chinese small arms thread

[Red Guard]

okay when i said i think 82 has a better look. i just mean i like the look of 82. i don't mean i choose 82 over 81. myself personally think amount all of the service rifles, 81 has the best look.
about 95s. i heard you people. and i also heard the soldiers in the army. so far, the only complaints we got fromt he soldiers, are the first productions of 95 were too ....easy to break. we heard the first production for 97 in hongkong almost all broken down. so far, no other complaints about 95, other than good words about it. soldiers like it short, like it light, like it more accurate. it's basicly a winning rifle of all. we had lots of great argues in chinese military forum. today, we have fewer and fewer of them. 95 is proven to be a good rifle in the services. if the soldiers don't spit on it, why should we? we considered it all. the left hand thing, the smoke, the muzzle flame, the bang on your ears. but so far, no one in the services said a word about those.....maybe chiense soldiers are dumb.
oh and by the way. just because a rifle is out. it doesn't mean it will be issued to the troop. there were 87, 86, 97, and tones of pistols, revolves,, you heard them entering service? no. they were designed to either prove soemthing, or try to sell to someone, or....for fun.

 

[MadMax]

i belive this is the O.I.C.W. that was mentioned earlier

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

has any one noticed that the type 99 anti-material rifle looks verry simaller to the Acuracy international AS50 rifle
heres the type 99

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

heres the AS50

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

the gas system looks almost identical

 

[sumdud]

For the OICW, I think that was really a picture of China's (demo?) laser rifle.

 

[MadMax]

ive heard that a few times but i dont think so because the back rifle magazine has an ejection port over it and so dose the the forward magazine wich is probably a grenade launcher and a lazer wouldnt need an ejection port because there are no shell casings

 

[Red Guard]

ja, no, that's the "chinese OICW". the chinese laser gun is another one.

 

[RedMercury]

a more detailed site on it:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

donfeng used to have a handgun page, but hes probbly reforming it now. ill post any updates.

The 92 pistol's main advantage is the new 5.8mm pistol round, a spitzer round that is claimed to have good penetration against soft body armor. Sort of like the idea behind FN's 5.7mm round. The 9mm version is just for police and export. The pistol is claimed to be very reliable, passing some amusing environmental tests. This is all from a article in Chinese I read awhile ago, judge for yourself.

Check out

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

for an article about the QBU-88. world.guns.ru also have new articles about the new SMG. But of course, their source is just another enthusiast from CDF.

I used to be surprised that they replaced the solid Type-81 (and did not pick the 5.8mm version of it). But after reading articles about the design process of Type-95, how much thought and engineering went into it, I think it's probably a far more modern and well-rounded design, if less mature/proven. Like the AK-47, which is a great, reliable rifle, the Type-81's technology is just outdated. But then, there's the question of how much do you gain by replacing the Type-81 with the Type-95? Such a big change like that (weapon and ammo) has huge costs. So the decision makers must have been impressed enough to bite and bullet and make the switch.

I read in an article written by an enthusiast who got to test fire a Type-95 SAW that the smoke comes from the layer of protective grease the factory puts on it, after that burns off, it's fine. The other initial complaints about the rifle were arguable partly "inertia", soldiers used to the balance of the standard rifle not being used to the balance of the bullpup. But considering the round and the effort that went into balancing the internals, the Type-95 probably has less felt recoil. But I would be freaked out by the spent cartridges flying out near my face! I'm surprised why they don't just put a deflector or something over it.

Oh gosh, just remembered one idea that went into the Type-03. The article was talking about the necessity of a carrying handle. That the bullpup needed one while the traditional type didn't. The problem with the carrying handle was that if optics had to be installed, it would mean the soldier's head was rather exposed (which you can see from some example pics) because of how high the optics would be compared to the barrel. That's why the 03 didn't have a handle.

 

[Nethappy]

The Type 95 might have there hisses and heat after firing but it bullpup design and for infomation it very well suited for Urban combat. Nevertheless, do believe ejected cartridges has to be fix up with a deflector b4 it become the main service rifle. But over all it should be a great design.

The advantage of a bullpup design is great, but what I really like to see is if China can keep up with the level of quality of each rifle. As quality deflect can really hitch a rifle capability.

 

[ahho]

do you think that they can put the cock the gun on the side instead of the top?? this could be a solution of the handle bar causing the ooptics to be put on the handle bar of the type 95

 

[RedMercury]

I think they should worry about the position of the safety as well. Rather difficult to reach in a hurry. Now if it came with optics built-in to the handle, drool. And that front handle strikes me as a bit small, maybe something more handly to handle.

 

[MIGleader]

i belive this is the O.I.C.W. that was mentioned earlier

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

has any one noticed that the type 99 anti-material rifle looks verry simaller to the Acuracy international AS50 rifle
heres the type 99

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

heres the AS50

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

the gas system looks almost identical

they look similar in some aspects, but are no where near identical. The barrels themselves have multiple differences.

for the type 95, it appears to be well balanced.

The rifle is lighter than previous models, so the increased recoil is not a defect, but an unwanted by product.