How about some thoughts on China's switch from the QBZ-95 series to the Type-03?
Not the 03, but some sort of Sino-ACR. For them modularity n shit.
>>34006634
They never switched, instead they have it coserviced with the 95 last I check on it.
>>34007532
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/05/18/chinese-pla-ground-forces-marines-replace-qbz-95-1-completely-new-non-bullpup-rifle/
>>34007540
Yeah, 95-1 with normal troops, 03 for armed police and airborne, as well as light infantry.
>>34007554
>bullpup.
>literally made for airborne and light infantry.
Why are chinks fucking retarded? Did they look at western weapons and just ape them without knowing why?
>>34007554
>>34007578
Most airborne still use the 95 tho
>>34007578
They noticed that when folded, the 03 is more compact than the 95.
>>34007578
The PLA also use that retarded .223 knock off. The 5.8mm they claim has better ballistics.
>>34008072
Some western guy tested it and the 77 grain heavy round is actually pretty good.
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/08/16/modern-intermediate-calibers-016-5-8x42mm-chinese/
>>34008481
But they are all steel core ammo, so bad wounding against unarmored targets.
>>34008492
That earliest DBP-88 heavy ball was also noticeably larger (black lacquered case)
>>34008072
>.223 knock off.
It seems like it's closer to the aborted 6mm SAW dimensions-wise.