QBZ-191 service rifle family

AsuraGodFiend

Just Hatched
Registered Member
Realistically, who would dare to land forces on Chinese soil? The answer is simple: no one. That’s precisely why China prioritizes its Navy, Air Force, and Rocket Force. The PLA Ground Force may not be the most modern in certain aspects, but it’s more than capable of decisively defeating any adversary on home territory.
Idgaf about that I only want the plagf to look on par and be on par that simple.
 

tamsen_ikard

Senior Member
Registered Member
Jesus christ man how can the second most powerful military have these subpar infrantry equip like wtf are they doing from the boots to wearing no plates like no trading or discipline Taiwan shit looks more and more useful BTW do the Pla have a independent company that checks the ballistic plates and such for the army and what is the standard plate and it's performance? imma just ignore the plagf and the whole infrantry and focus of the airforce and navy cause this is embarrassing how do the army not feel embarrassed with these gears in 2025 shit coating on the qbz 191 shit stock, polymer rail like wtf when will The people who are actively sabotaging the plagf be purged man every time I look at this and the other infrantry forum I'm left feeling angry and hopeless with how shit the gear is the one eye nvg flimsy shit is embarrassing.
They have no excuse
PLA has the best ground force in the world, period. They have the best and most modern truck mounted artillery, best and longest ranged MLRS, newest light tank suitable for mountanious and tropical asia.

They have type-08 style medium brigades with very good mobility and protection. They have also superior organization and logistic due to complete brigadization. Not even US is fully brigadized.

They have complete Amphibious heavy brigades with dedicated amphibious tanks and other types of armored vehicles that no one in the world has.

People should check the PLAGF of 20 years ago in 2005 vs PLA of today. Check the hardware they used to have vs what they have now. The change is much bigger than even the air force or the navy.

So, its wrong to say PLAGF did not get the same level of attention as the navy or the air force got. What actually happened was, PLAGF was very close to the pinnacle of ground force tech so their modernization was faster and easier. PLAGF probably caught up to US tech much earlier than navy or air force.


As for Infantry gear, No reasonable body armor can stop a military service rifle bullet and still be practical. So, actual combat utility of a body armor very limited. Soldiers die by the 100s of thousands in Ukraine war despite having body armor. Why? Cause they are killed not just by bullets, but by drones, artillery and air strikes.

In a true peer-to-peer battle, an infantry will die in maybe a few days of actual combat regardless of how cool their rifle is or how many attachments it can hold. Doesn't matter one bit.
 

MwRYum

Major
I

I wonder, what more does the new handguard provide apart from the fact that it's a bit longer?
Ain't we keep hearing how polymar frame and rail won't hold zeroing as the metallic ones would?

If anything, it's more ventilated than the standard ones, and more accessory mounting freedom as well. Good for SOF type operators but little use to grunts who'd be fine with low zoom optics and handgrip at the front.
 

sabiothailand

Junior Member
Registered Member
Ain't we keep hearing how polymar frame and rail won't hold zeroing as the metallic ones would?

If anything, it's more ventilated than the standard ones, and more accessory mounting freedom as well. Good for SOF type operators but little use to grunts who'd be fine with low zoom optics and handgrip at the front.
Eh, the default handguard and rails are already polymer anyways, and the guns seem to still hit targets fine.

Ventilation's good against overheating and more accessory for SOF is a plus as well.
 

tygyg1111

Captain
Registered Member
Stupid question but does anyone know performance of qbz-191 against harsh environments(waters, mud, snow,...)?
Expectation is they will perform very well. There are videos on youtube and bilibili showing the standard endurance tests that all prospective service rifles are subjected to during evaluation - these cover firing after extended submersion in varying types of water (turbid to severely turbid), rain firing, simulated climates ranging from tropical to near-arctic. This type of testing has been used since the type 81, so there is enough institutional knowledge to ensure a very comprehensive test.
 

PeoplesPoster

Junior Member
As for Infantry gear, No reasonable body armor can stop a military service rifle bullet and still be practical. So, actual combat utility of a body armor very limited. Soldiers die by the 100s of thousands in Ukraine war despite having body armor. Why? Cause they are killed not just by bullets, but by drones, artillery and air strikes.
This is absolutely false. lvl 4 body armor is rated for just that. if the PLA is not issuing that to their soldiers, then that's their fault.
 
Top