The 2007 marked Norinco M14 rifles have 1993/1994 vintage receivers. You can tell by the CJA SFLD MICH marking on the left side of the receiver. In the last month, there has been one shipment imported into Canada by Bell Lifestyle Products (and receivers are so marked) that the age of the receivers remains an open question. I'm working on the answer to that question.
There's an urban legend that the Chinese M14 rifles exported post-2000 are better quality that the pre-'94 models. I look for evidence, one way or the other. I've been reseaching the M14 for seven years now. Based on end user reports and photographs of Chinese M14 rifles and limited hardness testing of Chinese parts in Canada and the US, my opinion is that the post-'00 and pre-'94 models are the same quality. I state this with all due respect to our Canadian brethern. For example, barrel indexing isn't always up to snuff on the post-'00 models and SOME of the rear sights on those rifles operate roughly. I've posted this research but no one seems to pick up on it so I'll type it out here: the bolt hardness of the pre-'94 and post-'00 models is the same, 47 HRC.
When there is a limited quantity of something, it's not unusual for collectors to say that it's better. Example, Texas era M1A rifles are highly sought after, partly because folks believe them to be of better quality. But the truth is that the receivers under serial number 003700 (Texas era) TEND to suffer from one or more of six manufacturing defects. Not my experience but that of Art Luppino, retired M14 gunsmith.
Don't fall for the marketing hype, true or not true. The Chinese M14 bolts, pre-'94 and post-'00, still lack the better geometry of the U. S. made M14 bolts. Before all the Chinese M14 fans get upset, DO NOT put words in my mouth and jump to conclusions. I have photos of seriously failed SA, Inc. M1A bolts but no photographs of failed Chinese M14 bolts.