QBZ-191 service rifle family

TerraN_EmpirE said:

He posted that add on as I was writing. I haven’t seen any adverts for a QBZ 191 airsoft rifle yet. Given the relatively new status of the weapon and lack of solid details it’s probably costom which is why I would favor model. Probably a 3 D printed shell with the guts of a off the shelf AEG. Fitted with airsoft replica accessories.

Click to expand...

Then he must've a lot of time on hand to make those models, but I really inclined to say those are 3D-printed models because those "guns" totally lack of serial markings and stuff on the body.

PikeCowboy said:

How does this compare with the Japanese 20 5.56?

Click to expand...

That we really don't know.

HOWA Type 20 as it was debuted, has many parts and accessories from other manufacturers like KAC and Magpul, and even the sample has prototype etched on the upper receiver body thus indicated its iteration status, so we don't know if all that will become standard in production model.

Also, "performance" will require some range shooting results to compare with. QBZ-191 has seen undergoing some range test firing in the news segment but its results were not shown; HOWA Type 20 shown with only dry firing.

Besides, if you want a "compare", then you'd need some "back-to-back" session by the same shooter at the same shooting range going through a few mags of standard issue ammo. No, I don't think even the CIA or DoD can arrange to "obtain" both guns' production version for such comparison shootout. And certainly Sino-Japan relationship is nowhere near the level that PLA and JGSDF would perform joint training exercise where both sides bring their best toys to the occasion, do cross-training and stuff.

I would say almost Identical.
first both emerged about the same time with similar concepts for ergonomic features. Yeah the Type 20 has Mlok and in theory would allow more but most of that space isn’t used for more than grip panels. Both likely have similar available sightings systems and accessories in mind. In reliability the PMAG type corrects the longest issue of the 5.56mm class and both likely use short stroke gas piston. So it would come down to ammo and 5.56x45mm vs 5.8x42mm is academic. It’s not like 5.56x45 x 7.62x39 where you have clearer delineation of one being lighter and longer range vs the other heavier and shorter.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

I would say almost Identical.
first both emerged about the same time with similar concepts for ergonomic features. Yeah the Type 20 has Mlok and in theory would allow more but most of that space isn’t used for more than grip panels. Both likely have similar available sightings systems and accessories in mind. In reliability the PMAG type corrects the longest issue of the 5.56mm class and both likely use short stroke gas piston. So it would come down to ammo and 5.56x45mm vs 5.8x42mm is academic. It’s not like 5.56x45 x 7.62x39 where you have clearer delineation of one being lighter and longer range vs the other heavier and shorter.

Click to expand...

I noticed neither QBZ-191 and Howa Type 20 have folding stock. QBZ-191 most likely could be fitted with m-lok rail if necessary. QBZ-191 is ergonomically inspired by HK416 while Howa Type 20 is inspired by FN SCAR/ACR. Anyone know why PLA soldiers are seen more often with the 10.5" version of QBZ-191 than with the 14.5" version?

Kejora said:

I noticed neither QBZ-191 and Howa Type 20 have folding stock. QBZ-191 most likely could be fitted with m-lok rail if necessary. QBZ-191 is ergonomically inspired by HK416 while Howa Type 20 is inspired by FN SCAR/ACR. Anyone know why PLA soldiers are seen more often with the 10.5" version of QBZ-191 than with the 14.5" version?

Click to expand...

Currently the QBZ 191 is still in very early stages of issue. As such, all the pictures of the issued rifles issued on parade came from either Special Forces/Commando/Elite units or mechanised units. Hence why carbine variants are the ones we have yet to see in any numbers.

As the issue of the rifle becomes more widespread, we can expect to see full-length rifles, DMR, or even SAW variants (I’ve not yet seen evidence for a SAW variant, but possible with a drum or quad stack magazine.).

I noticed that western/NATO rifles typically have a much longer magazine well whereas China's/Soviet pattern rifles typically have a much more shallow magazine well... difference between rock n' load vs plug and play? lol

Any advantages for one or the other? It seems that both sides stay quite consistently with their respective patterns.

Kejora said:

I noticed neither QBZ-191 and Howa Type 20 have folding stock. QBZ-191 most likely could be fitted with m-lok rail if necessary. QBZ-191 is ergonomically inspired by HK416 while Howa Type 20 is inspired by FN SCAR/ACR. Anyone know why PLA soldiers are seen more often with the 10.5" version of QBZ-191 than with the 14.5" version?

Click to expand...

Both could still get folders as they are both very new. I wouldn’t say the QBZ 191 is HK416 inspired it’s just as much ACR or IWI ACE inspired. They have similar ideas.

PikeCowboy said:

I noticed that western/NATO rifles typically have a much longer magazine well whereas China's/Soviet pattern rifles typically have a much more shallow magazine well... difference between rock n' load vs plug and play? lol

Any advantages for one or the other? It seems that both sides stay quite consistently with their respective patterns.

Click to expand...

Speed of reload. The 5.56x45mm class is built around the same magazine with few exceptions that was based direct off the AR15. The advantage being fast drop in reloading. Push button magazine clears the well in goes the new one. The AK series is built on an older rock and latch concept not as fast but easier to make less expensive in materials.

^ ah I see thanks, you need an extra movement to press the mag release in the AK pattern but there's very minimal movement needed to push the button release for the AR pattern.

I watched a couple of reloads for the AK47 vs the AR15 and the AK47 you needed to charge the rifle after reload but for the AR15 you don't. Is that the bolt hold open function? Does the QBZ191 have that?

It looks like even with the QBZ95 you have that disadvantage vs the AR15... I don't know how significant that reload speed disadvantage is in the military vs in police action or shooting sports.

It’s violence of action. If caught in an ambush or laying an ambush the ability to lay down more fire than the other guy is often the deciding factor in whether you love of die.

Live* not love.... although that Sounds rather unromantic. A example of what I mean is that in Iraq and Afghanistan insurgents were found to avoid attacking US SF team vehicle convoys but favored US conventional even though they often used the same vehicles. Why? US SF mounted miniguns conventional didn’t. US SF forces started hiding their weapons. Conventional US forces mocked up Mini gun shells over their conventional MGs and the Insurgents reversed their behavior. That’s violence of action. The Mini gun’s faster rate of fire made ambushing forces want to avoid them due to the casualties inflicted in the counter assault.
in small arms the same factor works for infantry the ability to lay down more fire and explosive force on the adversary whether they are the ambushed or ambusher can mean the difference between life and death. Even if the weapon used on paper is inferior. Like a M107 vs a MP5. At close range it’s 10 shots vs 30. And a dozen 9mm will kill just as well as a 12.7mm.

from the looks of the videos the LRBHO is much more important for reload rate compared with whether you use the button release or the AK mag release. From looking at the rifle it seems that the QBZ191 doesn't have this function again, at least I can't see a bolt release button. I guess PLA still subscribes to the idea that fewer moving parts = more reliable weapon... 1 fewer spot for dust to get into/fail/jam

Speaking of mag releases though it looks like the rifle that lost the competition did have mag release button and kind of follows the NATO AR pattern for reloading.