That makes zero flippin sense man ^
The ratio of hits made on target if the shooter does their part is directly a result of the guns grouping capability. The 5moa Type 81 may hit the 10" plate 5 out of 5 times at 200m. But that doesnt mean it will do nearly as well at 500m. Measuring the average group your rifle makes lets u have a understanding of what its capabilities are and anyone who disagrees with that is just making themselves sound like a 9 year old.
I don't see any point in gauging any comm bloc semi auto design past 300 meters using irons (the only way I shoot them). That's at max effective range of the ammo and the platform anyways.
Even picking up my neon orange painted 16" plate in brown and green bush at 300m is challenging. But if I can still get consistent hits with any SKS, CZ858, or Type 81 (they all did) then in my eyes and taking the gun for what it is and what it's designed to do, then measuring which one gets 4 - 5 MOA and which one gets 3.8 - 4 MOA etc etc is irrelevant to me. I think it's irrelevant in general for these firearms but we're never going to see eye to eye on that obviously.
I like to be 100% honest about capability all the time. Even with the Type 81 when I first sighted it in and shot for groups to get the sights as bang on as I could, I could muster a group as tight as my slightly tuned SKS with Tech Sights (honest and consistent 5" to 8" group at 100m resting on a bag off the ground) shooting bulk Chinese ammo. Other groups it would open up and some groups it would be even tighter. That's an average over many groups with no special barrel cooling stupidity or long rest periods.
For the record I shoot 10 round groups. Anyone can shoot 3 or 4 or 5 round groups until they get a lucky one off and pretend that's what it really is.
I've not seen any difference from a lot of personal experience firing them over the last 15 years that's consistent, tangible or definitive between any of the available comm bloc x39 guns in Canada (including the AK47 which is not available) to make accuracy a relative point in weighing one against the other.
Maybe if you add scopes, custom hand loaded ammo, modifications yadda yadda. But taking them all at stock config using surplus ammo with stock irons, accuracy is about the same. And I'm not saying it's bad. It's exactly good enough. That's my personal experience and not reading the absolute bull#### of superhuman "2 MOA comm bloc anything" groups. My Colt SP1 using match .223 Rem couldn't print that with irons and I shoot A LOT.
The topic of the debate here is "Type 81; is it worth it" and it always seems to go to accuracy comparisons for any of these com bloc type rifles for some odd reason when they all shoot more or less exactly the same which is exactly accurate enough as they were designed for.
Just like I said, accuracy is irrelevant in these platforms. It comes down to weighing them against handling, ergonomics, reliability and most of all price point since they all do about the exact same thing after the trigger gets pulled.
I've since sold my Type 81, CZ858s and I've gone back to the good old Chinese SKS with a home trigger job and tech sights for this same reason:
That's 10 rounds, 100 meters Chinese surplus prone off a bag with my SKS with a home trigger job and tech sights. I didn't measure it because again, I don't care.
Type 81 is worth the $1k for what it is IMHO in Canada because it's the only affordable, available, stamped steel one like it. It's still cheaper than an 858. I think the design is more robust than the 858. The rifle just felt a lot more sturdy and components more simple and robust. I liked it when I had it. But my SKS did the same thing for 1/5th the price. So I sold it and bought tech sights and thousands of rounds of ammo
I liked the gun, I liked the ergonomics, I liked the simplicity and the reliability. it was well balanced and it was exactly Comm Bloc rifle MOA accurate.
