QBZ-191 service rifle family

EdgeOfEcho said:

Wonder how well it performs against its US counter part made by Vortex, and whether the PLA is interested in adopting technology in the future...

For comparison:

View attachment 101492
View attachment 101493


Smart scopes are definitely an interesting development for small arms, probably will be a lot more successful than previous attempts by US or Russia (looking at G11, An-94, AEK-971) to increase hit probably by common infantrymen.

It'll be interesting to see how well these smart scopes perform in the hands of US infantry. I think this will prove to be quite successful as long as it works as intended and is robust enough to still function properly in rough environments. This will make it so much easier to hit targets at 300 - 500 meters with intermediate cartridges for you common grunts.

But this set up will not be cheap, so it will be interesting to see if the return is worth the cost.

A good question to ponder is, how often will soldiers in the near future battlefield need to engage enemies at distances of 300 to 500 meters with accurate fire from intermediate cartridges? I think this question really depends on the level of intensity of the combat, overall capability of the the military engaged in the conflict, the terrain of the battlefield, and many other factors. But there will be a clear trend as technology and warfare evolves.

This technology will probably significantly increase infantrymen's firepower by making it significantly easier to hit targets, but will this technology change the course of a war or even the outcome of a battle? That will be hard to say to be honest.

I feel like the importance of small arms in modern combat has diminished significantly. There must be some reports out there on the War in Afghanistan documenting the most effective method of engaging the enemy from a US perspective. What proportion of Taliban fighters killed by US military were killed by small arms or by air strike / arty strike? It would be interesting to estimate from such reports how effective red dots and ACOGs have been in combat. Would US lose significantly more men if these equipment's were not issued? Or would it not really matter anyways since most Taliban fighters are not killed by small arms fire?

It may be entirely possible that these scope's most important role in the future of warfare is not to help soldiers to shoot more accurately (they most likely could do that very well), but to serve as an additional data generator in the information system that can help to relay real time battlefield information to the chain of command to enable better decision-making from the top or to request fire support missions.

Honestly I'm not sure what to make of this. Any other thoughts on this?

Click to expand...

I agree with your thoughts that the most useful benefit of giving this to troops would be more information on the battlefield but outside of that, I think these would only be useful against a weaker nation than against other superpowers. Not to mention with stuff like smart helmets/visions which would be more convenient to use over a scope. IMO, the people who would need and use it the most would be police or border control, not front-line soldiers except for maybe SOFs. The one on the XM5 cost about $10k per scope, that's absolutely ridiculous. I know we can make it cheaper compared to them but still, that is an absurd amount of cost for a single scope.

It should be remembered that the XM5 and XM157 are still in early buys. As such the cost per unit is misleading. This is because early buys are paying for the tooling up of the factory and supply chain to produce such systems. So the initial unit cost will be significantly higher and come down over time. Farther it’s not “Just a Scope”. It’s like the IPhone was when it was introduced. It replaced pagers, PDA’s, personal video game consoles, portable CD/Cassette players…ecta and then your phone.
The XM157 replaces the scope but also laser and IR pointer, range finders, meteorological instruments, ballistic calculator, it can even record and stream video too an off board device via secure channels. So in essence it’s a snipers kits plus. Abilities like shooting around corners haven’t been displayed yet but by all indications are on the way.
The thing about “Smart helmets” is they can only take so many parts and many have to have parts elsewhere on the body of the soldier. The Processor and radio on the torso the keypad or interface device on the body. Among their intended functions a aiming assist requires some input from the rifle. Shooting around corners means that a sensor has to be on the rifle with a camera so the soldier can see what he is pointing at. This how corner shot works an arm with a gun on the end and a camera with a display on the stock. That doesn’t work well for a rifle. But if you can mount the display on the head and the sensors on the rifle. XM157 is that. A camera that can stream data to a Smart device like say IVAS. Point the gun around the corner see what the rifle sees decide if it needs to die.
In night vision this comes in again. In 2006 when Us Forces faced off against Taliban and AQ/IS they didn’t need to worry about the other guy seeing the laser pointer on the rifle it was in the IR spectrum of light. In 2017 the story was changing. Well in 2022 Ukraine vs Russian conscripts you could still use an IRPointer without issues. If you do have to face that risk you have two options first mount your NOD to your rifle. Second ENVG which has one scope on the rifle one Bino on the head and the two talk to each other.
Additionally the other capabilities of the scope the range finder and navigation systems mean that you have a tool to allow precision fires to be called in, Mortars Rockets, Artillery or Air strike.

