QBZ-191 service rifle family

[Blitzo]

I'm hoping for an ambidextrous charging handle one the next iteration.

In terms of top of the list priorities for a potential QBZ-191A (or QBZ-191-1? lol), I think a proper free floated full length handguard fresh from the factory, is probably at the top.

Ambi charging handle, non-reciprocating etc... could be useful if they are sufficiently mechanically reliable and easy to produce for the PLA brass.
But personally I'm even surprised that the standard 191 has ambi safety to begin with as standard.

 

[MrCrazyBoyRavi]

Looks like QBZ-191 didn’t met a lot of users expectation here. If PLA was trying to overhaul infantry equipment and modernize everything from ground up, then why did they cheapen up & compromized on different aspect of new rifle for cost cutting for few billions? Its not like they are buying expensive rifles from other nation like India. Heck China give way more money as donation to poor nations for various reasons. Even Turkish new rifle looks more advanced than QBZ-191, while Turkey’s economy is in shambles. This doesn’t look good for world’s 2nd richest nation.

 

[Aniah]

Looks like QBZ-191 didn’t met a lot of users expectation here. If PLA was trying to overhaul infantry equipment and modernize everything from ground up, then why did they cheapen up & compromized on different aspect of new rifle for cost cutting for few billions? Its not like they are buying expensive rifles from other nation like India. Heck China give way more money as donation to poor nations for various reasons. Even Turkish new rifle looks more advanced than QBZ-191, while Turkey’s economy is in shambles. This doesn’t look good for world’s 2nd richest nation.

I think you're exaggerating here. Almost all equipment is going to be overhauled. As for the gun, it isn't a real compromise for the Chinese outside of maybe the handguard. We've already said why the charging handle might've been designed the way it was. And if Turkey decides to put more money into developing a rifle while their economy is in shambles then they are free to. The Chinese will see what's fit for themselves.

 

[Blitzo]

Looks like QBZ-191 didn’t met a lot of users expectation here. If PLA was trying to overhaul infantry equipment and modernize everything from ground up, then why did they cheapen up & compromized on different aspect of new rifle for cost cutting for few billions? Its not like they are buying expensive rifles from other nation like India. Heck China give way more money as donation to poor nations for various reasons. Even Turkish new rifle looks more advanced than QBZ-191, while Turkey’s economy is in shambles. This doesn’t look good for world’s 2nd richest nation.

I think there's a difference between meeting "expectations of people who want a rifle with all of the trimmings" and "expectations of a service rifle meant to be issued to the world's largest standing military (and other services like armed police".

When you are designing a rifle intended to be used for a nation that large, used by that many service personnel, small design decisions and extra features do end up costing you quite a lot in terms of procurement, ease of manufacture, and depending on the design decision it can influence upkeep as well.



The only "issues" with QBZ-191 that I see, are:
1. non free floated handguard
2. single sided charging handle
3. reciprocating charging handle


I would say that 2. and 3. are not entirely fair criticisms. I believe 2. and 3., if implemented would result in greater cost and more difficulty in manufacture -- and more importantly, I believe 2. and 3. are not features that the PLA brass desired either. It is not unreasonable to say that 2. and 3. would be quite a deviation from the standard PLA manual of arms that they've been used to since the Type 81 and 03 in terms of conventionally configured rifles. That isn't to say the PLA are unwilling to change -- the QBZ 95 as a bullpup, and the bolt release on the QBZ 191, show that clearly there are some things they believe to be worthwhile changing for.

As for 1., I think a proper free floated handguard issued as a standard rifle is likely going to be excessive for your standard soldier. A free floated handguard is useful for a few things, but perhaps most notably it is for IR lasers/aiming devices. Your average soldier in the PLA is not going to be equipped with such equipment. There are of course some benefits for accuracy as well to having a free floated handguard, but again, your average soldier probably isn't going to be able to make full use of that bleeding edge improvements in accuracy when equipped with just the standard 3x prism sight. In the case of the standard QBZ-191, they've clearly considered the effect of their polymer HG solution on stability which is why they've taken so much lengths to have a forward iron sight housing that helps to stabilize the HG with the gas block. Not as good as a proper FF HG, but it does mean it was a conscious decision.
Then there is the issue of cost. A proper FF HG would have to be milled and machined, meaning it will be more expensive by a decent margin compared to the standard 191's polymer handguard. If money was no object, then perhaps they could do it. But money is most certainly finite, and the ability of the average soldier to effectively make use of the benefits of a FF HG is even more finite. So I can understand why this feature was omitted.
Fortunately, the QBZ-191 design means that they can quite easily produce upgrade kit for existing QBZ-191s by changing the barrel nut and changing the handguard to a FF HG. Or they can design and produce a QBZ-191 variant with FF HG -- which they've already really done with the QBU-191 that features a longer and heavier barrel and a FF HG. The design of the QBZ-191 means producing an upgrade kit or a designing a new variant of it with a new FF HG is very easy to do. However it depends on the need.

