This report provides an analysis of the quality and market perception of Zastava-manufactured AK-platform firearms within the United States civilian market from 2020 through the first half of 2025. Persistent concerns among consumers regarding receiver metallurgy, heat treatment, and associated failures such as cracking and deformation form the impetus for this investigation. The analysis reveals that Zastava’s quality reputation in the U.S. is best understood as a narrative of two distinct eras: the pre-2019 period dominated by third-party importation, and the post-2019 period managed directly by the company’s U.S. subsidiary.

The investigation finds that significant, documented quality control issues, particularly catastrophic receiver failures, were predominantly associated with the N-PAP series of rifles imported and modified by Century Arms. Evidence strongly suggests these failures were not the result of fundamentally inferior steel but rather a combination of mechanical and structural factors, including over-gassed systems, inadequate recoil springs, and specific design elements of the 1.0mm receivers used at the time.

In 2019, Zastava initiated a comprehensive remediation strategy by establishing Zastava Arms USA. This move brought importation, 922(r) compliance, and quality control in-house. The subsequent introduction of the ZPAP series, featuring a standardized 1.5mm thick, bulged-trunnion receiver and a chrome-lined barrel, directly addressed the primary engineering and durability complaints of the previous era.

Analysis of market sentiment and user-reported issues from 2020 to 2025 shows a dramatic positive trend. The catastrophic failures that defined the N-PAP era are virtually absent from discussions about current-production ZPAP models. Present-day complaints have shifted qualitatively, now focusing on minor, non-systemic fit-and-finish or assembly issues, such as cosmetic blemishes, stiff controls, or components that may require thread-locking compound.

The report concludes that the historical concerns regarding Zastava’s receiver metallurgy and heat treatment are a legacy issue that has been effectively rectified in current production models. The “soft metal” narrative, while rooted in the real failures of older rifles, is not applicable to the ZPAP series. The reputational risk for the brand has successfully transitioned from one of fundamental engineering integrity to one of maintaining consistent final assembly quality.

Section 1: The Provenance of Perception: A Tale of Two Importers

The reputation of Zastava firearms in the United States has been shaped by a complex history involving manufacturing in Serbia and final market preparation by different entities in the U.S. Understanding the persistent quality concerns requires a clear demarcation between two distinct periods of importation. The negative perceptions that fuel the user’s query are not inherent to Zastava’s core manufacturing capability but are inextricably linked to the importation, modification, and quality control processes of a specific, earlier era, which stands in stark contrast to the current corporate structure.

1.1 The Century Arms Era (Pre-2019): The Genesis of Quality Concerns

Prior to 2019, Zastava’s semi-automatic PAP (Poluautomatska puška, or semi-automatic rifle) series firearms, including the N-PAP and O-PAP models, were brought into the U.S. market primarily through Century Arms. During this period, the importer was responsible for modifying the rifles to comply with federal regulations, most notably section 922(r) of the Gun Control Act, which limits the number of foreign-made parts on an imported semi-automatic rifle. This process often involved swapping original Serbian components for U.S.-made substitutes, such as trigger groups, pistol grips, and stocks.¹

It was during this era that the most severe and widespread quality complaints emerged. Online forums and social media platforms documented a litany of issues with early PAP rifles, including reports of “poor-quality replacement parts, sloppy assembly, and inconsistent reliability”.¹ Specific failures were often traced back to the U.S.-based modification process. For instance, users reported incorrectly installed “paper clip” style shepherd’s crook retainers for the trigger and hammer pins, leading to pins “walking out” of the receiver.² The commonly used Tapco aftermarket trigger groups were also a source of complaint, described as “terrible” in feel and contributing to other wear issues.²

The most damaging reports concerned the structural integrity of the receivers themselves. The N-PAP model, in particular, became notorious for developing cracks in the receiver sheet metal, an issue that will be analyzed in technical detail in Section 2.³ High-profile durability tests, such as those conducted by the AK Operators Union, Local 47-74, brought these failures to a wide audience. After a 5,000-round test on an N-PAP resulted in a cracked receiver, the reviewer noted the relationship with Century Arms “deteriorated very quickly,” criticizing the importer for not appearing to use the failure data to improve the product.²

