| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Talk:Sa vz. 58: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
Commando552 (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
Shouldn't the proper name of this page be '''Sa vz. 58''' and not '''SA Vz. 58''' as it's suppose to be short for '''Sa'''mopal '''vz'''or 19'''58'''? Isn't it only when an abbreviation is made up of two individual words ('''A'''vtomat '''K'''alashnikova) that both letters are capitalized in an acronym ('''AK''')? --[[User:Thejoker|Thejoker]] ([[User talk:Thejoker|talk]]) 18:38, 19 March 2013 (EDT) | Shouldn't the proper name of this page be '''Sa vz. 58''' and not '''SA Vz. 58''' as it's suppose to be short for '''Sa'''mopal '''vz'''or 19'''58'''? Isn't it only when an abbreviation is made up of two individual words ('''A'''vtomat '''K'''alashnikova) that both letters are capitalized in an acronym ('''AK''')? --[[User:Thejoker|Thejoker]] ([[User talk:Thejoker|talk]]) 18:38, 19 March 2013 (EDT) | ||
:I would agree that "SA" is wrong as it is from one word, however it confuses me why there would be a period after the first abbreviated word but not the second. However I think we should go with Sa vz. 58 as that is what the current manufacturer CSA (Czech Small Arms) who makes the modern variants like the Carbine and the Compact call it on [http://www.csa.co.cz/en/15-produkty/19-civilian.html their site]. CZ USA also refer to it as the [http://cz-usa.com/products/view/vz-58-military-sporter/ Sa vz. 58] on their site, although not consistently. Either way it needs to be standardised as something as there are three different ways of writing it on this page alone. Anyone think Sa vz. 58 is wrong? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 19:29, 19 March 2013 (EDT) | |||
Revision as of 23:29, 19 March 2013
Aditional Variants
Not like the StG. 44
The article claims that the Vz's internals are close to the StG. 44, but there are significant differences:
StG - Long-stroke gas piston
Vz - Short-stroke gas piston
StG - Hammer fired
Vz - Striker fired
StG - Non-reciprocating charging handle
Vz - Reciprocating charging handle
StG - Tilting bolt (the entire bolt assembly)
Vz - Linearly-moving bolt with separate tilting breechblock
71.193.180.188 04:03, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
Name of this gun?
What is the proper name for this gun? Wikipedia calls it the "SA vz. 58", the manufacturer "SA vz.58" the page name is "SA Vz.58" and the sections are "Sa. Vz. 58V". Which one is correct? --commando552 (talk) 05:17, 9 November 2012 (EST)I am from the Czech Republic and so you can explain it: There are 2 variants of SA Vz. 58. The designation "V" means paratrooper (czech: "výsadkár") , the designation P denotes infantry (czech: "pechota").--Pandolfini (talk) 07:56, 10 November 2012 (EST)
Compact variant looks rather cartoonish
Does the compact version of this gun look cartoonish to anyone else? I mean, I know it's just because it's extremely compact, but to me, it just looks like a cartoonishly-proportioned rifle, like it's supposed to be full-sized, but the magazine is disproportionately large. Jeddostotle7 (talk) 22:20, 14 November 2012 (EST)
Page Name?
Shouldn't the proper name of this page be Sa vz. 58 and not SA Vz. 58 as it's suppose to be short for Samopal vzor 1958? Isn't it only when an abbreviation is made up of two individual words (Avtomat Kalashnikova) that both letters are capitalized in an acronym (AK)? --Thejoker (talk) 18:38, 19 March 2013 (EDT)
- I would agree that "SA" is wrong as it is from one word, however it confuses me why there would be a period after the first abbreviated word but not the second. However I think we should go with Sa vz. 58 as that is what the current manufacturer CSA (Czech Small Arms) who makes the modern variants like the Carbine and the Compact call it on their site. CZ USA also refer to it as the Sa vz. 58 on their site, although not consistently. Either way it needs to be standardised as something as there are three different ways of writing it on this page alone. Anyone think Sa vz. 58 is wrong? --commando552 (talk) 19:29, 19 March 2013 (EDT)