User talk:BroadArrow

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Feel free to leave a message for BroadArrow here...

[edit] Vz 27

I've expanded the article you started on the Vz 27 by a teensy-tiny bit, after I spotted this picture here. It's a cute little thing. Airport 1975 20:00, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vzor, Vz. Vz, and CZ

I'm trying to get a correct reading of the vernacular here. CZ is the company name and is properly listed as CZ without any punctuation, correct? So, then Vz is shown two different ways both with and without a period after the Vz, right? Now, then, Vzor means Model, right? Why isn't it the CZ Vz. 27, for instance? It's very common for the word "Model" to be left out of firearms names as redundant. For instance, the Remington 700, Winchester 1897, etc. We don't just come out and say, "Model 700" although I would know what you're talking about. Current CZ pistols, according to the web site, are listed as CZ 92, or CZ 83, for instance. So, why should the older models be Vz 50, and the newer models be CZ 75, for instance? I'm just trying to get this correct and universal. Of course, I am of the opinion that it should be, CZ 27 and not CZ Vz. 27, CZ Vz 27, Vz. 27, or Vz 27. What do you think?--Asams10 19:57, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your question! I think it's important that we do resolve the use of CZ/Vz designations on Wikipedia as the variety of styles used is making things confusing!

Personally, I would use "Vz XX" to refer to a Czech military firearm with an official military "vzor" designation and "CZ XX" to refer to commercial firearms made by CZ (if CZ itself called it that, of course). (To be really precise, I would always use "ČZ" instead of "CZ" if it wasn't such a hassle on English keyboards!)

It gets a little confused for three reasons:

1. "CZ" (an acronym for the company Česká Zbrojovka) and "Vz" (an abbreviation of a military designation "vzor") look similar

2. both CZ and the Czech military used years as model numbers

3. CZ made both military and civilian firearms.

For example, I would call a "Samopal vzor 58" (rifle model 58) a "Vz 58" for short although you could also correctly abbreviate it as "Sa Vz 58" although I think it's a little long and cumbersome. (Whether you use stops at the end of abbreviated words is a matter of style; I don't.) So, "Vz 58" is an abbreviation of its Czech military designation. Whether or not it was made by CZ is irrelevant. As it happens, CZ did make Vz 58s. But I would never call a CZ-manufactured Vz 58 a "CZ 58".

Similarly, I would call not a CZ 75 a "Vz 75" as there has never been a "Vz 75" adopted by the Czech military. CZ itself called it a "pistole ČZ vzor 75" in Czech but calls it a "CZ 75" for short.

BroadArrow 10:02, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tavor edit

My bad on the Tavor - I wasn't aware that it can be reconfigured, but I still think that the point needs to be made that you can't simply switch shoulders in the middle of a firefight to shoot around the left side of an obstacle. Your thoughts? Spinolio 04:52, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

No worries. You can change it if you want. Personally, I think saying it can be "configured" implies it requires an alteration more than simply flicking a switch in a firefight.BroadArrow 06:29, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Take a look at the new edit and let me know what you think. Spinolio 17:09, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Fine by me. Although, to be picky, most military rifles weren't designed to be shot by left-handers. At best the controls won't be accessible. At worst, left-handers will get a face full of brass. Well known cases in point are the M16 (before the case deflector was added on the A2) and the M1 Garand just to name a couple. (I have a left-handed friend who insists on shooting his M1 left handed and innevitably gets some nasty cuts on his eyebrow by the end of a competition.) The Tavor and the Steyr AUG are unusual in that they can be used just as effectively by left-handed shooters. I should point out that I don't have an axe to grind on the issue. I think all soldiers should train to shoot right-handed weapons to prevent someone getting a nasty surprise using a comrade's rifle in a firefight. So I think it's a waste of time making them ambidextrous. Just my two cents worth. BroadArrow 08:27, 6 June 2006 (UTC)