For the end-user, the distinction between a Serbian-made component and a U.S.-installed part was often unclear. The rifle was sold as a “Zastava,” and any failure, regardless of its specific origin within the complex supply and assembly chain, was attributed to the Zastava brand. This confusion of the Serbian manufacturer with the American importer and modifier cemented a market perception of questionable quality that overshadowed the reputation of Zastava’s military-contract firearms.¹ The issues were not limited to a single generation; they spanned the Gen 1 PAPs with their single-stack bolts and reliability problems, the Gen 2 N-PAPs where receiver cracking was most prominent, and the Gen 3 O-PAPs.³

1.2 The Zastava USA Era (2019-Present): A Corporate-Led Renaissance

The turning point in Zastava’s U.S. market presence occurred in 2019 with the establishment of Zastava Arms USA. This strategic move saw the Serbian parent company take direct control of its brand and product in the world’s largest civilian firearms market.⁶ Operating from a facility in Illinois, Zastava Arms USA became the exclusive importer, responsible for distribution, 922(r) compliance, warranty service, repairs, and parts fulfillment.⁸

This was not merely a logistical shift but a deliberate, capital-intensive initiative to reclaim the brand’s narrative and directly address the quality control deficiencies of the past. By eliminating the “middleman meddling,” Zastava could ensure that the rifles reaching consumers were assembled and configured to their own standards.¹ The establishment of a dedicated U.S. entity was a clear investment in quality control as the primary lever for brand rehabilitation. The company identified that the critical point of failure was the loss of control over the final product configuration in the U.S. and invested accordingly, betting that a demonstrably higher-quality product would justify its price point and rebuild consumer trust.

The flagship product of this new era is the ZPAP M70. This model represented a “serious glow-up” over the older PAPs, with significant upgrades that directly targeted the most common historical complaints.¹ The result was a rifle lauded by reviewers as being “as close to its military roots as U.S. laws allow” and arguably the “nicest new AKs on the market”.¹ The market perception shifted dramatically. Where forums once buzzed with complaints about Century-imported PAPs, they now feature widespread praise for the robustness and reliability of the ZPAP, with many reviewers concluding that the current Z-PAPs are the “highest quality semi-auto AKs Zastava have ever sent to the U.S.”.¹¹ This corporate-led renaissance successfully repositioned the brand from a budget-tier option with questionable reliability to a premium import known for its durability.

---

Table 1: Comparative Analysis of Zastava Import Eras

Characteristic	Pre-2019 Era (Century Arms)	Post-2019 Era (Zastava Arms USA)
Primary Importer/Distributor	Century Arms	Zastava Arms USA
Key Models	N-PAP, O-PAP	ZPAP M70, ZPAP M90, ZPAP85/92
922(r) Compliance	Performed by Century Arms, often with U.S. aftermarket parts 1	Managed in-house by Zastava Arms USA 10
Standard Receiver Spec.	Primarily 1.0mm stamped; some O-PAPs had 1.5mm 13	Standardized 1.5mm stamped with bulged RPK-style trunnion 1
Standard Barrel Spec.	Typically non-chrome-lined 1	Standardized cold-hammer-forged, chrome-lined 1
Nature of Complaints	Systemic and major: cracked receivers, poor assembly, unreliable parts 2	Minor and cosmetic: stiff controls, loose screws, finish blemishes 16
Dominant Market Perception	Inconsistent quality, “project gun,” buyer beware 1	Robust, reliable, “tank-like,” one of the best import AKs 1

---

Section 2: Technical Analysis of Reported Failures: Metallurgy, Mechanics, and Myth

A thorough engineering analysis of the reported failures is essential to move beyond anecdotal evidence and address the core of the user’s query regarding metallurgy and heat treatment. The evidence indicates that the most severe historical issues were the result of a confluence of mechanical forces and structural design choices, rather than a simple case of “soft metal.” Differentiating between systemic design flaws, isolated batch defects, and issues arising from aftermarket modifications provides a clearer picture of Zastava’s manufacturing quality over time.