Personally, I think that going forwards once the standard QBZ-191s are more common place and widely issued, it would make sense to produce either an upgrade kit or produce new factory fresh variants of QBZ-191, to give it a new FF HG and new barrel nut (basically just a shortened QBU-191 handguard).
Such rifles would become standard fit for SOF/TZBD, rapid response units, airborne, maybe recon elements of normal brigades, who would be equipped to actually adequately make best use of a FF HG.
But would giving a FF HG to everyone be needed or cost effective? Probably not.


Personally I think the QBZ-191 has the right combination of features, and the selected omissions are reasonable. Assuming it performs kinematically in the way the PLA wants it to, it seems like a winner of a rifle design to me.
And the QBU-191 in particular seems like it should be an excellent DMR that can double as a HBAR, as well as a vision of what a more optimized QBZ-191 could look like.

 

[MrCrazyBoyRavi]

I think there's a difference between meeting "expectations of people who want a rifle with all of the trimmings" and "expectations of a service rifle meant to be issued to the world's largest standing military (and other services like armed police".

When you are designing a rifle intended to be used for a nation that large, used by that many service personnel, small design decisions and extra features do end up costing you quite a lot in terms of procurement, ease of manufacture, and depending on the design decision it can influence upkeep as well.



The only "issues" with QBZ-191 that I see, are:
1. non free floated handguard
2. single sided charging handle
3. reciprocating charging handle


I would say that 2. and 3. are not entirely fair criticisms. I believe 2. and 3., if implemented would result in greater cost and more difficulty in manufacture -- and more importantly, I believe 2. and 3. are not features that the PLA brass desired either. It is not unreasonable to say that 2. and 3. would be quite a deviation from the standard PLA manual of arms that they've been used to since the Type 81 and 03 in terms of conventionally configured rifles. That isn't to say the PLA are unwilling to change -- the QBZ 95 as a bullpup, and the bolt release on the QBZ 191, show that clearly there are some things they believe to be worthwhile changing for.

As for 1., I think a proper free floated handguard issued as a standard rifle is likely going to be excessive for your standard soldier. A free floated handguard is useful for a few things, but perhaps most notably it is for IR lasers/aiming devices. Your average soldier in the PLA is not going to be equipped with such equipment. There are of course some benefits for accuracy as well to having a free floated handguard, but again, your average soldier probably isn't going to be able to make full use of that bleeding edge improvements in accuracy when equipped with just the standard 3x prism sight. In the case of the standard QBZ-191, they've clearly considered the effect of their polymer HG solution on stability which is why they've taken so much lengths to have a forward iron sight housing that helps to stabilize the HG with the gas block. Not as good as a proper FF HG, but it does mean it was a conscious decision.
Then there is the issue of cost. A proper FF HG would have to be milled and machined, meaning it will be more expensive by a decent margin compared to the standard 191's polymer handguard. If money was no object, then perhaps they could do it. But money is most certainly finite, and the ability of the average soldier to effectively make use of the benefits of a FF HG is even more finite. So I can understand why this feature was omitted.
Fortunately, the QBZ-191 design means that they can quite easily produce upgrade kit for existing QBZ-191s by changing the barrel nut and changing the handguard to a FF HG. Or they can design and produce a QBZ-191 variant with FF HG -- which they've already really done with the QBU-191 that features a longer and heavier barrel and a FF HG. The design of the QBZ-191 means producing an upgrade kit or a designing a new variant of it with a new FF HG is very easy to do. However it depends on the need.

