I don't know if it's already posted yet, but those QBZ-95 look like very similar to Keltec weapons and K&M rifles:
They bear a very passing resemblance to the Type 97 modifications pictured, The
from 1983.is far closer to resembling the QBZ97.
This was modified and changed makers first to Bushmaster then the KM who basically changed the charging handle location and mounted a length of rail
It was designed from day 1 with rails in mind.
Or there is the HS VHS 2 Rifle
With the Exception of the F2000 and P90 which are FNH getting artistic All Intermediate caliber bullpups have the same silhouette dating back to the EM2 rifles. this is because of there basic needs. The want of a compact magazine feed weapon gas operated ( semi or full auto) with a full length barrel.
To do this they removed the Stock and merged it into the receiver this necessitates a means actuate the trigger group of the rifle which is still in it's natural location behind the magazine and under the bolt. so they needed to create a extension from the sear to the new trigger and pistol grip. And the basic bull pup is born but in the process two things have happened. first the iron sight radius and placement suffers this is because Iron sights normally sit raised on the rifles receiver. but then they merged the stock and receiver the traditional place for the rear sight is not behind your ear when aiming. well the front sight is fine in theory. most Intermediate calibre rifles have a slight change in elevation of the stock vs the receiver this is to allow aligning the eye to the rear iron.
So to fix this in the EM2 the British decided to eliminate the ironsights and went to attempt an optical sight. Many Bullpups after it did the same like the AUG. They created a raised scope that sits on a structure resembling a handle. there's took the Handle and removed the scope they mounted a rear iron in the handle and raised the front iron to match it in a manner akin to the AR15 ( The QBZ95 Does this). Others like the French (FAMAS) extended the "Handle" between the two sights ( like the VHS2 above) forming a Sight bridge.
The other issue that moving the receiver did was shorten the hand grip. traditional rifles have a 2 handed grip the pistol grip and the supporting hand, when the bull pup came about the place one would normally support the weapon from is now either empty space, paynet blade or burning hot barrel. So The Famas extended the hand guard but could only go so far, The AUG added a fold down grip and a full length hand guard that you could support the weapon from and the P90, F2000 Split the difference.
And all was well... Then Rails declared war. Until the mid 1990s the Idea that you would mount more than a Scope and Bayonet to a rifle was limited. There had been some things done Grenade launchers and Ciener Ultimate Over/Under shotguns but those were permanent modifications. the idea that you could add more and remove said modifications was earth shaking. First though Rails had to become common. Prior to about the 1970's it was rare for a weapon to have a scope mount from the manufacturer. Gunsmiths would be used to modify weapons to fit scopes. Those weapons that did have scope mounts usually had there own proprietary system that was only good for scopes and then some scopes as the maker had to make a product that fit the mount then came the Weaver rail which over time allowed a standardized mounting. Basically you went from having to customize a mount to getting only a OEM mount to any system you could fit. the weaver though was lackluster it was far from perfect had limitations but another maker A.R.M.S. took and improved the design into the M1913 Mil Spec rail that solved those, Then then took the rail and started doing something funny. Rather then just on top of the weapon now they placed them on the sides and bottoms as Makers like Surefire started making lights and laser dots for weapons. then someone added a foregrip and bipod. And SOPMOD was born and it expanded to the civilian market and this was the early 1990's. The US started it with the CAR15 that became the M4, HK jumped in on the G36, offering variants with a reduced height rail system lacking the integrated optics.
as more makers jumped on the Bull pup eventually came in. When that happened two Schools of thought emerged the first school was to follow the M4 carbine. That is remove the sight handle flat top the rifle, rail the upper surface the whole length. you see this on the Tavor series, SAR, SA80 updates, F2000, and AUG.
The other was to follow the G36C with a rail system that has some high off the weapon in the form of a "Sight Bridge" with a rail running the length.
Adding Rails to a bull pup depends on the form the rifle takes And the QBZ95 dictates a number of things. first because of the top mounted charging handle location like that on the original AR10, UZI and Famas demands 1 of two options either change the handle like KM did to the M17 to a side mounted or a sight bridge with just enough clearance to access the handle ( like the VHS 2 above). farther more the take down of the rifle used the Carry handle position as a structural point of the rifle. Although the carry handle is a single module the front and rear sights there in are mounted to the barrel to reduce the profile of the weapon demands changing those These demand gunsmithing.
as a result to get a full flat top QBZ9x series carbine you would need to remanufacture the weapons. There have been claims of a QBZ95 1 Flat top from the factory with a side mounted handle .
The absence of bayonet lug means those are civilian model, and that means Type 97.
You should also see there are KeyMod holes (those that were said not fully machined to KeyMod spec). Strange, because KeyMod is open source, no need to worry about patent, and full specs is openly available.
The Keymod cuts are wrong, the Keymod slot has a internal chamfer cut that widens to the interior of the slot verses the exterior. without this cut the Keymod slots on the 97 won't mount. Of course Keymod on the Whole is a flawed system. during US DOD testing for potential use by SOCOM Keymod was tested vs MLOK in point of Shift it had a Spread of .2 to 14.6 MOA, in drop testing Keymod systems failed, in pull tests Mlok held out twice as long. the only advantage was ease of mounting.
