| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Talk:QBZ-95: Difference between revisions
S&Wshooter (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
m (Wuzh moved page Talk:Norinco QBZ-95 to Talk:QBZ-95) |
||
| (102 intermediate revisions by 20 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
=Additional Variants= | |||
==QBZ-95== | |||
[[File:Type95-2.jpg|thumb|none|500px|QBZ-95 with proprietary Y/MA 95-002 scope - 5.8x42mm]] | |||
[[File:QBZ95Bs.jpg|thumb|none|500px|QBZ-95B with Y/MA 95-002 scope - 5.8x42mm]] | |||
[[File:QBZ95LG1.jpg|thumb|none|500px|QBZ-95 5.8x42mm with [[LG1 grenade launcher]] 35mm]] | |||
[[File:QBZ-95 Railed Prototype.jpg|thumb|none|500px|QBZ-95 with custom Picatinny rail system - 5.8x42mm. According to some sources, this Picatinny rail system is known as ACP95 or simply ACP, designed by Hong Kong engineer Lei Gaa-hou (李嘉豪).]] | |||
[[File:QBZ-95-1 Picatinny Rail.jpg|thumb|none|500px|QBZ-95 and QBZ-95-1 with custom Picatinny rail system - 5.8x42mm. This Picatinny rail system is known as "长弓" (literally "Longbow"), made by Shenzhen Hanweizhe Industrial Design Co.,Ltd.]] | |||
==QJB-95== | |||
[[File:QBB95Scope.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Earlier version of QJB-95 with Y/MA 95-002 scope - 5.8x42mm]] | |||
[[File:QBB95ds.jpg|thumb|none|500px|QJB-95 with Y/MA 95-002 4x scope - 5.8x42mm]] | |||
==QBZ-97== | |||
[[File:QBZ-97-with-Stanag-mag.jpg|thumb|none|500px| QBZ-97A - 5.56x45mm]] | |||
[[File:QBZ-97.jpg|thumb|none|500px|QBZ-97A with Y/MA 95-002 scope - 5.56x45mm]] | |||
[[File:QBZ-97 Picatinny Rail.jpg|thumb|none|500px|QBZ-97A with "长弓" (literally "Longbow") Picatinny rail system - 5.56x45mm]] | |||
[[File:T97.ca.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Emei Type 97 NSR (Canadian civilian version of the QBZ-97) with T97.ca LHG (Lower Hand Guard) and FTU (Flat Top Upper) modifications - .223 Remington. It is not to be confused with the factory "Gen 2" FTU variant of the Type 97 NSR.]] | |||
[[File:T97NSR with FTU.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Type 97 NSR with FTU unit installed - .223 Remington.]] | |||
==QBZ-97B== | |||
[[File:QBZ-97B.jpg|thumb|none|500px|QBZ-97B with Y/MA 95-002 scope - 5.56x45mm]] | |||
==QJB-97 LSW== | |||
[[File:QBB97.jpg|thumb|none|500px|QJB-97 LSW - 5.56x45mm ]] | |||
[[File:QBB97s.jpg|thumb|none|500px|QJB-97 LSW with Y/MA 95-002 scope - 5.56x45mm ]] | |||
=Discussion= | |||
==changes== | ==changes== | ||
Keep the QBZ-97 carbine as the QBZ-95 carbine because 95 designation means the chinese 5.8x42mm round while the 97 designation refers to the export models which are chambered in 5.56x45 mm NATO and uses M16/AR15 STANAG magazines. | Keep the QBZ-97 carbine as the QBZ-95 carbine because 95 designation means the chinese 5.8x42mm round while the 97 designation refers to the export models which are chambered in 5.56x45 mm NATO and uses M16/AR15 STANAG magazines. | ||
| Line 5: | Line 32: | ||
http://www.securityarms.com/20010315/galleryfiles/1700/1719.htm | http://www.securityarms.com/20010315/galleryfiles/1700/1719.htm | ||
:I remember hearing somewhere that the 5.8 round performs very poorly-[[User:S&Wshooter|S&Wshooter]] 03:43, 20 August 2009 (UTC) | :I remember hearing somewhere that the 5.8 round performs very poorly-[[User:S&Wshooter|S&Wshooter]] 03:43, 20 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
:Just to add on questionable reliability. I saw a Chinese propaganda video on youtube showcasing the weapon system. The guy demoing claims it works after being dunked in water like the HK416. What happened was he did put the rifle in water, unloaded, no round chambered, unlike the H&K demos, then loaded and chambered it after dunking it and waited up to 30 seconds before firing it. By the time you'd fire the rifle, all the water would be out and less likely to have a malfunction anyway. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] | |||
you think everything, but S&W weapons suck @ S&W Shooter | |||
==QBZ-03== | |||
Are we going to add the QBZ-03? Same caliber, but it uses a conventional rifle layout based on the Type 81. I think it was in AO2:TFD. | |||
:If everyone agrees with this, I will add the [[Norinco QBZ-03]] to this page.--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 07:45, 26 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
:I wonder why would China go back to a more AK appearance when the bullpup look was pretty good already [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] | |||
@Excalibur01 | |||
There been alot of complains from the troops that the 95 rifle force them to use right handed even though some might be left handed. Also some complain with the awkard safety position lever.. however this rifle wont be phased out yet! After all it takes many years just to updates all the Chinese army division! The 03 rifle would probably be handed to elite division or special forces most likely. I hope some of these information helps. | |||
Han | |||
:Strange because from what i've read only right handed shooting is taught in East Asian Countries like China. Seeing as being a southpaw is discouraged from birth. --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 06:13, 3 May 2010 (UTC) | |||
::I must admit that as a Chinese, what AdAstra2009 saying is true. Both my mother and my sister were born left-handed, but the parents forced both to write with their right hands. Since my sister is an American-borne Chinese, she's still left handed in most aspects, but my mom seems to be completely right handed now. Left-handed people tend to be forced into "correcting" their dominate hands. This is simply a small part of the large amount of crap that China has that eventually convinced my parents to leave for the US. | |||
When I was reading a Guns & Ammo article on the QBZ series, they showed a photo of a French soldier teaching Chinese how to shoot a bullpup left handed, but it wasn't correct since if he fired the rifle with his cheek against the stock, he'd get a shot of brass in his face. What he should have done was SBU, tilt the rifle so the shells eject down and away. I've heard about China discouraging left handers and some horrible stories about it, but for soldiers, you have to think about it. You need to know how to shoot with your weapon hand being left or right in the event your right arm is disable and you are forced to shoot with your left hand. | |||
The British did a similiar thing with their main rifles. Regular army have the bullpup and Special Forces gets M4s and other traditional rifles [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] | |||
::Most countries that adopted bullpups seem to regret it; soldiers hate them (and not only lefties). The advantages that everyone used to think made them so great seem pretty trivial nowadays. That's why SF units everywhere use AR while regulars use bullpups. Problem is, most of NATO doesn't have the cash (or isn't willing to spend the cash) to replace their bullpup service rifles, so they're stuck with those guns for the foreseeable future. Whereas the PLA has considerably more cash in comparison, so now is the time for them to make the switch. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 19:53, 3 May 2010 (UTC) | |||
:Yeah, China is actually smart about their military adopting the more tried and true look assault rifle. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 21:58, 3 May 2010 (UTC) | |||
I'd like to see some actual sources for this info. It seems the bullpup haters like to speak for everybody and make claims based more on rumors and personal opinion than anything else. I admittedly have no info about the QBZ-95, but then again, China isn't very forthcoming about it's small arms other than maybe exaggerated reports and statistics. You may now proceed to call me a CS/MW fanboy with no real knowledge of anything... | |||
Hughjefender | |||
The main problems with a lot of Bullpup is adapting it for lefties, long trigger pulls and taking too long to reload compared to traditional rifles. Not saying there isn't a lot of advantages to a bullpup. The better ones like the AUG, and the Tavor can change the brass ejection for lefties and the F2000 has a forward ejection. Bullpups are more compact and just as easy to handle. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 21:52, 15 February 2012 (CST) | |||
The QBZ 95-1 is the solution the PLA has for lefties. It ejects to the 1 o-clock position to allow left handed fire. It also has the safety switch on the pistol grip and a bolt release right behind the magazine well. | |||
--[[User:Cifyra|Cifyra]] ([[User talk:Cifyra|talk]]) 21:35, 9 January 2013 (EST) | |||
Okay, so if the QBZ-03 is based on the Type 81, shouldn't it be on ''that'' page instead of this one? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 20:47, 3 February 2018 (EST) | |||
== Type 95 in TV == | |||
I've been watching a lot of new Chinese TV shows and the gun has been showing up a lot [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 21:52, 15 February 2012 (CST) | |||
Are there any actual QBZ-95s that have been exported and used in films? I don't think the ones in 2012 are actual 95s and might be 97s [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 15:31, 28 May 2012 (CDT) | |||
== QBZ-97 == | |||
I believe QBZ-97 is the designation for the 5.56mm rifle with the same trigger guard of the QBZ-95, and QBZ-97A is the designation for the 5.56mm rifle with the trigger guard without the front grip attached. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] ([[User talk:SmithandWesson36|talk]]) 15:30, 29 June 2013 (EDT) | |||
== Drum mag == | |||
Some sources state that the QBB-95's drum mag has a capacity of 75 rounds, while others state 80 rounds. Which one is true? (I think it's 80) Or both are correct? --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 07:20, 2 January 2014 (EST) | |||
The correct answer is 75 rounds.QBB-95 using it's 75 round drum magazine and 30 rounds box magazine,the 30 rounds box magazine for QBB-95 are not interchangeable with QBZ-95 rifles.--[[User:105howitzer|105howitzer]] ([[User talk:105howitzer|talk]]) 01:46, 30 September 2014 (EDT) | |||
:Lol... So even the official [http://world.guns.ru/machine/ch/type-95-lmg-e.html Modern Firearms website] got it wrong? --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 05:50, 1 October 2014 (EDT) | |||
== QBZ-03 Redux == | |||
So its only relation to the QBZ-95 is that it fires the same caliber? By this logic, the AUG, F2000, ARX-160, and L85 should all be on the M16 page. If this is just a rechambered version of the Type 81, then it should be on ''that'' page, not this one. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 09:43, 12 December 2014 (EST) | |||
:I agree. I also think that this page should be renamed since the Chinese QBZ is a designation and not a weapon series. It's a designation based on three words that describe the weapon's properties (almost all weapons adopted by the PLA is designated like this), 轻武器 步枪 自动 (Qing wu qi, bu qiang, zi dong) meaning "light weapon", "rifle" and "automatic". It would like be calling all the Russian weapons "6P weapon series" because they're all listed as "6Pxxx" in the GRAU index. | |||
:And while we're on that, we should probably move the sniper rifles too.--[[User:Wuzh|Wuzh]] ([[User talk:Wuzh|talk]]) 08:07, 22 February 2018 (EST) | |||
While I am thinking about moving the 03 to Type 81, I'm not exactly sure how to rename this page since the current page name is what's keeping the 03 on this page. Removing the 03 would also mean that the page title should be limited down to just the 95 family, but how should we call that? --[[User:Wuzh|Wuzh]] ([[User talk:Wuzh|talk]]) 21:36, 4 May 2018 (EDT) | |||
:We should definitely get rid of the Type 81 from this page, and in the event that we get to separate the QBU-88 sniper rifle and the QBB LMG for it, I guess we can simply call it Norinco QBZ-95 rifle series (or Norinco Type 95 rifle series, if that's what you meant by your previous comment) while keeping the carbine and export variants in it (I mean, the AK-47 page is named as such, even though it includes the AK-101, AK-103, etc.) --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 13:23, 29 May 2018 (EDT) | |||
:: I was just having some weird confusions back there. QBU-88 and the QBZ-03 should be split off from this page and the page should be renamed to Norinco QBZ-95 rifle series. That should be the plan. --[[User:Wuzh|Wuzh]] ([[User talk:Wuzh|talk]]) 01:30, 2 June 2018 (EDT) | |||
I say that the redirect of the so-called QB rifle series should be cut entirely. There is no such thing as the QB rifle series. (and there's also the extremely bizarre ambiguous redirect of QBZ-95/97) --[[User:Wuzh|Wuzh]] ([[User talk:Wuzh|talk]]) 01:48, 2 June 2018 (EDT) | |||
==About its depiction in Warface== | |||
Or in Chinese Passion Leads Army video game. Is this rail system completely fictional or is it based on something real? [[User:Lunar Watcher|Lunar Watcher]] ([[User talk:Lunar Watcher|talk]]) 18:40, 15 May 2018 (EDT) | |||
:Rails for the QBZ-95 are uncommon, but they do exist as custom upper receiver parts or even a plain and simple extra rail piece on the dovetail rails. Factory QBZ-95s all lack rails. As for the RIS in Warface, I think there might be some custom parts like that somewhere out there. --[[User:Wuzh|Wuzh]] ([[User talk:Wuzh|talk]]) 02:35, 2 June 2018 (EDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 19:49, 5 February 2023
Additional Variants
QBZ-95
QJB-95
QBZ-97
QBZ-97B
QJB-97 LSW
Discussion
changes
Keep the QBZ-97 carbine as the QBZ-95 carbine because 95 designation means the chinese 5.8x42mm round while the 97 designation refers to the export models which are chambered in 5.56x45 mm NATO and uses M16/AR15 STANAG magazines.