Next the Taliban propaganda is to claim that with a pair of sandals, the Koran and the Kalashnikov they defeated the infidel west. The facts are, Well yes many in the Taliban were armed like that early on closer to the end they also more and more had many who had foreign weapons and equipment including night vision and even body armor on par with what was being given to the ANA.
This mean’s that the battles in Afghanistan in the later stages were much more modern infantry v modern infantry even more so that Ukraine war. Though the Taliban lacked tanks, planes and heavy artillery they had light guns, mortars and nod. As such we started to see a shift in the US Military. Wide spread adoption of Suppressors.
The XM5 and XM250 from the factory with a flow through suppressor. This reduces recoil, flash and noise of the weapon it also doesn’t heat up or send as much material back into the weapon. This was a requirement for the NGSW program, for night and close quarters operations.
Next the 6.8x51mm round. I have seen some claim this was specifically about Afghanistan and longer range shooting. To a degree yes. But if the USDOD only wanted longer range shooting why develop a round from scratch? Since 2003 6.5x39mm Grendel has been available commercially offering a round that fits in a M4 platform and has performance out to 1000m alternatively 6.5x48mm Creedmoor has been around since 2007. Can easily be chambered by any AR10 derivative and offers the same range. So why 6.8x51mm? What was it that the US Army wanted that and not an off the shelf round of it was just looking to hunt the Taliban in the mountains for all eternity?
It wasn’t. The NGSW was announced around 2017 when the US Army was looking at China. Now Russia was also on the list but Ukraine has again made it clear Russia isn’t the near peer state they wanted to be. Ak74, M4 and AKM type weapons used by the Ukrainians have no issues taking out Russian troops due to the issued Russian Plate carriers often being empty, issued helmets often being older types that seem limited to fragmentation protection.
China would be a different story and the 6.8x51mm is a very hot loaded round meaning although it might not actually penetrate the plate in one shot the amount of energy into the plates will render it susceptible to follow on shots. The whole justification the Chinese have made for 5.8x42mm was back in the day it was supposed to be superior in range and penetration vs 5.45x39mm And NATO 5.56x45mm on paper it smokes 5.45x39mm and likely older 77 grain 5.56 but questionable on newer heavier 5.56 NATO. It wouldn’t come anywhere near 6.8x51mm.

Rumor has it that Canadian civilian market will acquire this gun soon.

EdgeOfEcho said:

Wonder how well it performs against its US counter part made by Vortex, and whether the PLA is interested in adopting technology in the future...

For comparison:

View attachment 101492
View attachment 101493


Smart scopes are definitely an interesting development for small arms, probably will be a lot more successful than previous attempts by US or Russia (looking at G11, An-94, AEK-971) to increase hit probably by common infantrymen.

It'll be interesting to see how well these smart scopes perform in the hands of US infantry. I think this will prove to be quite successful as long as it works as intended and is robust enough to still function properly in rough environments. This will make it so much easier to hit targets at 300 - 500 meters with intermediate cartridges for you common grunts.

But this set up will not be cheap, so it will be interesting to see if the return is worth the cost.

A good question to ponder is, how often will soldiers in the near future battlefield need to engage enemies at distances of 300 to 500 meters with accurate fire from intermediate cartridges? I think this question really depends on the level of intensity of the combat, overall capability of the the military engaged in the conflict, the terrain of the battlefield, and many other factors. But there will be a clear trend as technology and warfare evolves.

This technology will probably significantly increase infantrymen's firepower by making it significantly easier to hit targets, but will this technology change the course of a war or even the outcome of a battle? That will be hard to say to be honest.

I feel like the importance of small arms in modern combat has diminished significantly. There must be some reports out there on the War in Afghanistan documenting the most effective method of engaging the enemy from a US perspective. What proportion of Taliban fighters killed by US military were killed by small arms or by air strike / arty strike? It would be interesting to estimate from such reports how effective red dots and ACOGs have been in combat. Would US lose significantly more men if these equipment's were not issued? Or would it not really matter anyways since most Taliban fighters are not killed by small arms fire?

