Yes, it somehow devolved into semantic bickering over the definition of "optional" instead of anything substantive about rifles/boots.
I think it was just really important for him to get the last word. Not worth engaging any further.
QBZ-191 service rifle family
- Thread starter Blitzo
- Start date
Yes, it somehow devolved into semantic bickering over the definition of "optional" instead of anything substantive about rifles/boots.
I think it was just really important for him to get the last word. Not worth engaging any further.
It's hard to measure the relative importance of each, but I can tell you that a deformed handguard that also doubles as a pic rail will effectively relegate a rifle to CQC, i.e. a big powerful hand gun.
I mean yeah when compared to other rifle that come standard with free floated rail that will hold zero of any aiming module being put on it, Its kind half assed like by78 said but since we already see a lot of free float handguard rail development and fielded in some way (DMR variant) out there there are probably some awareness within the military of this issue. If we ever got the chance to witness the normal infantry in PLA get equipped with laser aiming module on their handguard (which probably wont happen for another decade) it wont be hard for the platform to be fitted with a free floated rigid handguard anyway. In my personal opinion its probably better to put this rifle platform out there replace the 95 as fast as possible. As for the shoe vs rifle issue both is important and shouldnt prioritize one over the other tbh i dont even know why there is a debate around it.
For a deformed handguard to relegate a gun to CQC it would first have to mount something. For the vast majority of PLAGF, it might as well not exist considering they don't have anything to put on it. Also this is assuming the handguard actually has a deforming issue important enough to matter.
The front iron sight is invariably installed on the handguard rail. Also, any lasers or any other devices will be installed on the handguard rail. I doubt that optics are going to be standard issue to front line troops if they are skimping on plastic handguards, so the long range accuracy of the rifle will absolutely depend on the iron sights.
The front iron sight is on a metal piece that is directly attached to the gas block. And again, is there actually any evidence that the handguard has deformation problems?
This pic shows the QBZ-191's handguard reinforcement sleeve which has 3 attachment points in red for the polymer handguard surrounding it. I do not see any attachment points to the gas block itself, likely because the barrel is meant to be free-floating.
If the handguard has any deformation problems I have no doubt the PLA would not share them with us. OTOH I don't know of any other modern military-grade assault rifle that uses polymer pic rails.
You can see the lugs that slide into the gas block in the patent drawing that you posted. Directly attached is maybe misleading since there are no fasteners involved, but there is a lot of contact between the two parts.
Why is there assumption that there's a deformation issue in the first place?
Sure, but why does this matter?
No fasteners means no contact, which means free-floating. What would be the point of doing it half-ass? You either lend structural support to the handguard and/or barrel by connecting them to each other, or you let the barrel free-float to increase accuracy. Not actually connecting them physically but letting them caress each other gently is literally the worst of both worlds.
That's my way of saying nobody else wants to mess with deformation issues. If it was not actually a potential issue, more militaries would cheap out and use polymer instead of metal for their pic rails. Also, do note that the DMR version of the QBZ-191 DOES actually use a metal handguard and is ALSO free-floating.
Attachments
-
mmexport1689677498313.jpg
They dovetail. What do you mean "gently caress"?
What deformation issues?
When you need a handguard that long, yes, the polymer may have an issue with bending. When its a short and thick piece of likely reinforced polymer secured on both ends, as it is on the other two variants, I think its fine.