2.1 Receiver Integrity: Analysis of Cracking and Deformation

The most serious allegation against Zastava firearms, and the one that has most damaged the brand’s reputation, is that of cracked receivers. These reports were most prevalent with the N-PAP series of rifles from the Century Arms import era. Online discussions and photographs consistently show the failure occurring at a specific, predictable location: the thin metal bridge of the receiver “right between the rear trunnion rivet and the little button that releases the dust cover”.² The consistency of the failure location is a critical data point, as it strongly suggests a predictable stress concentration point rather than a random material flaw distributed throughout the steel.

The popular narrative that emerged in the firearms community was that Zastava used “soft metal” or had improper heat treatment on its commercial-line receivers. However, a more detailed analysis points to a systems engineering failure—a causal chain of mechanical events that overloaded a specific structural weak point. Multiple sources in the user community correctly identified contributing factors, speculating that the cracking was due to a combination of “less than adequate recoil springs coupled with overgassing”.³

This hypothesis is mechanically sound. An over-gassed AK system directs more high-pressure gas than necessary onto the piston head, accelerating the bolt carrier group rearward with excessive velocity and energy. Concurrently, a weak or worn-out recoil spring—with users reporting factory springs measuring below the minimum service length of 16 inches—provides insufficient resistance to this rearward travel.³ The result is a violent impact of the bolt carrier against the front face of the rear trunnion at the end of its stroke. This repeated, high-energy impact creates significant fatigue stresses. These stresses naturally propagate to the weakest point in the immediate vicinity of the impact: the cutout in the receiver for the dust cover locking mechanism. Over thousands of cycles, a fatigue crack would initiate at this stress riser and propagate until failure. The observation by AK Operators Union that a failed N-PAP receiver could be bent by hand after cracking suggests that the metal in that specific area had lost its temper due to the stress cycles, but this is a localized result of the failure, not necessarily the root cause for the entire receiver.²

The “soft metal” rumor is, therefore, an oversimplification of a more complex mechanical reality. The problem was not necessarily that the steel itself was fundamentally substandard, but that the system’s design parameters (gas port size, spring strength) and the receiver’s geometry (1.0mm thickness with a stress-inducing cutout) were mismatched, leading to a predictable structural failure.

The engineering choices made for the current-production ZPAP M70 corroborate this assessment. Zastava’s solution was not merely to change the steel’s heat treatment protocol; it was a comprehensive structural reinforcement. The standardization of the RPK-style 1.5mm thick receiver and the heavy-duty “bulged” front trunnion creates a much more rigid and durable platform capable of absorbing and distributing these forces far more effectively.¹ This was a structural fix for a structural problem.

2.2 Component-Level Issues and Incompatibilities

Beyond the critical issue of receiver integrity, other reported problems can be parsed into distinct categories: verifiable manufacturing defects, known characteristics of the AK platform, and issues created by aftermarket modifications.

Manufacturing Defects: There is clear evidence of isolated, batch-specific quality control escapes from the Zastava factory. In one instance, Zastava “admitted fault due to faulty casting on a run of [gas] blocks,” which led to some components cracking.³ Similarly, users reported a batch of bolt carriers that were “cut really thin around the bottom of the bolt channel,” leading to a handful of fractures.³ These are undeniable manufacturing defects, but their limited scope suggests they were exceptions resulting from a temporary lapse in QC rather than a systemic design flaw or persistent issue with metallurgy.

Platform Characteristics: Certain “issues” are inherent to the Kalashnikov design or Zastava’s specific variant. For example, the deformation or “peening” of the bolt carrier tail where it is struck by the hammer is a common wear pattern on virtually every AK-platform rifle.³ Another example is the use of an unfinished, “in the white” bolt carrier, which is prone to surface rust if not kept properly lubricated.³ This is a material and finish choice, representing a maintenance consideration for the owner, rather than a defect.