The carbine version of the QBZ-95 is the CAR-95, see: http://www.securityarms.com/20010315/galleryfiles/1700/1719.htm
- I remember hearing somewhere that the 5.8 round performs very poorly-S&Wshooter 03:43, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
- Just to add on questionable reliability. I saw a Chinese propaganda video on youtube showcasing the weapon system. The guy demoing claims it works after being dunked in water like the HK416. What happened was he did put the rifle in water, unloaded, no round chambered, unlike the H&K demos, then loaded and chambered it after dunking it and waited up to 30 seconds before firing it. By the time you'd fire the rifle, all the water would be out and less likely to have a malfunction anyway. Excalibur01
you think everything, but S&W weapons suck @ S&W Shooter
QBZ-03
Are we going to add the QBZ-03? Same caliber, but it uses a conventional rifle layout based on the Type 81. I think it was in AO2:TFD.
- If everyone agrees with this, I will add the Norinco QBZ-03 to this page.--SB2296 07:45, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
- I wonder why would China go back to a more AK appearance when the bullpup look was pretty good already Excalibur01
@Excalibur01 There been alot of complains from the troops that the 95 rifle force them to use right handed even though some might be left handed. Also some complain with the awkard safety position lever.. however this rifle wont be phased out yet! After all it takes many years just to updates all the Chinese army division! The 03 rifle would probably be handed to elite division or special forces most likely. I hope some of these information helps.
Han
- Strange because from what i've read only right handed shooting is taught in East Asian Countries like China. Seeing as being a southpaw is discouraged from birth. --AdAstra2009 06:13, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- I must admit that as a Chinese, what AdAstra2009 saying is true. Both my mother and my sister were born left-handed, but the parents forced both to write with their right hands. Since my sister is an American-borne Chinese, she's still left handed in most aspects, but my mom seems to be completely right handed now. Left-handed people tend to be forced into "correcting" their dominate hands. This is simply a small part of the large amount of crap that China has that eventually convinced my parents to leave for the US.
When I was reading a Guns & Ammo article on the QBZ series, they showed a photo of a French soldier teaching Chinese how to shoot a bullpup left handed, but it wasn't correct since if he fired the rifle with his cheek against the stock, he'd get a shot of brass in his face. What he should have done was SBU, tilt the rifle so the shells eject down and away. I've heard about China discouraging left handers and some horrible stories about it, but for soldiers, you have to think about it. You need to know how to shoot with your weapon hand being left or right in the event your right arm is disable and you are forced to shoot with your left hand.