It may be entirely possible that these scope's most important role in the future of warfare is not to help soldiers to shoot more accurately (they most likely could do that very well), but to serve as an additional data generator in the information system that can help to relay real time battlefield information to the chain of command to enable better decision-making from the top or to request fire support missions.

Honestly I'm not sure what to make of this. Any other thoughts on this?

Click to expand...

The one thing that kept bugging me in my mind is: battery. It's probably got a microprocessor inside, so the battery life is probably not in the category of "put it in and forget about it". If there is one thing Generation Kill showed us, it was how logistics can hamper an operation. In the beginning, the marines kept asking for laser aiming module batteries without any real success. IIRC it was only resolved when the reporter showed up and they used his civilian status to buy stuff from post exchange without limit.

So, this brings us back to the scope. Anyone knows what kind of battery does it take? AA? AAA? Those weird CR123 thing one can never really find in a grocery store? Does the scope share battery with any laser aiming module or night vision device currently in inventory?

siegecrossbow said:

Rumor has it that Canadian civilian market will acquire this gun soon.

Click to expand...

I have a gut feeling that if that ever happens, "QBZ-191 and any variations thereof" along with "QBZ-95 and any variations thereof" will be prohibited by name in the near future by our genius of a prime minister. Why? Gun banning seems to be a vote winner and a wedge issue, also, CHYNA.

siegecrossbow said:

Rumor has it that Canadian civilian market will acquire this gun soon.

Click to expand...

Don't worry, next time someone stabs 3 people to death in a rampage with a kitchen knife they bought in Walmart (made in China of course), Trudeau will ban all guns from China to make Canadians safe again.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

It should be remembered that the XM5 and XM157 are still in early buys. As such the cost per unit is misleading. This is because early buys are paying for the tooling up of the factory and supply chain to produce such systems. So the initial unit cost will be significantly higher and come down over time. Farther it’s not “Just a Scope”. It’s like the IPhone was when it was introduced. It replaced pagers, PDA’s, personal video game consoles, portable CD/Cassette players…ecta and then your phone.
The XM157 replaces the scope but also laser and IR pointer, range finders, meteorological instruments, ballistic calculator, it can even record and stream video too an off board device via secure channels. So in essence it’s a snipers kits plus. Abilities like shooting around corners haven’t been displayed yet but by all indications are on the way.
The thing about “Smart helmets” is they can only take so many parts and many have to have parts elsewhere on the body of the soldier. The Processor and radio on the torso the keypad or interface device on the body. Among their intended functions a aiming assist requires some input from the rifle. Shooting around corners means that a sensor has to be on the rifle with a camera so the soldier can see what he is pointing at. This how corner shot works an arm with a gun on the end and a camera with a display on the stock. That doesn’t work well for a rifle. But if you can mount the display on the head and the sensors on the rifle. XM157 is that. A camera that can stream data to a Smart device like say IVAS. Point the gun around the corner see what the rifle sees decide if it needs to die.
In night vision this comes in again. In 2006 when Us Forces faced off against Taliban and AQ/IS they didn’t need to worry about the other guy seeing the laser pointer on the rifle it was in the IR spectrum of light. In 2017 the story was changing. Well in 2022 Ukraine vs Russian conscripts you could still use an IRPointer without issues. If you do have to face that risk you have two options first mount your NOD to your rifle. Second ENVG which has one scope on the rifle one Bino on the head and the two talk to each other.
Additionally the other capabilities of the scope the range finder and navigation systems mean that you have a tool to allow precision fires to be called in, Mortars Rockets, Artillery or Air strike.

