Jump to content

Talk:Saiga-12

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Comments

I removed the referance to "America's Army" as the Saiga-12 does not make an apearance in any version of the game. --Paulwharton

Poorly written —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.54.253.250 (talk) 20:02, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the "shortcomings" section, which had previously stated that the Saiga-12 could not be loaded on a closed bolt. It's quite possible, if anyone would like to know how, leave a note on my talk page. As for the below, why is it not relevant for an encyclopedia? The opinions stated aren't relevant to the argument (and the Saiga-12 is not a "bigger caliber" than any other 12-guage). --rwjohnst

This Article is not relevant for an encyclopedia. I suggest the author moves it to a wiki for fans of fire arms. Further, this weapon is not good for anything but injuring/killing civilians. Shot guns for hunting don't need to be semi-automatic and have a bigger caliber and better effective range anyway. This weapon is only good for show-offs and other wankers. --braeutigam

Ah, but our very own page on the subject states that an encyclopedia "is a comprehensive written compendium that contains information on all branches of knowledge or a particular branch of knowledge"... While I'm here, would anyone be willing and able to come up with a good copylefted photo of the complete unit, rather than just the dismantled parts? --BobBQ 04:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Calling people names is the best way to really show that you know what you're talking about. The Saiga 12 does have sporting purposes such as hunting, standard clay and target shooting, it is also a very popular firearm in 3-Gun events; as well as self-defense and military applications. --vbrtrmn —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vbrtrmn (talk • contribs) 21:34, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the original author and would be glad to provide complete photos of my gun. Sorry, I should have done this originally.

This encyclopedia has contained information on firearms since its inception, presumably because firearms have played an important role throughout modern history and in general human affairs for several centuries. This entry discusses a significant member of the shotgun family.

Regarding this comment "Further, this weapon is not good for anything but injuring/killing civilians." I would remind you that self-defense is a perfectly legitimate civilian activity. Additionally, the same reliability and ergonomics concerns that make it excellent for combat also make it an excellent hunting arm. You can buy capped off magazines for hunting waterfowl.

Beerslurpy 01:22, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also Protip: You're about a century late for complaining about semi-automatic shotguns. Kthxbye. --Sctn2labor (talk) 00:31, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and youre correct about being able to reload on a closed bolt, but it is a pain in the ass and not something I would attempt under stress.

Beerslurpy 01:24, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the Saiga-12 and Vepr-12 shotguns are made in Russia and exported worldwide. I removed some US specific verbiage about importation and if anyone can find any further ways to make this more globally relevant, please post it here.

Beerslurpy 01:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article mentions which other calibres the Saiga line is availble in. While I know 7.62 NATO is nearly identical to .308, the product is chambered and marketed as a .308 but the article mentions 7.62. Should we change this to .308 (which links to 7.62 NATO) for the sake of accuracy?? Also is there any interrest in an article for the whole Saiga brand? GarrettJL 22:47, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Technically speaking, .308 Win and 7.62x51mm NATO are different specifications. Basically identical for all practical purposes the .308 Win spec was conceived as the commercial cartridge spec to fit the NATO chamber spec. It's certainly splitting hairs, but at the very least the.308 Win spec comes from Winchester and the 7.62x51mm spec comes from NATO. Regardles of what spec source Izhmash uses, they say ".308", thus, .308 needs to be used here.
As for non-military uses: clearly there are a large number of civilian semiauto shotguns for hunting or sporting clays. What makes the Saiga 12 superior to most other sporting semiauto is the price. Ignoring its Kalishnikov looks, a Saiga 12 is half the price of most commercial autoloaders, is more durable, and has a detachable magazine. It's not as pretty as some, but from a cost effectiveness stand-point, it is the best buy. Nwilde (talk) 18:02, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article for the whole Siaga line?

