1x optic. Given their reputation for reliability and extreme durability, coupled with my own experience, I'd say your experience was an extreme outlier.
As to Uzi's, they have always been regarded as very high quality firearms, as are most Israeli designs, but they've never been common in this country and have always been something of a collector's item. Perhaps you're confusing them with the civilian Intratecs? AFAIK, China never imported any, and I doubt IMI would have licensed their production; the only non-IMI's I'm aware of were made by a U.S. company under license.
Out of curiousity, do you feel about AR's? You certainly can't claim those are low quality, inaccurate, unsafe designs, or commonly misused.
= new reply since forum marked as read