Personally, I think that going forwards once the standard QBZ-191s are more common place and widely issued, it would make sense to produce either an upgrade kit or produce new factory fresh variants of QBZ-191, to give it a new FF HG and new barrel nut (basically just a shortened QBU-191 handguard).
Such rifles would become standard fit for SOF/TZBD, rapid response units, airborne, maybe recon elements of normal brigades, who would be equipped to actually adequately make best use of a FF HG.
But would giving a FF HG to everyone be needed or cost effective? Probably not.


Personally I think the QBZ-191 has the right combination of features, and the selected omissions are reasonable. Assuming it performs kinematically in the way the PLA wants it to, it seems like a winner of a rifle design to me.
And the QBU-191 in particular seems like it should be an excellent DMR that can double as a HBAR, as well as a vision of what a more optimized QBZ-191 could look like.

Thanks for the detailed reply. I agree to your assessment on why QBZ-191 is what it is today. My only grievance is when you have already poured so much money to develope a capability then why take a slight backstep from perfection? I am sure PLA engineers have capabilities & money to go for it but it feels like Asian trait to not push for that final line.

 

[Blitzo]

Thanks for the detailed reply. I agree to your assessment on why QBZ-191 is what it is today. My only grievance is when you have already poured so much money to develope a capability then why take a slight backstep from perfection? I am sure PLA engineers have capabilities & money to go for it but it feels like Asian trait to not push for that final line.

Because cost effectiveness is still a thing.

Spending extra money for additional capability is sensible if it is worthwhile.


If it is not, then the extra capability will not be procured.

 

[allyerse]

I think there's a difference between meeting "expectations of people who want a rifle with all of the trimmings" and "expectations of a service rifle meant to be issued to the world's largest standing military (and other services like armed police".

When you are designing a rifle intended to be used for a nation that large, used by that many service personnel, small design decisions and extra features do end up costing you quite a lot in terms of procurement, ease of manufacture, and depending on the design decision it can influence upkeep as well.



The only "issues" with QBZ-191 that I see, are:
1. non free floated handguard
2. single sided charging handle
3. reciprocating charging handle


I would say that 2. and 3. are not entirely fair criticisms. I believe 2. and 3., if implemented would result in greater cost and more difficulty in manufacture -- and more importantly, I believe 2. and 3. are not features that the PLA brass desired either. It is not unreasonable to say that 2. and 3. would be quite a deviation from the standard PLA manual of arms that they've been used to since the Type 81 and 03 in terms of conventionally configured rifles. That isn't to say the PLA are unwilling to change -- the QBZ 95 as a bullpup, and the bolt release on the QBZ 191, show that clearly there are some things they believe to be worthwhile changing for.

As for 1., I think a proper free floated handguard issued as a standard rifle is likely going to be excessive for your standard soldier. A free floated handguard is useful for a few things, but perhaps most notably it is for IR lasers/aiming devices. Your average soldier in the PLA is not going to be equipped with such equipment. There are of course some benefits for accuracy as well to having a free floated handguard, but again, your average soldier probably isn't going to be able to make full use of that bleeding edge improvements in accuracy when equipped with just the standard 3x prism sight. In the case of the standard QBZ-191, they've clearly considered the effect of their polymer HG solution on stability which is why they've taken so much lengths to have a forward iron sight housing that helps to stabilize the HG with the gas block. Not as good as a proper FF HG, but it does mean it was a conscious decision.
Then there is the issue of cost. A proper FF HG would have to be milled and machined, meaning it will be more expensive by a decent margin compared to the standard 191's polymer handguard. If money was no object, then perhaps they could do it. But money is most certainly finite, and the ability of the average soldier to effectively make use of the benefits of a FF HG is even more finite. So I can understand why this feature was omitted.
Fortunately, the QBZ-191 design means that they can quite easily produce upgrade kit for existing QBZ-191s by changing the barrel nut and changing the handguard to a FF HG. Or they can design and produce a QBZ-191 variant with FF HG -- which they've already really done with the QBU-191 that features a longer and heavier barrel and a FF HG. The design of the QBZ-191 means producing an upgrade kit or a designing a new variant of it with a new FF HG is very easy to do. However it depends on the need.