I agree with GarrettJL; there should be an article referencing the whole Saiga line of rifles and shotguns. --Neo3DGfx 04:00, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have a decent digital camera and I can take some pictures of a Saiga .223, external, action, etc. Whatever you guys need. Would be nice to get some more pictures of other calibres. The ones with wooden furniture are particularly photogenic. I would write the article myself, but I'm not much of a writer. If I did, it would need ALOT of work. GarrettJL 19:37, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

I added the infobox along with some basic information. --Neo3DGfx

Micro-8

[Tromix] lead delivery systems uses the Saiga 12 as the base weapon for a line of short barreled shotguns. I think that someone should add them in someplace.--Paulwharton 10:33, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of Saiga

Whats the purpose of having picture of somebodys heavily modified weapon as article picture? You people need to find better picture of a basic weapon, in out of factory condition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.231.217.247 (talk) 10:23, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That IS in "out of factory" condition, except possibly for the buttstock (most of the ones I've seen are solid instead of skeletal, but they all fold.) The "normal" looking Saigas you see for sale in the states are actually heavily modified from their original Russian design in order to comply with ridiculous legal restrictions and to appear less "militarized."
If you want to talk about truly modified guns, I'll second the notion that Tromix should be mentioned. It's nearly impossible to have a discussion about Saigas without someone bringing 'em up... regardless of whether or not they deserve their rep, they're extremely high profile. --Lode Runner (talk) 05:56, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is not an Izhmash S12 in factory condition. It is heavily modified. It even includes the ubiquitous US made Tapco grip made to resemble the M249 SAW. The article could include such a picture with a section discussing the US cottage industry, but a Tromix or similar gun is not representative of the Izhmash product which is the named focus of the article as a whole. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.237.199 (talk) 13:31, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Shortcomings?

If shortcomings are mentioned, should maybe also advantages be mentioned? Like loading advantages over normal shotguns. Also, some of the shortcomings there aren't really shortcomings, i.e. recoil part is not really a shortcoming, considering it is a combat shotgun for trained people. Could we deal with this issue?99.231.50.118 (talk) 07:39, 8 February 2009 (UTC)Pavel Golikov.[reply]

another common short comming of the saiga 12 is that it dosn't cycle the lower weight rounds well untill broken in, which usually takes about 100 rounds of 3 inch ammunition or 2 3/4 slugs --24.58.197.109 (talk) 07:14, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising

Some of that article reads like product placement. Especially lines like this one: "All these features along with the already great reliability of the AK system seem to make for the ultimate combat shotgun." 87.157.227.245 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:55, 6 April 2009 (UTC).[reply]


History

Why is there no mention to when this weapon was developed, released or first issued to units?... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.29.19.60 (talk) 05:44, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The answer to the first part of your question is that nobody has bothered to find out. The second part of your question is more interesting. Although the article describes it as a combat shotgun - which implies that it was designed for the military or police - it doesn't explicitly state that it is actually used by the military or police at all, either in Russia or the US or anywhere. The impression I get is that it is sold exclusively to civilians and that the various aftermarket "taktikal" modifications of the gun are aimed at people who want something that looks like a military weapon even though it is not. There's a lot of guff about it being the primary weapon of the Spetsnaz, but this is always hopelessly vague forum chatter. The only photographs I can find of the gun being held by people in military uniform show tubby-looking middle-aged people who are presumably not soldiers. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 14:57, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You're absolutely right - in our country, Russia, Saiga is not a weapon of any law enforcement or military organizations. It's only civilian weapons, one of the most popular (because of the simplicity and cheapness. But I personally prefer the Remington 870 Tactical and Browning Maxus :)) Denis (Moscow).