Next the Taliban propaganda is to claim that with a pair of sandals, the Koran and the Kalashnikov they defeated the infidel west. The facts are, Well yes many in the Taliban were armed like that early on closer to the end they also more and more had many who had foreign weapons and equipment including night vision and even body armor on par with what was being given to the ANA.
This mean’s that the battles in Afghanistan in the later stages were much more modern infantry v modern infantry even more so that Ukraine war. Though the Taliban lacked tanks, planes and heavy artillery they had light guns, mortars and nod. As such we started to see a shift in the US Military. Wide spread adoption of Suppressors.
The XM5 and XM250 from the factory with a flow through suppressor. This reduces recoil, flash and noise of the weapon it also doesn’t heat up or send as much material back into the weapon. This was a requirement for the NGSW program, for night and close quarters operations.
Next the 6.8x51mm round. I have seen some claim this was specifically about Afghanistan and longer range shooting. To a degree yes. But if the USDOD only wanted longer range shooting why develop a round from scratch? Since 2003 6.5x39mm Grendel has been available commercially offering a round that fits in a M4 platform and has performance out to 1000m alternatively 6.5x48mm Creedmoor has been around since 2007. Can easily be chambered by any AR10 derivative and offers the same range. So why 6.8x51mm? What was it that the US Army wanted that and not an off the shelf round of it was just looking to hunt the Taliban in the mountains for all eternity?
It wasn’t. The NGSW was announced around 2017 when the US Army was looking at China. Now Russia was also on the list but Ukraine has again made it clear Russia isn’t the near peer state they wanted to be. Ak74, M4 and AKM type weapons used by the Ukrainians have no issues taking out Russian troops due to the issued Russian Plate carriers often being empty, issued helmets often being older types that seem limited to fragmentation protection.
China would be a different story and the 6.8x51mm is a very hot loaded round meaning although it might not actually penetrate the plate in one shot the amount of energy into the plates will render it susceptible to follow on shots. The whole justification the Chinese have made for 5.8x42mm was back in the day it was supposed to be superior in range and penetration vs 5.45x39mm And NATO 5.56x45mm on paper it smokes 5.45x39mm and likely older 77 grain 5.56 but questionable on newer heavier 5.56 NATO. It wouldn’t come anywhere near 6.8x51mm.

Click to expand...

A few points, first, just because the scope can do all those things, does not mean it will necessarily replace all of the equipment you list. I can play games, browse webpages, and watch videos on my iPhone, but I prefer to play games and browse webpages on my PC better and the big screen at the cinema is still a much better experience than iPhone. Of course that's just an example.

The decision for PLA to adopt the 5.8mm was because they thought this was one cartridge that could solve all problems and there was no need for a full sized bullet. Yes 5.8mm with a heavier load can reach enemies at further distances but as we have seen, 5.8mm alone is not enough, now we see the PLA adopting a 7.62mm GPMG like everyone else. Just because it can do it does not mean it will do it well, and when it does not do a function well enough, it cannot replace an existing piece of equipment.

I'm sure these smart scopes can allow users to get ranges, see thermal/night vision, shoot out IR laser for targeting, do ballistic computation, record videos, send data and such, but will that package do all of these well enough to make all these equipment obsolete? It is hard to say, maybe, maybe not.

Even if this scope could do all of the above in one package, how much better would it be compared to what is currently available?

Finally, on the 6.8x51mm bullet for US infantry in the future, I'm honestly not sure if this is really meant for China. Body armor is pretty cheap nowadays unlike 20 years ago and everyone and their moms can afford to buy them (case in point, IIRC, French GIGN bought some 7.62x39mm Bren 2s because terrorists in the 2015 attacks wore body armors and 556 was just not enough to drop them).

I kind of feel like this new bullet is more designed for defeating level 4 armor at longer distances, something that feels super relevant to the later stages of the War in Afghanistan. I really don't see how Americans will fight major ground wars with China in the near future, unless they are gearing up for Korean War 2.0, most of the fighting will be done in the air and at sea.

So I'm struggling to see how the new caliber is tailor made for China to counter Chinese doctrine. It feels more like it is made based on the lessons learned in Afghanistan, especially with engagements over long distances and enemies with body armor.

Chavez said:

this allow anyone who never handle fire arm,become a instant snipper. A texas company also offering similiar "smart"rifle.its possible it could convert into a some sort remote control snipping

Click to expand...

Chavez that is so completely wrong. I remember when Trackingpoint came out and this was repeated again and again and it’s still wrong. No you cannot become an instant sniper. It assisted in aim but the fundamentals of marksmanship and training remain. A shooter with the skills can learn to use the system substantially better than a caveman. Farther the Trackingpoint system had a major design aspect that the Chinese system, Israeli Smart Shooter and Vortex intentionally lack. That being that the trackingpoint system had an electric trigger mechanism. This was so that the shooter could pull the trigger but the weapon wouldn’t fire unless the solution was matched. For a sniper rifle not a bad idea for a combat rifle terrible idea. Because in combat you may still need to suppress.