Personally, I think that going forwards once the standard QBZ-191s are more common place and widely issued, it would make sense to produce either an upgrade kit or produce new factory fresh variants of QBZ-191, to give it a new FF HG and new barrel nut (basically just a shortened QBU-191 handguard).
Such rifles would become standard fit for SOF/TZBD, rapid response units, airborne, maybe recon elements of normal brigades, who would be equipped to actually adequately make best use of a FF HG.
But would giving a FF HG to everyone be needed or cost effective? Probably not.


Personally I think the QBZ-191 has the right combination of features, and the selected omissions are reasonable. Assuming it performs kinematically in the way the PLA wants it to, it seems like a winner of a rifle design to me.
And the QBU-191 in particular seems like it should be an excellent DMR that can double as a HBAR, as well as a vision of what a more optimized QBZ-191 could look like.

Just to add onto what you said, a little more food for thought.

If they swap the handguard on the carbine/rifle variants, then you pretty much have chinese m4 sopmod block 2 in the makings, and to be fair the original block 1 didn't even have FF HG. The chinese can already issue a block 1 if they want right now, technically they already did in those propaganda flicks and they already offer accessories, so we can infer that a block 1 equivalent defacto exists. Additionally the standard issue m4 that most of the US military uses to this day doesn't have FF HG either. A qbz 191 with FF HG would be very specific in use case (special forces, elite infantry centric units), there's a good chance we probably will see the police get some aftermarket FF HG way before the army even has such a thing. Unless if the government deems it neccesary to order large batches of FF HG and do a full upgrade kit for the regular rifle and carbine, we'll probably see special forces use after market gear if they deem it neccesary, though keep in mind most PLA special forces are not like some FBI HRT team, they are whole formations of troops built for conventional war and have different priorities. Considering this context for SOF, it's even moreso that most recce, airborne, etc won't even bother with FF HG due to this context unless the unit or government deems it of vital importance. Though small batches of this kind of upgrade is something I see as plausible through the aftermarket, and what you mentioned always has a chance of happening, we can't just dismiss it as time goes on. The government did issue qbz 95s with rail upgrades afterall however that is different compared to the qbz 191 which already has such capabilities out of the box where the government won't have the need to add rails just so people can add a grip, or attach a light; what the gov't did in limited numbers for the qbz 95, the qbz 191 already has built in (and more).

 

[Blitzo]

Just to add onto what you said, a little more food for thought.

If they swap the handguard on the carbine/rifle variants, then you pretty much have chinese m4 sopmod block 2 in the makings, and to be fair the original block 1 didn't even have FF HG. The chinese can already issue a block 1 if they want right now, technically they already did in those propaganda flicks and they already offer accessories, so we can infer that a block 1 equivalent defacto exists. Additionally the standard issue m4 that most of the US military uses to this day doesn't have FF HG either. A qbz 191 with FF HG would be very specific in use case (special forces, elite infantry centric units), there's a good chance we probably will see the police get some aftermarket FF HG way before the army even has such a thing. Unless if the government deems it neccesary to order large batches of FF HG and do a full upgrade kit for the regular rifle and carbine, we'll probably see special forces use after market gear if they deem it neccesary, though keep in mind most PLA special forces are not like some FBI HRT team, they are whole formations of troops built for conventional war and have different priorities. Considering this context for SOF, it's even moreso that most recce, airborne, etc won't even bother with FF HG due to this context unless the unit or government deems it of vital importance. Though small batches of this kind of upgrade is something I see as plausible through the aftermarket, and what you mentioned always has a chance of happening, we can't just dismiss it as time goes on. The government did issue qbz 95s with rail upgrades afterall however that is different compared to the qbz 191 which already has such capabilities out of the box where the government won't have the need to add rails just so people can add a grip, or attach a light; what the gov't did in limited numbers for the qbz 95, the qbz 191 already has built in (and more).

Agreed with all the above.

I would say, that a FF HG for QBZ-191 would probably be M LOK rather than quads like on Block II M4, and visually would probably look more like URGI.

I also wonder just how stable the current standard polymer non FF HG for the QBZ-191 is, because even though it is not FF, it doesn't seem like they just phoned it in either, and took efforts to make it more secure.


Also, having an AR style upper and lower receiver configuration with pic rail on the upper, that allows secure mounting of optics at sensible height for the baseline rifle variant, is already a fairly major improvement over anything else the PLA has had in service before as a standard basic service rifle. And it is at least better than what some other new service rifle variants can achieve (AK-12)

 

[pakje]

Would a polymer handguard with some kind of metal insert be good enough to hold zero?