Aftermarket Incompatibilities: The issue of carrier tail peening is a prime example of a standard platform characteristic being exacerbated into a significant problem by aftermarket parts. Users widely report that the peening is “made much worse” by popular American-made triggers, such as those from Tapco or ALG Defense.³ These triggers often use a harder steel for the hammer and feature a more acute contact angle compared to the original factory components. This mismatch in geometry and material hardness concentrates the force of the hammer strike on a smaller area of the carrier tail, accelerating wear and deformation.³ Attributing this accelerated wear solely to poor Zastava metallurgy is an inaccurate diagnosis; the root cause is an incompatibility between components from different manufacturers with different design specifications.

---

Table 2: Matrix of Reported Technical Issues and Resolutions

Technical Issue	Primary Affected Models	Suspected Engineering Cause(s)	Current Status in ZPAP Series
Receiver Cracking	N-PAP (Gen 2)	Over-gassing, weak recoil spring, and stress riser at dust cover lock on 1.0mm receiver.	Resolved. Standard 1.5mm bulged trunnion receiver is structurally superior and not prone to this failure mode.
Carrier Tail Peening	All models (platform-wide)	Normal wear from hammer impact; significantly exacerbated by aftermarket triggers (e.g., ALG) with harder steel and acute angles.	Still occurs as normal wear. Remains a consideration for users installing aftermarket triggers.
Cracked Gas Blocks	Isolated batches of ZPAP	Faulty casting in a specific production run, acknowledged by Zastava.	Resolved. Considered an isolated QC escape, not a current, ongoing issue.
Fractured Bolt Carriers	Isolated batches of ZPAP	Improper machining (“skinny carriers”) on a specific production run, resulting in thin walls.	Resolved. Considered an isolated QC escape, not a current, ongoing issue.
Barrel Corrosion	N-PAP, O-PAP	Non-chrome-lined barrels, requiring meticulous cleaning, especially with corrosive ammunition.	Resolved. ZPAPs feature chrome-lined, cold-hammer-forged barrels as standard.
Galling of Barrel/Trunnion	Anecdotal reports on M70s	Extremely tight press-fit during barrel installation, possibly related to material compatibility or tooling.	Not a widely reported issue on current ZPAPs; may be an occasional assembly anomaly.

---

Section 3: Zastava’s Remediation Strategy and Market Communications

Faced with a damaged reputation in its most important export market, Zastava Oruzje executed a deliberate, two-pronged strategy to remediate the quality concerns. The first prong involved tangible, product-based engineering improvements. The second involved a carefully managed corporate communications strategy to reshape the brand’s narrative. This combined approach was a classic case of “show, don’t tell,” where the company chose to let a demonstrably superior product, rather than apologies or explanations, redefine its market standing.

3.1 Product-Based Remediation: The ZPAP M70 as the Embodiment of the Fix

The most compelling evidence of Zastava’s commitment to fixing its quality issues is the ZPAP M70 rifle itself. The standard features of this new line of firearms serve as a point-by-point engineering rebuttal to the primary complaints leveled against the older PAP series.

The most critical upgrade was the standardization of the 1.5mm thick stamped receiver combined with a bulged, RPK-style front trunnion.¹ This “beefed-up” construction, originally designed for the rigors of launching rifle grenades, provides immense structural integrity and directly counters the fatigue-related cracking seen on the previous 1.0mm receivers.¹ This change alone effectively solved the single most damaging technical issue associated with the brand.

The second major upgrade was the adoption of chrome-lined, cold-hammer-forged barrels as a standard feature.¹ While non-chromed barrels can offer a slight theoretical accuracy advantage, the U.S. market overwhelmingly prizes the corrosion resistance and longevity afforded by chrome lining, especially given the historical prevalence of corrosive-primed surplus ammunition.¹⁵ Zastava’s adoption of this feature was a direct response to consumer demand and a clear signal that it was listening to its customers, rectifying a long-standing drawback of its civilian-market rifles.¹¹

Finally, the establishment of Zastava Arms USA allowed for direct oversight of the final assembly and quality control processes. This move was intended to eliminate the “sloppy assembly that had tarnished Century’s versions”.¹ Reviews of new ZPAP rifles consistently praise the overall fit and finish, noting that the rivet work is clean and the wood and metal finishes are “excellent throughout”.⁷ By investing in these tangible product improvements and taking control of the final steps before sale, Zastava demonstrated its remediation strategy through action, not words.

