Comments by "" (@RedXlV) on "How to Classify the H&K MP-7 and FN P90" video.

When I first saw it on SG-1, I thought it was a fictional gun they were using. Wasn't until later I discovered it was real.
16
Yes, it's really quite bizarre to refer to the P90 as a scaled-down F2000. It's on the same level as claiming the M14 is a scaled-up Mini-14.
3
The problem is that there's no way you can call the P90 a scaled-down F2000. There's more of a case for the F2000 being a scaled-up P90. The F2000 came much later than the P90, after all. Those numbers in their names aren't arbitrary. They reflect the years in which each gun was designed.
2
Yes, the P90 predates the F2000 by a full decade.
2
And yet, the entire category of SMG is defined by the use of pistol calibers.
2
Given that a submachine gun is normally defined as an full-auto or select-fire weapon firing a pistol cartridge, I'd say that PDWs really shouldn't be considered SMGs. Would anybody call the M2 Carbine an SMG? Because it really has about as much claim to that designation as the P90 does.
1
@UCKY5 Neither is the P90.
1
I would think the question is less whether the P90 and MP7 are 3rd generation or 4th generation SMGs. The actual question is whether they qualify as SMGs at all. A defining trait of an SMG that they fire a pistol cartridge. It's not simply that they aren't chambered for 9mm Parabellum. 3rd gen SMGs have also been made in .45 ACP and 10mm Auto, and nobody suggested that created a new generation. The difference is that the P90 and MP7 don't fire a pistol cartridge at all. I mean, nobody would call the M2 Carbine an SMG, because .30 Carbine isn't pistol caliber. Neither are 5.7x28mm and 4.6x30mm. They're rifle cartridges, scaled down to a smaller size for use in small, ultra-high-capacity rifles. There is no pistol that fires 4.6x30mm, and pistols firing 5.7x28mm didn't come until years after after P90. The existence of pistols firing a rifle cartridge doesn't turn it into a pistol cartridge (otherwise the M4 Carbine would count as an SMG). Also, calling the P90 an F2000 scaled down to SMG size is simply ridiculous. Since the P90 predates the F2000 by a decade.
1
Gen 3 still has a variety of cartridges, even though 9mm is predominant. SMGs are still made in .45 ACP, and a some are chambered for newer cartridges 10mm Auto or .40 S&W. What makes the MP7 and P90 different from that is that their cartridges aren't "pistol caliber" at all. No pistol exists that fires 4.6x30mm, and it was a decade after the P90's debut when a 5.7x28mm pistol was first made. That's why I'd say those two aren't Gen 4 SMGs, because they're not SMGs at all.
1
Ian seems to be overlooking that the distinction of the P90 and MP7 isn't merely that they don't fire 9mm Parabellum. It's that they don't fire a pistol caliber round at all. Nobody was claiming the MP5/10 was 4th generation because of the 10mm Auto round, since that's still a pistol round. The P90 and MP7 both fire scaled-down rifle rounds that were designed specifically for them. That makes them more in a category with the M1 Carbine (and more to the point, the select-fire M2 Carbine) rather than with SMGs. Nobody would ever call the M2 Carbine an SMG, even though years after the fact pistols have been made that fire .30 Carbine. And .30 Carbine has more in common with typical pistol rounds than 5.7x28 or 4.6x30.
1
@lostalone9320 A civilian MP7 would be more likely to just not have the stock and forward pistol grip. Unfortunately, HK being HK they'd probably have them removed entirely rather than giving it immovable pieces of plastic that look like the foregrip and stock when they're in the closed positions.
1
Yeah, those numbers in their names aren't just arbitrary. They refer to years.
1