Jump to content

Talk:Zastava M92

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Submachine gun?

[edit]

Since when was 7.62x39 considered a pistol catridge? Isn't this better described as a Carbine? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.179.67.6 (talk) 19:36, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Assault carbine

[edit]

I completely agree with this statement above. I was the one which changed that to assault carbine, but somebody very ignorant again changed my correction. I don't know how does Wikipedia allows that mistake at all. The Zastava M92 does not have anything to do with being a submachine gun. The submachine gun is a automatic weapon that fires pistol cartridges, the H&K MP5 is a prime example of this - an automatic weapon that fires 9x19mm pistol ammunition. M92 in contrast, fires intermediate cartridges (assault rifle ammo), the 7.62x39mm. If the M92 is an submachine gun, then the Zastava M70 is also, in fact then, the assault rifle as a type of the weapon doesn't exist at all.

About the case is it a carbine, obviously, the author which fanatically refers it to a submachine gun does not know what is carbine at all. The carbine is a shortened version of any rifle, in this case, the Mauser K98 is a prime example of this, it is a shortened version of original rifle, the Gewehr 98. M92 is a shortened version of the M70, which is an assault rifle, what makes the M92 an ASSAULT CARBINE. Although, it can be theoretically referred as an 'assault rifle', but please, do not refer it to a 'submachine gun' anymore, because that is an ignorant mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by M4mihulja (talk • contribs) 09:07, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Let me explain

[edit]

It is not a Carbine.Btw:The "Assault Carbine" is not a category or type, it refers to some M4 derivatives.

Reasons:

  • -The Barrel lenght isn't compatible with a carbine
  • -The effective range is not compatible with a carbine-It would be one the worst carbines ever made
  • -The overall lenght is not compatiple with a carbine
  • -The sights are compatible with a submachine gun
  • -The concept of the weapon:It was conceived as SUBMACHINE GUN-If you don't believe it, then you can ask directly the manufacturer, Zastava Arms.Why do they call it "submachine gun", if it is a carbine???

The JNA always used it as a submachine gun, the contractors and the bodyguards are still using it in the same role...are all of them stupid and ignorant?Does the manufacturer know what is he actually manufacturing?

Take a look at this(Directly from the manufacturer):http://www.zastava-arms.rs/en/militaryproduct/submachine-gun-m92

Conclusion: The only thing that is not compatible with a submachine gun is the caliber-this caliber was choosen in order ensure a better penetration without changing the overall lenght.You cannot claim that the weapon is a carbine only because it is not chambered for pistol ammo.This would mean that you take in consideration only one characteristic and ignore everything else.

Answer on fairy tale above

[edit]

I must say that I came across many ignorance through the internet, but such like this above is just horrible, one of the worst I have ever saw, to be honest. I should say a lot of bad things with right, but I stay polite and will continue to do so.

Yes, the M92 is a carbine, like I have stated above and proved with all possible logical reasons. Firstly, your statements are complete contradictory - According to your edit on the article, only the Zastava M92 is a submachine gun, while Zastava M85 together with original Soviet models, the AKMSU and AKS-74U which are also mentioned and for which is mentioned that they are carbine as a type of a weapon, are interestingly, carbines for you...

Also, you made a complete nonsense in the prologue of the article, according to you, a shortened barrel version of some rifle is a 'submachine gun'? Then what is a carbine for you? You also probably never even checked your link for a submachine gun, which you are fanatically refering to, because in the very first sentence says that submachine gun is an automatic weapon that fires pistol cartridges. This is the first and most important designation of a submachine gun. The submachine gun CANNOT fire rifle, to be even worse, intermediate cartridges in this case, so already on that we can conclude that M92 is not an submachine gun.

Secondly, your stated reasons are also complete nonsense full of ignorance:

The barrel length, together with overall length (Barrel length is actually a part of overall length, so your low intelligence can be clearly shown here) are totally irrelevant for discussing the weapon's type, in other words, that doesn't determine anything at all. Where is the rule in which it clearly says how much long has to rifle be to be called a carbine? You must understand that weapons are all different by design, and that all have different barrels, in other words, it is impossible to determine the exact length for a carbine, submachine gun, sniper and etc. You are just comparing all weapons with the M4A1 carbine, and if some weapon has shorter carbine, it is automatically a submachine gun for you. Your first reason fails completely.

Effective range? Do you know of what you are talking about? M92 uses 7,62x39mm M43 intermediate caliber, its small barrel gives it 680m/s of muzzle velocity, together with its weight of 2kg, because of which it has a higher recoil, has effective range of around 200m, what is inferior to assault rifles, BUT completely SUPERIOR to any submachine gun. Do you know the effective range of average submachine gun at all? It is about 50m, because of using a PISTOL ROUND! MP5 has this exact range, because of using heavier and smaller 9x19mm round, which because of that has a bigger recoil and smaller muzzle velocity (even more smaller when combined with a shorter barrel of the MP5), and due to that it has an effective range of only 50m. So, your second analogy also fails.

