They didnt update their news page since 2018... gah. They did made some firefighting rocket launchers. Interesting.Possibly the Chinese equivalent of Carl Gustaf M4
PLA Small arms
- Thread starter Vanguard1688
- Start date
SinoSoldier
Colonel
Possibly the Chinese equivalent of Carl Gustaf M4
Were the Chinese dissatisfied with the DZG141, DZS151, DZP11, DZJ08, or PF89 variants?
As far as being a recoilless rifle that is sufficiently small/mobile with a reusable and multirole tube by design, and a modern optics suite.... None of those really fit the bill.
This new recoilless rifle has been expected for a while now anyway, it shouldn't be a surprise.
As far as I understand the thing is , the role these weapons fill are not the same , DZP , DZS , DZG fill the role of a short range heavy ordnance
It is a relatively short range, within 400m, think of it as a really big grenade that you can accurately aim , similar to the rife grenade of the old.
PF98 fills a different role, it is a longer range engagement tool, it can reach all the way to 1000m
that is a squad use artillery piece.
The new recoilless is suppose to replace the PF98, not the DZG DZS DZP DZJ
Trigger finger workout from pulling back the slide XD. That said, I feel like this design is more the "it looks good on paper" but practically meh.
Honestly, PLA should just adopt a Glock clone. Even the current US handgun aren't designed by US company.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
The latest iteration of the QSZ92 would I wouldn’t say compare favorably to Glock but not exactly inferior either.
The mode of operating for the Type 92 is more or less analog to the Beretta 92 series. The new 92s being analogous to the P4X storm series.
Both the Norinco and Beretta pistols are DA/SA, hammer fired, using a rotating barrel. The Chinese started as a 5.8x28mm but has always had a 9x19mm. Norinco differed in that they went to a polymer before Beretta, They also adopted a Tokerov inspired trigger chassis system. Where beretta got the grip modules and rail system on the Storm before Norinco, with its “open slide”.
Still the two series would be the closest to direct counterparts.
Vs Glock style pistols The three big aspects are the striker vs Hammer , DA/SA vs DAO and barrel lock up. In theory the Rotating barrel system is more accurate than the Browning tilting barrel on Glock style pistols. In Theory, in practice the only people whom might be able to take advantage of the accuracy are competitive shooters.
The hammer/Striker and Trigger differences are going to have a bigger effect on the comparison. The Norinco pistol uses single action/ Double action with a frame mounted mounted safety decocker. What this means is that when the pistol is loaded one of two possible outcomes take place. The magazine is inserted the slide is racked cocking the hammer and the shooter then engages targets in a single action mode. IE with the hammer cocked the trigger pull bipasses the need to push it back. In the other case the magazine is loaded the slide is racked the decocker is depressed the hammer drops in a manor that doesn’t allow the gun to go off. This mode is the preferred mode if as most of the time used the pistol will be holstered for carry. If the pistol is needed to be fired the shooter would draw and engage pulling the trigger acts in two functions the first being to draw the hammer back the second to release it firing the gun.
Now what about Glock? Striker fired pistols obviously lack an external hammer. As such they operate in Double action only. When the pistol is loaded the magazine inserted the slide racked. In that action the Striker is partially cocked. The Striker isn’t completely cocked until the tigger is pulled.
What this functionality means is that a DA/SA has two trigger pull weights. The SA pull and then Doubled for the DA pull. Where the Striker pistol will always have the same trigger pull.
Some argue the DA/SA as a “passive safety system” in that the shooter would have to intend to fire the gun because of the double pull weight on the trigger in the initial shot.