Honestly giving free floated metal hgs to everyone is a kind of a waste, that being said a hg that can hold zero should be what the qbz-191 should strive for.

 

[RedMetalSeadramon]

I think there's a difference between meeting "expectations of people who want a rifle with all of the trimmings" and "expectations of a service rifle meant to be issued to the world's largest standing military (and other services like armed police".

When you are designing a rifle intended to be used for a nation that large, used by that many service personnel, small design decisions and extra features do end up costing you quite a lot in terms of procurement, ease of manufacture, and depending on the design decision it can influence upkeep as well.



The only "issues" with QBZ-191 that I see, are:
1. non free floated handguard
2. single sided charging handle
3. reciprocating charging handle


I would say that 2. and 3. are not entirely fair criticisms. I believe 2. and 3., if implemented would result in greater cost and more difficulty in manufacture -- and more importantly, I believe 2. and 3. are not features that the PLA brass desired either. It is not unreasonable to say that 2. and 3. would be quite a deviation from the standard PLA manual of arms that they've been used to since the Type 81 and 03 in terms of conventionally configured rifles. That isn't to say the PLA are unwilling to change -- the QBZ 95 as a bullpup, and the bolt release on the QBZ 191, show that clearly there are some things they believe to be worthwhile changing for.

As for 1., I think a proper free floated handguard issued as a standard rifle is likely going to be excessive for your standard soldier. A free floated handguard is useful for a few things, but perhaps most notably it is for IR lasers/aiming devices. Your average soldier in the PLA is not going to be equipped with such equipment. There are of course some benefits for accuracy as well to having a free floated handguard, but again, your average soldier probably isn't going to be able to make full use of that bleeding edge improvements in accuracy when equipped with just the standard 3x prism sight. In the case of the standard QBZ-191, they've clearly considered the effect of their polymer HG solution on stability which is why they've taken so much lengths to have a forward iron sight housing that helps to stabilize the HG with the gas block. Not as good as a proper FF HG, but it does mean it was a conscious decision.
Then there is the issue of cost. A proper FF HG would have to be milled and machined, meaning it will be more expensive by a decent margin compared to the standard 191's polymer handguard. If money was no object, then perhaps they could do it. But money is most certainly finite, and the ability of the average soldier to effectively make use of the benefits of a FF HG is even more finite. So I can understand why this feature was omitted.
Fortunately, the QBZ-191 design means that they can quite easily produce upgrade kit for existing QBZ-191s by changing the barrel nut and changing the handguard to a FF HG. Or they can design and produce a QBZ-191 variant with FF HG -- which they've already really done with the QBU-191 that features a longer and heavier barrel and a FF HG. The design of the QBZ-191 means producing an upgrade kit or a designing a new variant of it with a new FF HG is very easy to do. However it depends on the need.

Personally, I think that going forwards once the standard QBZ-191s are more common place and widely issued, it would make sense to produce either an upgrade kit or produce new factory fresh variants of QBZ-191, to give it a new FF HG and new barrel nut (basically just a shortened QBU-191 handguard).
Such rifles would become standard fit for SOF/TZBD, rapid response units, airborne, maybe recon elements of normal brigades, who would be equipped to actually adequately make best use of a FF HG.
But would giving a FF HG to everyone be needed or cost effective? Probably not.


Personally I think the QBZ-191 has the right combination of features, and the selected omissions are reasonable. Assuming it performs kinematically in the way the PLA wants it to, it seems like a winner of a rifle design to me.
And the QBU-191 in particular seems like it should be an excellent DMR that can double as a HBAR, as well as a vision of what a more optimized QBZ-191 could look like.

All these conversations about the charging handle reminds me of the G41 issues. These old boomers insisting that nothing on the surface moves and it results in a gun that needs outrageous machining hours and doesn't work properly. They ended up copying the SVT40 with the G43.

This insistence of non-reciprocating charging handle, adding another separate moving component, moving the cost up, introducing another point of failure shows in my opinion an AR15/American bias. Solid charging handles have performed will in overwhelming instances where they are installed, and the 191 is fine as it is.