About sights, your heavy ignorance is once more shown here - Submachine guns does not have ADJUSTABLE sights, in contrast to assault rifles. M92 has different sight of the M70AB2, but it DOES HAVE adjustable sights like it, so your third claim also fails to prove anything at all. It is clear that you are only looking for differences in design of M70AB2 and M92, and when you find any, you automatically put that difference into a submachine gun class - A prime proof of your knowledge about the topic.

Your last statement is just pointless like the rest, but about Zastava Arms - Yes, they are marking M92 as a submachine gun, because sole M92 is a modified copy of Soviet AKMSU carbine. In other words, they themselves do not know what they are talking about at all, because they are only making modified copies. If Soviets marked AKMSU as a carbine (assault carbine to be more precise, because it is a shortened barrel version of the assault rifle, the AKMS), so how then can its copy, the M92 be an submachine gun, which is also a shorter barrel version of its original, the M70AB2? Fine proof of Zastava's ignorance is also about the case with the M70 assault rifle - they marked it as an automatic rifle (Automatska puška), instead of assault rifle.

Another of your already many proofs of ignorance is the fact about JNA - the JNA NEVER used M92, because it disbanded 1990., while M92 came yet in 1992 in very small numbers. And can you explain what does mean when you say 'It is used as submachine gun'?

Conclusion is as follows - THE ZASTAVA M92 IS AN ASSAULT CARBINE, BECAUSE IT IS A SHORTENED BARREL VERSION OF THE ASSAULT RIFLE, THE M70AB2. IT IS NOT A SUBMACHINE GUN BECAUSE OF USING THE ASSAULT RIFLE'S ROUND AND BECAUSE OF BEING A SHORTENED VARRIANT. SUBMACHINE GUN USES STRICTLY PISTOL AMMO AND SUBMACHINE GUN IS NOT A DERIVATIVE (SHORTENED VERSION, IN THIS CASE) OF ANYTHING. IF M92 IS A SUBMACHINE GUN, THEN THE CARBINE AS A TYPE OF WEAPON DOES NOT EXIST AT ALL, WHAT IS AWFULLY WRONG. AND IF ORIGINAL SOVIET AKMSU AND AKS-74U ARE CARBINES, THEN ITS MODIFICATIONS, THE M92, TOGETHER WITH M85 ARE ALSO.

Man, you are a proof of huge ignorance. Please, stop arrogantly changing the weapon's type, because your claims does not have anything to do with reality. Buy a book about weapons and read it. And, do not twist my words, because I never said that anyone here is stupid and I will not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.141.122.206 (talk) 14:31, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Zastava M92. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:23, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Subjectivity in article...

[edit]

I see a lot of statements in the article made which come across as subjective opinion. I agree with a lot of them, but it doesn't feel professional, and should probably have some citations attached. It reads a little like a sales pitch.

On the subject of whether this would be called a submachine-gun or an assault rifle, this would come down a lot to language. In English, submachine-gun would describe an automatic weapon which fires pistol cartridges (generally excluding literal pistols capable of fully automatic fire), thus in English firearms nomenclature, the M92 would not be regarded as a submachinegun given that 7.62x39mm is considered a rifle cartridge. The M92, being a shortened down variant of a full length assault rifle design, can be regarded as a carbine variant of said rifle. In English, carbine would be referring to either a shorter version of an existing rifle, or a rifle which is designed with the intent of being short, often lightweight, and firing a rifle cartridge.

An example of where nomenclature can differ; in Swedish language, "automatkarbin" (automatic carbine) is used interchangeably for a select-fire infantry combat rifle, regardless of if it's in a larger rifle cartridge such as 7.62x51mm NATO and 7.92x57mm Mauser, or if it's in an 'intermediate' rifle cartridge like 5.56x45mm NATO, 5.45x39mm, and 7.62x39mm, in English terms, there's been this move in recent decades to reclassify 'assault rifles' in large cartridges such as the previously mentioned as 'battle rifles', to differentiate them from intermediate caliber rifles. Swedish also doesn't seem to make much difference on length, the Swedish AK5 (a license clone of the Belgian FNC) is referred to as an automatic carbine, at the same time, the older AK4 (a license clone of the German G3), is also referred to as an automatic carbine, in spite of being a full length rifle and longer than the AK5.

My point would be that firearms nomenclature doesn't interchange 1 to 1 between all languages, and while it may be correct to refer to the Zastava M92 as a sub-machinegun in Serbian nomenclature, it is not appropriate to English nomenclature. 88.129.163.155 (talk) 15:11, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Zastava_M92&oldid=1208135015"