The British did a similiar thing with their main rifles. Regular army have the bullpup and Special Forces gets M4s and other traditional rifles Excalibur01
- Most countries that adopted bullpups seem to regret it; soldiers hate them (and not only lefties). The advantages that everyone used to think made them so great seem pretty trivial nowadays. That's why SF units everywhere use AR while regulars use bullpups. Problem is, most of NATO doesn't have the cash (or isn't willing to spend the cash) to replace their bullpup service rifles, so they're stuck with those guns for the foreseeable future. Whereas the PLA has considerably more cash in comparison, so now is the time for them to make the switch. -MT2008 19:53, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, China is actually smart about their military adopting the more tried and true look assault rifle. Excalibur01 21:58, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to see some actual sources for this info. It seems the bullpup haters like to speak for everybody and make claims based more on rumors and personal opinion than anything else. I admittedly have no info about the QBZ-95, but then again, China isn't very forthcoming about it's small arms other than maybe exaggerated reports and statistics. You may now proceed to call me a CS/MW fanboy with no real knowledge of anything... Hughjefender
The main problems with a lot of Bullpup is adapting it for lefties, long trigger pulls and taking too long to reload compared to traditional rifles. Not saying there isn't a lot of advantages to a bullpup. The better ones like the AUG, and the Tavor can change the brass ejection for lefties and the F2000 has a forward ejection. Bullpups are more compact and just as easy to handle. Excalibur01 21:52, 15 February 2012 (CST)
The QBZ 95-1 is the solution the PLA has for lefties. It ejects to the 1 o-clock position to allow left handed fire. It also has the safety switch on the pistol grip and a bolt release right behind the magazine well. --Cifyra (talk) 21:35, 9 January 2013 (EST)
Okay, so if the QBZ-03 is based on the Type 81, shouldn't it be on that page instead of this one? Spartan198 (talk) 20:47, 3 February 2018 (EST)
Type 95 in TV
I've been watching a lot of new Chinese TV shows and the gun has been showing up a lot Excalibur01 21:52, 15 February 2012 (CST)
Are there any actual QBZ-95s that have been exported and used in films? I don't think the ones in 2012 are actual 95s and might be 97s Excalibur01 15:31, 28 May 2012 (CDT)
QBZ-97
I believe QBZ-97 is the designation for the 5.56mm rifle with the same trigger guard of the QBZ-95, and QBZ-97A is the designation for the 5.56mm rifle with the trigger guard without the front grip attached. --SmithandWesson36 (talk) 15:30, 29 June 2013 (EDT)
Drum mag
Some sources state that the QBB-95's drum mag has a capacity of 75 rounds, while others state 80 rounds. Which one is true? (I think it's 80) Or both are correct? --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 07:20, 2 January 2014 (EST)
The correct answer is 75 rounds.QBB-95 using it's 75 round drum magazine and 30 rounds box magazine,the 30 rounds box magazine for QBB-95 are not interchangeable with QBZ-95 rifles.--105howitzer (talk) 01:46, 30 September 2014 (EDT)
- Lol... So even the official Modern Firearms website got it wrong? --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 05:50, 1 October 2014 (EDT)
QBZ-03 Redux
So its only relation to the QBZ-95 is that it fires the same caliber? By this logic, the AUG, F2000, ARX-160, and L85 should all be on the M16 page. If this is just a rechambered version of the Type 81, then it should be on that page, not this one. Spartan198 (talk) 09:43, 12 December 2014 (EST)
- I agree. I also think that this page should be renamed since the Chinese QBZ is a designation and not a weapon series. It's a designation based on three words that describe the weapon's properties (almost all weapons adopted by the PLA is designated like this), 轻武器 步枪 自动 (Qing wu qi, bu qiang, zi dong) meaning "light weapon", "rifle" and "automatic". It would like be calling all the Russian weapons "6P weapon series" because they're all listed as "6Pxxx" in the GRAU index.
- And while we're on that, we should probably move the sniper rifles too.--Wuzh (talk) 08:07, 22 February 2018 (EST)
While I am thinking about moving the 03 to Type 81, I'm not exactly sure how to rename this page since the current page name is what's keeping the 03 on this page. Removing the 03 would also mean that the page title should be limited down to just the 95 family, but how should we call that? --Wuzh (talk) 21:36, 4 May 2018 (EDT)
- We should definitely get rid of the Type 81 from this page, and in the event that we get to separate the QBU-88 sniper rifle and the QBB LMG for it, I guess we can simply call it Norinco QBZ-95 rifle series (or Norinco Type 95 rifle series, if that's what you meant by your previous comment) while keeping the carbine and export variants in it (I mean, the AK-47 page is named as such, even though it includes the AK-101, AK-103, etc.) --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 13:23, 29 May 2018 (EDT)
I say that the redirect of the so-called QB rifle series should be cut entirely. There is no such thing as the QB rifle series. (and there's also the extremely bizarre ambiguous redirect of QBZ-95/97) --Wuzh (talk) 01:48, 2 June 2018 (EDT)
About its depiction in Warface
Or in Chinese Passion Leads Army video game. Is this rail system completely fictional or is it based on something real? Lunar Watcher (talk) 18:40, 15 May 2018 (EDT)
- Rails for the QBZ-95 are uncommon, but they do exist as custom upper receiver parts or even a plain and simple extra rail piece on the dovetail rails. Factory QBZ-95s all lack rails. As for the RIS in Warface, I think there might be some custom parts like that somewhere out there. --Wuzh (talk) 02:35, 2 June 2018 (EDT)