BMUFL said:

The one thing that kept bugging me in my mind is: battery. It's probably got a microprocessor inside, so the battery life is probably not in the category of "put it in and forget about it". If there is one thing Generation Kill showed us, it was how logistics can hamper an operation. In the beginning, the marines kept asking for laser aiming module batteries without any real success. IIRC it was only resolved when the reporter showed up and they used his civilian status to buy stuff from post exchange without limit.

So, this brings us back to the scope. Anyone knows what kind of battery does it take? AA? AAA? Those weird CR123 thing one can never really find in a grocery store? Does the scope share battery with any laser aiming module or night vision device currently in inventory

Click to expand...

The XM157 is a bit of a hybrid. It’s a dumb 1-8 LPVO with standard ranging based on a 5 foot 7 inch human silhouette.
The laser and other goodies obviously depend on a battery. The battery is a pair of Cr123 battery life will very based on use but vortex claims several weeks.

The Chinese system?? It has a key pad okay. It looks like it has a Ranger system perhaps even pointer but we have one side seen no indication of a magnification ring.

siegecrossbow said:

Rumor has it that Canadian civilian market will acquire this gun soon.

Click to expand...

I saw that Weibo post and funny enough it may have some merits.

I remember someone at this year's Zhuhai Airshow saying that the new production lines for QBZ191 is highly automated so a lot of workers are underemployed - I guess the SOE would not fire them but there is not much for them to do, so a lot of people turned into the export market, but even that is too small of a pie so they dedicated a lot of people to other new systems like drones and stuff.

This actually matches with my experience in Canada. Tactical Import brought in some batches of Type 81s in 2017/2018 and they were made to pretty poor qualities, and they kept saying that this was the last batch because the factories were making spaces and resources for the new rifle.

However, in 2020, they brought in a LMG version of Type 81, newly manufactured, and then later a new batch of newly produced Type 81 with a complete different finish specifically for the Canadian civilian market! Then this year a few months ago they brought in a DMR version of type 81, complete new production, thick barrel, adjustable trigger, new stock, and 5 round magazines that look like SVD mags but only holds 5 rounds....

That's a lot of new products in 2 years! Norinco used to never really give a crap about the Canadian civilian market and the fact that we saw so many new offerings in the Canadian market from Norinco since 2019 (when QBZ191 first showed up) may suggest what was said above may be true - new production lines for QBZ191 "laid off" a lot of people from the usual production duties, and there is actually more focus on the export side of things to help staff people.

So it may actually be possible that folks at Norinco are working with Tactical Imports to bring QBZ191 to the market, since the QBU variant will make for a very nice DMR style black rifle that is non-restricted.

So a good question is does a 5.56 version of QBZ191 exist? Or will they bring in the 5.8mm versions with 5.8mm ammo (does China even export the 5.8mm ammo? You can buy so many cheap 5.56, 308, 7.62x39, 7.62x54r, and 7.62x25 from Norinco but never seem any 5.8mm anywhere)?

Pictures of my Type 81 in DMR style made by Norinco:

EdgeOfEcho said:

A few points, first, just because the scope can do all those things, does not mean it will necessarily replace all of the equipment you list. I can play games, browse webpages, and watch videos on my iPhone, but I prefer to play games and browse webpages on my PC better and the big screen at the cinema is still a much better experience than iPhone. Of course that's just an example.

The decision for PLA to adopt the 5.8mm was because they thought this was one cartridge that could solve all problems and there was no need for a full sized bullet. Yes 5.8mm with a heavier load can reach enemies at further distances but as we have seen, 5.8mm alone is not enough, now we see the PLA adopting a 7.62mm GPMG like everyone else. Just because it can do it does not mean it will do it well, and when it does not do a function well enough, it cannot replace an existing piece of equipment.

I'm sure these smart scopes can allow users to get ranges, see thermal/night vision, shoot out IR laser for targeting, do ballistic computation, record videos, send data and such, but will that package do all of these well enough to make all these equipment obsolete? It is hard to say, maybe, maybe not.

Even if this scope could do all of the above in one package, how much better would it be compared to what is currently available?

Finally, on the 6.8x51mm bullet for US infantry in the future, I'm honestly not sure if this is really meant for China. Body armor is pretty cheap nowadays unlike 20 years ago and everyone and their moms can afford to buy them (case in point, IIRC, French GIGN bought some 7.62x39mm Bren 2s because terrorists in the 2015 attacks wore body armors and 556 was just not enough to drop them).