3.2 Corporate Communications and Brand Management

Complementing the product improvements was a disciplined and forward-looking communications strategy. An analysis of Zastava Arms USA’s official website, product manuals, and news releases reveals a clear pattern: the company makes no mention of, or apology for, the quality issues of the Century Arms era.⁶ The past is not acknowledged because the strategy is to render it irrelevant.

Instead, all corporate messaging is focused on building a narrative of historical excellence, precision, and military-grade durability. Product manuals and website copy are replete with phrases emphasizing a “gunsmith tradition since 1853,” “materials of the highest quality,” and “meticulous attention to detail”.⁹ The company’s history is framed as the “cradle of Serbian industry,” with a legacy of winning medals at World Fairs in the 19th century.⁶ This messaging consciously links the current civilian products to a long and proud history of military manufacturing.

The company’s active blog and news section reinforces this narrative by focusing exclusively on the features, applications, and upgrade potential of its current products.²¹ Articles discuss topics like “Tuning Gas Systems,” “Best Loads for Chrome-Lined Barrels,” and “ZPAP M70 vs Other AK Variants,” all of which position the ZPAP as a high-quality, desirable firearm.²¹ Even the marketing for their “DRNCH” gun cleaner connects the product to its historical use in the Yugoslav People’s Army, further strengthening the “authentic military heritage” angle.⁶

This strategy effectively overwrites the old, negative narrative with a new, positive one built on the foundation of the improved ZPAP rifle. Zastava does not need to engage in debates about the failures of the N-PAP because they can simply point to the robust construction and positive reviews of the ZPAP. They let the new product do the talking.

Section 4: Current Quality Trends and Outlook (2020-2025)

The ultimate measure of Zastava’s remediation strategy is the quality of its current products and the corresponding sentiment in the marketplace. An analysis of user feedback from 2020 through mid-2025 reveals a clear and positive trend. The systemic, catastrophic failures of the past have been replaced by a class of minor, non-structural issues typical of mass-produced firearms, indicating that the underlying engineering problems have been solved.

4.1 Social Media and User Sentiment Analysis (2020-2025)

A survey of discussions on platforms like Reddit, firearms forums, and YouTube comment sections reveals a significant qualitative shift in the nature of user complaints regarding new Zastava firearms. Reports of cracked receivers, deformed pin holes, or other major metallurgical failures are virtually absent in discussions pertaining to ZPAP models manufactured and sold since 2019. The consensus among knowledgeable users is that the “cracked receiver thing came from the older NPAP and OPAP rifles”.³

In the place of these critical failures, current complaints about ZPAPs are of a much less severe nature, typically related to initial assembly, fit, and finish. These include:

• Loose Components: Users have reported dust cover retaining buttons and stock bolts becoming loose over time, a minor issue easily rectified with thread-locking compound.¹⁶
• Stiff Controls: New rifles are often reported to have very stiff safety selectors or lower handguard retaining levers, which typically “break in” and loosen up with use.¹⁷
• Initial Break-in: Some new owners have reported initial feeding or cycling issues that were resolved after a thorough cleaning to remove the thick factory packing grease or cosmoline, followed by a break-in period of a few hundred rounds.²⁵
• Cosmetic Blemishes: Minor cosmetic issues, such as visible weld marks on the receiver or small scratches from the assembly process, are sometimes noted but are generally accepted by the AK community as normal for the platform’s manufacturing style.¹⁷
• Canted Sights: Occasional reports of canted front sight blocks still surface, which remains a common quality control challenge across nearly all manufacturers of AK-pattern rifles.²⁶

Despite these minor issues, the overwhelming sentiment in the market from 2020 to 2025 is positive. The ZPAP M70 is consistently described as a “tank,” “robust,” “reliable,” and one of the “best AK’s out there currently” for its price point.¹ The shift in the nature of complaints from “my rifle is broken and unsafe” to “my safety lever is a bit stiff” represents a monumental improvement in product quality and consistency.

