QBZ-191 service rifle family

Franklin said:

The new QBZ-191 rifle with a mention in the article of "Rick Joe" our very own Blitzo.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Meh quality from TNI as always.

I think the flaws it describes from the QBZ-95 are only valid in about half of them.

The new service rifle doesn't have a folding stock.

Lacking a three shut burst mode is not surprising or strange; most service rifles lack such a function, and I don't think the PLA ever had a rifle fielded with such a function either, so you can't "do away" with something you never had.

Burst mode is basically the same old argument by bean counters that soldiers shouldn’t be “wasting bullets.”
Penny wise Pound foolishness. It’s cost lives. History proves the force that can place more fire on the enemy and sustain it often wins the day.
Burst mechanisms are a poor substitute for proper fire training.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

Burst mode is basically the same old argument by bean counters that soldiers shouldn’t be “wasting bullets.”
Penny wise Pound foolishness. It’s cost lives. History proves the force that can place more fire on the enemy and sustain it often wins the day.
Burst mechanisms are a poor substitute for proper fire training.

Click to expand...

Point is, the PLA to my knowledge have not had a burst mode for their fielded service rifles, so Mr Robin's statement that the lack of a burst mode is "curious" or that it was "done away" is inaccurate because the PLA never had a history of having such a mode in their past service rifles and such a mode isn't that widespread or default of a capability either.

You can't "do away" something which was never present in the first place.

Even the original article on The Firearm Blog pointing out that there was no burst fire on the new Chinese rifle merely wrote "According to TFB’s Chinese source, the new rifle has semi-auto and full-auto but no burst-fire" -- and anyone that is half informed about past Chinese rifles and/or who has internet access, should be able to understand that the "but no burst fire" part is not meant to indicate such a capability was present in past Chinese rifles but rather for readers who might have believed that such a mode would have been present on a Chinese rifle due to it being present on some US service rifles.




Overall it's just a bit of a poor quality article.

by78 said:

One more...

(1280 × 1943)

Click to expand...

Looks a lot like Kim Jong Un!

I'm not a fan of the PLA ditching bullpup designs; if they complained about bayonet reach, all they had to do was to stuff on a longer bayonet.

Still, I admit the bullpup is a solution in search of a problem. It has trade-offs in ergonomics (greater noise), but the longer potential barrel length isn't actually being exploited by any bullpup I'm aware of. Maybe when they go to 6.8mm?

@Bltizo it was more a general rant than a targeted one.
The QBZ95 got points from me for having a auto and not burst mode but lost those points because of the location of the fire selector.
Ranged fire is normally single shot. The QBZ191 has its selector well placed for switching between modes. The QBZ95 had its all the way back on the weapon meaning that the shooter would have to break aim to change modes or fire a burst and hope they can walk the rounds on target.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

@Bltizo it was more a general rant than a targeted one.
The QBZ95 got points from me for having a auto and not burst mode but lost those points because of the location of the fire selector.
Ranged fire is normally single shot. The QBZ191 has its selector well placed for switching between modes. The QBZ95 had its all the way back on the weapon meaning that the shooter would have to break aim to change modes or fire a burst and hope they can walk the rounds on target.

Click to expand...

Yeah, my point was just that the PLA has never had a service rifle to my knowledge which had a burst mode.

QBZ-95 shouldn't really get any points for having an auto and no burst mode because previous Chinese service rifles prior to QBZ-95 were the same.
The fire selector position for QBZ-95 is obviously a well known flaw, which was corrected on QBZ-95-1, but even the fire select position on the original QBZ-95 has no real bearing on its fire select options.

Now regarding the rifle...

Am I seeing things, or does this image of the rifle's top rail on the handguard looks like there might be some holes drilled into every second rail groove?

I assume it is for cooling purposes -- are there other handguard designs with holes in the rail itself like so?





Also, does anybody seem how the handguard attaches to the receiver? It's clearly a one piece handguard like that of the HK416, but I can't see an obvious bolt on the sides of the handguard for that purpose.
I suppose it is possible that a bolt might exist on the ventral side of the handguard but we haven't got a good clear picture of that side yet.

The holes only appear beyond the receiver so probably meant to be heat vents.
There seems to be two attachment devices at the gas block. My bet is that’s part of how it would come off either that or there is something at the 6 O’clock

If by attachments near the gas block you mean the two boltheads on each side of the forward handguard, I think that may be a connection for the internal sleeve of the handguard which keeps the forward permanent BUIS in place (and possibly the rail as well in comparison to the rest of the handguard is polymer).

I'm not sure if there's a physical connection between the handguard and the gas block.

Bltizo said:

If by attachments near the gas block you mean the two boltheads on each side of the forward handguard, I think that may be a connection for the internal sleeve of the handguard which keeps the forward permanent BUIS in place (and possibly the rail as well in comparison to the rest of the handguard is polymer).

I'm not sure if there's a physical connection between the handguard and the gas block.

View attachment 54710

Click to expand...

If it's so then it won't be floating barrel design, right?

Likely the front handguard can be disassemble into 2 major piece - the polymer handguard and the metal frame.