Split Proposal

The rifles and the shotguns deserve to have their own articles. The rifles are quite notable on their own. Faceless Enemy (talk) 09:17, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Deserve" doesn't really factor into it. Is there enough information in reliable sources to write separate articles? — The Hand That Feeds You:Bite 13:38, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it does. Anyway, I can add more information about the rifles if they get their own article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Faceless Enemy (talk • contribs) 21:10, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently it already exists as "Saiga semi-automatic rifle". Guess I'll add some links in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Faceless Enemy (talk • contribs) 06:38, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the tag since the article does exist.--MartinezMD (talk) 22:34, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

vandalism

Under the "specifications" heading in the right-side text box, for "caliber", someone has put "it use gay bullets". Oddly enough, I can't find this text in the editing mode. Could someone please correct it to read "12-gauge, 20-gauge, .410 bore"? Thanks. Bricology (talk) 06:27, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Use of the Saiga-12 by Bangladesh

Might be of interest for you:

Just seen on Bangladesh Army Internet-Site www.defencebd.com : weapons-used-by-bangladesh-army Izhmash Saiga-12 Semi-automatic shotgun 12 gauge Russia

Best Regards

André Gasser — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.41.8.31 (talk) 21:48, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Scare quote need to stay

Oh yeah?[1]] Why do the scare quotes need to stay? I'm assuming good faith. Don't make me look like an ass. Felsic (talk) 17:26, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll remove them again. If anyone don't like it they oughta discuss it here. Felsic (talk) 16:22, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Scare quotes discussion. [2] Felsic (talk) 16:41, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think they're appropriate here, see [3], but whether they are or not, the whole section is very OR and not particularly notable. There are no instructions on the Winchester 94/22's page for making it ban-compliant. I'm going to remove that paragraph, and I think the whole section should be removed. Thoughts? Faceless Enemy (talk) 18:15, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Funny how you're ignoring the replies you got to your question. Sure, whatever delete the whole damn thing for all I care. Felsic (talk) 18:20, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the link directly addresses this issue. It says that: "Punctuation can also be used for similar effects: quotation marks, when not marking an actual quote, may indicate that the writer is distancing herself or himself from the otherwise common interpretation of the quoted expression; the use of emphasis may turn an innocuous word into a loaded expression." In this case, the term itself is not innocuous, so sticking to a neutral voice requires some distancing. As I read it, it's referring to something more like "Mr. Smith, is a 'smart' person, with 'good' character." rather than "Mr. Smith wrote a letter to the editor opposing 'death panels.'" In the first case, adding the quotations loads the sentence. In the other, it adds neutral distancing. Are you aware of other cases on Wikipedia where the actual terms themselves are contentious? They could provide a guide to how we should approach such terms here. Faceless Enemy (talk) 00:58, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe you want to distance yourself from this term. But that ain't no reason to force your POV into the article. This isn't some pop culture neologism - it's a matter of law. There's no "death panel law" so you're making a false analogy. If we're gonna say the gun was banned as an assault weapon then just say it - don't insert a POV on the issue.Felsic (talk) 17:15, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Saiga-12. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:57, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2 and 5 round magazines?

It doesn't make sense for 2 and 5 round magazines to be used when for a 2 round capacity it would be easier and cheaper to just manually thumb them in. Having a 2 or 5 round magazine for an automatic weapon would be an absolute waste of money for those mags. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:8A:4000:C480:3C12:91C6:6FD8:23D3 (talk) 17:45, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The purpose of the two round magazine is so that the sales and use of the shotgun in some jurisdictions and for certain purposes is compliant with the law. Many of the people who would be interested in obtaining two round magazines are doing so for bird hunting purposes so that they will comply with federal law, "Unplugged shotguns. You cannot hunt migratory game birds with a shotgun that can hold more than three shells, unless you plug it with a one-piece filler that cannot be removed without disassembling the gun." With a two round magazine and one round in the chamber, the shotgun could be used legally for bird hunting.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 18:17, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Use of wrong picture

im genuinely sure that the picture used as "Saiga 12k" in the section "common configuration" is actually a Vepr 12 5.48.158.0 (talk) 02:45, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

After thoughts, i may be wrong 5.48.158.0 (talk) 02:57, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Saiga-12&oldid=1210174339"