Is the type 81 worth it
- Thread starter jagermyster
- Start date
Mumbles Marble Mouth
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Lower Mainland
I recommend to check out 9 hole Reviews on YouTube. He takes just about any military gun you can think of including old bolt actions and tests their effective accuracy out to 500. Some of you might be surprised to see 7.62x39 guns can easily be effective out to 500. It seems there is a major performance drop after 400 but they could still hit targets out to 500.
I've seen enough targets shot at the 500m prone deliberates to know that 7.62x39 surplus in the majority of service rifles chambered in them are not effective at that distance.
Area and suppressive fire? Sure.
Performance tanks hard past 300m and even that is a stretch for most rifle/surplus combos. It really is a 100-200m cartridge - exactly what it was designed for.
No it isnt. There has been a few owners who have mounted and blended wood grips to the original lower handguards tho.
But yet it was replaced by a plastic bullpup with a spongy trigger. Yup it must have been the Sh!t lol
It was replaced for weight savings not reliability. Chinese forces don't need a heavy rifle anymore.
Happens often in the gun community, I find. People expecting precision rifle accuracy from rifles designed for 300m or less is common.
Mumbles Marble Mouth
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Lower Mainland
His series of videos tests the guns combat effectiveness. You can check all the other videos of 7.62x39 guns but they all do impressively pretty well. Many of the misses are due to them converting meters to yards. This Chinese AK turned out to be a more effective combat rifle than a side folding stock FN FAL. I disagree with you. The 7.62x39 is more than capable up to 400 meters or in this videos case, 457 meters.
Last edited:
Cuz the 81 was nothing but a stop gap rifle, China’s real first attempt to develop and manufacture a firearm in one go and they did so with the intention of it never really being adopted as it was more of a test to see if they could do it. But as with all things politics plays a huge rule in wether a country will adopt it hell if politics didn’t play a part in decisions maybe the US would have adopted the FAL instead of pursuing the so called “cost effective” m14 built from M1 Garand tooling they sold themselves on. First thing that comes to mind for a plastic bullpup with a spongy trigger would be like the tavor, aug, famas and a that new kel tec bullpups in general don’t have good triggers.
And as China put it they wanted a Chinese firearm developed and produced in China using their own designed 5.8x42mm ammo and they already knew a bullpup offered a better advantage in some aspects but when your government owns everything they can do whatever they want. Or in the end it’s just a sh!t rifle since the Chinese are working on a non bullpup qbz-03 of the more conventional layout that’s been trickling out to service using a very similar rotating bolt lock and short stroke gas piston of the type 81 who would have guessed.
Kinda hoping maybe TI can get these imported to Canada as they made some in 5.56 using stanag mags
Last edited:
Cant argue with that video, they even mention that they measured 2-3moa groups with that gun. So obviously they didnt think measuring groups from a combloc gun was a stupid idea either. Somebody should tell them that their wasting there time having fun exploring the limits on that "bullet hose's" range....
The video you posted supports my statement...not that I needed it to confirm what I've seen and recorded in the butts time and time again....
At 350 yds he missed 65% of his shots
At 400-450 yds he missed 70% of his shots
At 500 yds he missed all but 2, and one was a squeaker on the lip of the 3' gong.
Move the shooter off of a nice level, prepared, comfy shooting position and the results spiral quickly. That isn't effective fire; it's suppressive fire.
Fun blaster to shoot gongs or run and gun at a 3gun match? no question, I can agree with that.
Mumbles Marble Mouth
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Lower Mainland
Yea I still disagree with you.
Mumbles Marble Mouth
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Lower Mainland
@#$% man! That last shot he would of hit that guy in the willy.
People don't seem to think that even if you gun was shooting terrible like 5" at 100 meters, you would be shooting 10" at 200 and 20" at 400. Sounds like a pretty large spread but that's not even 2ft. Easily effective at that kind of distance.
Last edited:
Travis Bickle
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Upper Lower Middle Alberta
I've been saying this for years on this site. The number of people that s**t on red rifles for their "bad accuracy" don't understand what practical combat rifle accuracy is or the military doctrine that created these designs.
There's a huge difference between effective accuracy and precision accuracy.
All the x39 comm bloc guns, even at 5 to 8 MOA or whatever are still extremely effective out to 300m and beyond. Granted beyond 300 with stock config irons is more about being able to see the target and hold any semblance of sight.
They get a bad rap for their "innacuracy" because people tend to choose to believe that unless a gun can shoot 10 rounds through the same hole it's junk.....
The "red rifles" sacrifice some accuracy in the name of reliability but most important (and often over looked) ease of manufacture. Cheapest materials mass produced and slammed together as quickly and efficiently as possible. Designs that make this possible tend to not result in a rifle that will shoot 1moa groups obviously (side note neither will any much more expensive and harder to produce rack grade western semi auto rifles)
But they'll hit a torso out to 300m and beyond all day and that is exactly as effective for a combat rifle as one that shoots groups you can measure with a set of calipers.
Ie they're exactly accurate enough.
It's people's expectations and their lack of being in touch with reality that is flawed. Not the comm bloc hardware Comrades
Last edited:
