I really don’t think that’ll even “do its job”. You’re holding it at such a weird angle, I can only believe it is being done for “tacticool” points.
QBZ-191 service rifle family
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
I wouldn't call that a poor man's canted red dot, given that the QMQ-171 holographic sight is a full sized sight while a canted red dot is much smaller and should be much cheaper.
It's more like a "stupid, expensive" offset red dot solution.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
It’s a holographic sight. That type of reflex optic is very forgiving when it comes to positioning relative to aiming basically shooting at point blank range. It’s an odd configuration but I seem to recall it being used in the late 00s in a few photos from Iraq. The Acog type optic has a fixed 4x power sight which though you can engage at close range has a habit of tunnel vision. This is why LPVOs and cowitnessed mini dots are a thing.
I think the question of cost would come down to the question of sourcing.
If he bought it himself; yeah very sub optimal. An optic like the Holosun 403/503 or 510 would be better suited to the job and there should be mounts available on the market to off set or better top mount.
How’s if the guy mounted it on the rifle was told he could only use official issue either as he couldn’t afford to buy it or it was verboten for equipment outside offical channels. Then the situation changes and make mend is better than nothing.
MwRYum
Major
Going from "we can't do this with QBZ-95" to "we can try out all those setups with this new platform, but we don't know if it'd be true quality-of-life improvement we need so let's try it out with standard issue accessories before we place order on Taobao", I presume?
Don't think it's a budget problem. You could order an aluminium 45 degree mount very cheap in China like $100 for 20 of them. Custom welding job is also very cheap in China like $10 an hour.
You still need the red dot mate, and given the holographic sight's length, it definitely won't fit.
MwRYum
Major
But like I said, that'd be more a quality-of-life improvement, good for bling factor and quick CQB environment shooting stance switch, but is it truly necessary?
The PAP/PLA is probably in its "let's try everything regardless of how it looks" phase similar to the US in the late 90s and early 2000s. They finally got all the budget and equipment readily available compared to just a few years ago. Just give them time and they will figure it out themselves.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
If it was meant for CQB, mounting it on the other side would make more sense as you might be able to rig it to allow you to use the dot while shooting both eyes open.
I almost wonder if this particular mounting position was intended for urban combat and shooting from unusual positions, like shooting under a car or similar cover. With a normal optic layout, the only way to shoot from such a position is to lie parallel to the cover, which will allow you to get a shot off, but will also expose nearly your whole body to enemy return fire. With this setup, you can lie perpendicular to the cover behind a wheel and only expose a bit of your head to shoot.
It’s an extremely fringe scenario, but might make sense if this unit is expecting a lot of urban combat or if there was specific positions in shooting competitions where such a mounting setup would give them an advantage.