4.2 Final Assessment and Industry Outlook

The evidence gathered and analyzed leads to a clear conclusion: the persistent concerns about Zastava receiver metallurgy and heat treatment are a legacy of the pre-2019 importation era. The systemic engineering and quality control failures that led to receiver cracking on N-PAP models have been comprehensively addressed by the design of the ZPAP series and the direct market oversight of Zastava Arms USA. For current production rifles, the “soft metal” narrative is effectively debunked.

It is plausible that production variables within the Zastava Oruzje factory in Kragujevac, Serbia, still exist. Forum discussions allude to a “local myth” that firearms destined for the demanding U.S. market receive a higher level of quality control, and also mention the possibility of “worn out machinery and underpaid workforce” leading to “occasional quality slips”.²⁸ If true, this context makes the role of Zastava Arms USA in performing final quality assurance checks even more critical to ensuring a consistent and reliable product for the American consumer.

A significant “reputation lag” exists in the market, where the negative perception generated by N-PAP failures a decade ago still influences the purchasing decisions of less-informed buyers today. The user’s query is itself evidence of this lag. However, for the informed analyst or consumer, the trend is unambiguously positive. The risk profile for a new Zastava rifle has fundamentally changed. The primary concern is no longer the potential for catastrophic, systemic failure. Instead, it has shifted to the possibility of encountering minor assembly or fit-and-finish issues that are common in the industry and often rectifiable by the end-user.

Outlook: The quality of Zastava’s AK-platform rifles has dramatically improved. The underlying engineering and metallurgical problems appear to be solved. The forward-looking challenge for Zastava Arms USA is not one of fundamental design, but of operational execution. Continued focus on final inspection and assembly quality control will be key to eliminating the minor complaints that, while not safety-critical, detract from the premium, high-reliability brand image the company has successfully worked to build since 2019. A prospective buyer’s due diligence should now focus less on the fear of a cracked receiver and more on a practical, pre-purchase inspection for things like a straight front sight and properly secured components.

---

If you find this post useful, please share the link on Facebook, with your friends, etc. Your support is much appreciated and if you have any feedback, please email me at in**@*********ps.com. Please note that for links to other websites, I may be paid via an affiliate program such as Avantlink, Impact, Amazon and eBay.