I kind of feel like this new bullet is more designed for defeating level 4 armor at longer distances, something that feels super relevant to the later stages of the War in Afghanistan. I really don't see how Americans will fight major ground wars with China in the near future, unless they are gearing up for Korean War 2.0, most of the fighting will be done in the air and at sea.

So I'm struggling to see how the new caliber is tailor made for China to counter Chinese doctrine. It feels more like it is made based on the lessons learned in Afghanistan, especially with engagements over long distances and enemies with body armor.

Click to expand...

The weight game @EdgeOfEcho the weight game. The fact if separate components are going to have separate batteries with separate housing and mounts and the weight goes up. Infantry before the 1960s didn’t wear armor they packed a 40 lbs load. Today with armor they are easily getting to 140lbs. Consolidation and elimination of redundant load in combination with reduced weight equipment and off loading to other mechanized carriers is how you trim the fat to a usable weight. Where the infantry can maneuver and fight. Your IPhone can’t play that game you love but it is a hell of a lot better than trying to lug your PC or console with you on the move. That’s the thing Infantry has to be mobile. Even snipers. Though specialists May keep some of the kit in the end they will likely receive their own versions.

Next armor is cheap for the individual who can afford one set but, the Military doesn’t do small targets it’s masses, the PLA is masses of troops. It’s the Near Peer. Yes the Taliban had forces in plate carriers yet the ring is the US wasn’t the one fighting them. The US operations in Afghanistan had shifted a decade ago it was the ANA who were on the front lines. Farther just because it can fight at long range doesn’t mean it can’t fight at close ranges. Infantry are the tool to take and hold territory. They root out the stragglers. End of the day air and sea may be the prime battles but eventually you need boots on the ground. Even the Taiwan scenario requires boots on the ground.
Is the new caliber based on lessons from Afghanistan? Yes of course. Yet that doesn’t mean it’s not an effective response to body armor of a near peer. Some equipment from and lessons from Asymmetric conflict are adaptable to symmetrical conflicts. Some isn’t. MRAPs for example are not adaptable. But Hard kill Active protection system and counter mine kits are because you will likely face the same threat just repackaged for infantry or armored units. Aircraft self defense systems to counter MANPADS used by insurgents are the same threats from symmetrical units. Light infantry in the mountains is the same as insurgents only they wear a uniform.

EdgeOfEcho said:

I saw that Weibo post and funny enough it may have some merits.

I remember someone at this year's Zhuhai Airshow saying that the new production lines for QBZ191 is highly automated so a lot of workers are underemployed - I guess the SOE would not fire them but there is not much for them to do, so a lot of people turned into the export market, but even that is too small of a pie so they dedicated a lot of people to other new systems like drones and stuff.

This actually matches with my experience in Canada. Tactical Import brought in some batches of Type 81s in 2017/2018 and they were made to pretty poor qualities, and they kept saying that this was the last batch because the factories were making spaces and resources for the new rifle.

However, in 2020, they brought in a LMG version of Type 81, newly manufactured, and then later a new batch of newly produced Type 81 with a complete different finish specifically for the Canadian civilian market! Then this year a few months ago they brought in a DMR version of type 81, complete new production, thick barrel, adjustable trigger, new stock, and 5 round magazines that look like SVD mags but only holds 5 rounds....

That's a lot of new products in 2 years! Norinco used to never really give a crap about the Canadian civilian market and the fact that we saw so many new offerings in the Canadian market from Norinco since 2019 (when QBZ191 first showed up) may suggest what was said above may be true - new production lines for QBZ191 "laid off" a lot of people from the usual production duties, and there is actually more focus on the export side of things to help staff people.

So it may actually be possible that folks at Norinco are working with Tactical Imports to bring QBZ191 to the market, since the QBU variant will make for a very nice DMR style black rifle that is non-restricted.

So a good question is does a 5.56 version of QBZ191 exist? Or will they bring in the 5.8mm versions with 5.8mm ammo (does China even export the 5.8mm ammo? You can buy so many cheap 5.56, 308, 7.62x39, 7.62x54r, and 7.62x25 from Norinco but never seem any 5.8mm anywhere)?

Pictures of my Type 81 in DMR style made by Norinco:

View attachment 101572
View attachment 101573

Click to expand...

Glad that Norinco served you well. I believe theres another series that serves as competition to 191 series and lose out to 191 will be offered to export.