My bent T81

Part of the reason the Chinese chose to create the Type 81 was it offered better full auto accuracy then the AK, due to the way the carrier doesn't hit the back of the gun. Back in the eighties and before, China's military would have been more about fielding much larger numbers of somewhat less trained troops against the smaller, more elite troops of the West. As long as most of the rounds go in approximately the same place, having a few bent rifles in a platoon of saturation automatic fire wouldn't make much of a difference. The SKS has fewer rounds in its standard configuration, and is semi-automatic, so it had to be more accurate by default, even in the hands of the same mass of troops. I suspect the Type 81 may give better accuracy when rapid fired then the SKS, and but worse when single shotted. Could someone who owns both give a rapid fire comparison?
 
Curtton said:
and yet, imho the LMGs are better built than the rifles, go figure.
Click to expand...

The tighter tolerances and heavier barrel required to make a LMG variant function in even heavier full auto usage then the rifle ironically makes it a better quality semi automatic firearm then the rifle variants.
 
Ive seen plenty of pics, watched peoples reviews... still cant bring myself to believe the hype that the LMGs notably surpass the rifles in quality. The only improvements ive gathered are that they peened the mag release pin, pressed in bigger trunnion rivets and to be expected focused a little more on the trunnion alignment (since a longer barrel displays misalignment more then a shorter one).

If i have the spare cash, and can catch the next shipment before they sell out, I may buy a LMG so i can see for myself, but more importantly to build a Tabuk Rifle since the other fella wouldnt do it lol
 
Ustauk said:
Part of the reason the Chinese chose to create the Type 81 was it offered better full auto accuracy then the AK, due to the way the carrier doesn't hit the back of the gun. Back in the eighties and before, China's military would have been more about fielding much larger numbers of somewhat less trained troops against the smaller, more elite troops of the West. As long as most of the rounds go in approximately the same place, having a few bent rifles in a platoon of saturation automatic fire wouldn't make much of a difference. The SKS has fewer rounds in its standard configuration, and is semi-automatic, so it had to be more accurate by default, even in the hands of the same mass of troops. I suspect the Type 81 may give better accuracy when rapid fired then the SKS, and but worse when single shotted. Could someone who owns both give a rapid fire comparison?
Click to expand...

noboby owns anymore sks or t81 ...

in the day i was able to shoot both i find the t81 folder easier to shoot than the sks or t81 not folder but that is just me and for accuracy they re not sniper rifle but both kind hitted the 200m small gong ...
 
Ustauk said:
The tighter tolerances and heavier barrel required to make a LMG variant function in even heavier full auto usage then the rifle ironically makes it a better quality semi automatic firearm then the rifle variants.
Click to expand...

i dont believe its tighter tolerances, i think they are the same and im not talking about the heavy barrel, im talking about the quality in general with some exception of some phosphate finishing. im still baffled with why they phosphate them?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom