| 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:FG 42: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
[[File:FG42.jpg|thumb|none|450px|FG 42 7.92x57mm Mauser early version with ZFG42 scope (top) and late-war version with ZF4 scope (bottom)]] | [[File:FG42.jpg|thumb|none|450px|FG 42 7.92x57mm Mauser early version with ZFG42 scope (top) and late-war version with ZF4 scope (bottom)]] | ||
[[File:FG42 2nd with bipod and bayonet.jpg|thumb|none|450px|FG 42 second model with bipod and bayonet deployed - 7.92x57mm Mauser]] | [[File:FG42 2nd with bipod and bayonet.jpg|thumb|none|450px|FG 42 second model with bipod and bayonet deployed - 7.92x57mm Mauser]] | ||
[[File:FG 42-1 granatnik.jpg|thumb|none| | [[File:FG 42-1 granatnik.jpg|thumb|none|451px|FG 42/I with [[Schiessbecher]] grenade launcher - 7.92x57mm Mauser]] | ||
=Discussion= | =Discussion= | ||
Revision as of 14:01, 2 June 2023
Additional Images
Discussion
Hello, I'm pretty sure the ZFG-42 is the optic seen on the early pattern FG-42, not the late pattern one.
- OngYingGao (talk) 05:55, 21 January 2017 (EST)
Can the FG 42 be categorized as a Machine Gun?
Right now the page categorizes as a Battle Rifle. However, other sources out there categorize it as an automatic rifle/light machine gun. Are these categories valid? --Wuzh (talk) 19:36, 28 November 2018 (EST)
- I'd certainly say so; it was intended as a hybrid rifle/LMG hybrid, hence some of its strange features (e.g. the closed-bolt semi-auto/open-bolt full-auto setup, the presence of a bipod and a bayonet, etc.). It's sort of like what the U.S. intended with the M14, except that it actually worked as a support weapon, instead of trying to physically wrench itself from your grasp in full-auto. Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 21:41, 28 November 2018 (EST)