---

Works cited

1. Zastava M70 Hands-On Overview – The Best AK for the Money in 2025 – AR15Discounts, accessed July 20, 2025, https://ar15discounts.com/zastava-m70-best-ak-for-the-money-in-2025/
2. Zastava AK NPAP rifle – what went wrong?!, accessed July 20, 2025, https://www.akoperatorsunionlocal4774.com/2015/05/zastava-ak-npap-rifle-what-went-wrong/
3. Has anyone seen any metal issues cracked receiver gas block? Deformed carrier tails?Curious. : r/zastavaarms101 – Reddit, accessed July 20, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/zastavaarms101/comments/yj8p6o/has_anyone_seen_any_metal_issues_cracked_receiver/
4. First AK Comrades. Zastava ZPAP M70 | The Armory Life Forum, accessed July 20, 2025, https://www.thearmorylife.com/forum/threads/first-ak-comrades-zastava-zpap-m70.14977/
5. Zastava PAP series – Wikipedia, accessed July 20, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zastava_PAP_series
6. Zastava Arms USA: Zastava AK rifles, accessed July 20, 2025, https://zastavaarmsusa.com/
7. Zastava ZPAP M70: An Authentic AK For The U.S. Market | An Official Journal Of The NRA, accessed July 20, 2025, https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/zastava-zpap-m70-an-authentic-ak-for-the-u-s-market/
8. Prvi Partizan, Zastava Problems: Serbia Shuts Down Ammo, Gun Exports – Guns.com, accessed July 20, 2025, https://www.guns.com/news/2025/06/25/prvi-partizan-zastava-problems-serbia-shuts-down-ammo-gun-exports
9. History – Zastava Arms USA, accessed July 20, 2025, https://zastavaarmsusa.com/history/
10. Is This the Best New AK For the $$$? The Zastava M70 Z-PAP AK-47 Review – YouTube, accessed July 20, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkJ2VZ24BiE
11. Zastava Arms: Quality And Quantity – Gun Digest, accessed July 20, 2025, https://gundigest.com/gun-reviews/military-firearms-reviews/zastava-arms-quality-and-quantity
12. Beyond the AR: Buying Your First AK, and Why It Should Probably Be a Zastava ZPAPM70, accessed July 20, 2025, https://dirtybirdusa.com/your-first-ak-and-why-it-should-be-zpapm70/
13. ZPAP M70 Underfolder AK Review: Zastava’s Serbian Red Classic Rocks – Guns.com, accessed July 20, 2025, https://www.guns.com/news/reviews/zastava-zpap-m70-underfold-ak-review
14. Modernizing the Zastava M70: A Professional Upgrade Journey – AR15Discounts, accessed July 20, 2025, https://ar15discounts.com/modernizing-the-zastava-m70-a-professional-upgrade-journey/
15. What’s your opinion on the M70 Zastava rifle? – Quora, accessed July 20, 2025, https://www.quora.com/Whats-your-opinion-on-the-M70-Zastava-rifle
16. Greetings from Zastava Arms USA. We are happy to finally be home amongst our family, please feel free to hit us up with questions/concerns and we will respond as much as possible. : r/zastavaarms101 – Reddit, accessed July 20, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/zastavaarms101/comments/nmgyp5/greetings_from_zastava_arms_usa_we_are_happy_to/
17. Questions about new ZPAPM70 Underfolder : r/zastavaarms101 – Reddit, accessed July 20, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/zastavaarms101/comments/1fr3td7/questions_about_new_zpapm70_underfolder/
18. ZPAP M70 vs PSAK-47 GF5 – AK-47 / AK-74 – Palmetto State Armory | Forum, accessed July 20, 2025, https://palmettostatearmory.com/forum/t/zpap-m70-vs-psak-47-gf5/18096
19. Just ordered a ZPAP M70. What should I know/do? : r/zastavaarms101 – Reddit, accessed July 20, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/zastavaarms101/comments/1hed98y/just_ordered_a_zpap_m70_what_should_i_knowdo/
20. Review: Zastava ZPAP M70 Rifle | An Official Journal Of The NRA – Shooting Illustrated, accessed July 20, 2025, https://www.shootingillustrated.com/content/review-zastava-zpap-m70-rifle/
21. Zastava Arms News | Zastava Arms USA, accessed July 20, 2025, https://zastavaarmsusa.com/news/
22. PAP M77PS | Cal. .308 Win. – Zastava Arms USA, accessed July 20, 2025, https://zastavaarmsusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/PAP-M77PS-k_230913_073505-1.pdf
23. OWNER’S MANUAL AND SAFETY INSTRUCTIONS – Zastava Arms USA, accessed July 20, 2025, https://zastavaarmsusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/ZPAPM70-manual-ZA-USA.pdf
24. OWNER’S MANUAL AND SAFETY INSTRUCTIONS – Zastava Arms USA, accessed July 20, 2025, https://zastavaarmsusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/ZPAP92-ZPAP85-manuals-ZA-USA.pdf
25. Brand new ZPAP issues : r/zastavaarms101 – Reddit, accessed July 20, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/zastavaarms101/comments/14oa4nf/brand_new_zpap_issues/
26. Zastava ZPAP M70 Review [2025] – Gun Made, accessed July 20, 2025, https://www.gunmade.com/zastava-zpap-m70-review/
27. Bulgaria vs. Serbia : r/guns – Reddit, accessed July 20, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/guns/comments/jkxte1/bulgaria_vs_serbia/
28. Zastava LK M70 worth the money? | AfricaHunting.com, accessed July 20, 2025, https://www.africahunting.com/threads/zastava-lk-m70-worth-the-money.81209/