Board Thread:Discussions/@comment-35898226-20180616172050/@comment-24909831-20180620065003

It doesn't really make sense to keep hot-shots and hellguns separate entities, because they are one and the same in all regards. Autogun-lasgun comparison is not relevant in this situation, because GW has made a distinction between them. If not later, in Rogue Trader: Rulebook at least. Here: "An autogun is comparable to 20th cent. automatic rifle in appearance and operation - although it uses caseless, small calibre ammunition and has a rate of fire far outweighting that ancient weapon. [...]"

- Autogun in 1st Edition Rulebook page 70

"[...] good availability and reliability. Lasguns are fairly low-powered weapons, but are popular with all military forces because they are easy to maintain and cheap to manufacture."

- Lasgun in 1st Edition Rulebook page 73, Wh40k: Wargear (1993)

Not even the autoguns and stubbers are indistinguishable from each others, not lore-wise and not gameplay-wise. Hellguns and hot-shots are indistinguishable both lore-wise and gameplay-wise because they are one and the same.

In FFG's "Only War - Core Rulebook": "Sometimes known as hellguns and hellpistols, "hot-shot" weapons are almost axclusively used by high ranking Imperial officers and elite forces [...] Hot-shot weapons use a 10 kg backpack power source [...] Larger power pack means greater power [...]"

- paragraph "Hot-shot Laspistol & Lasgun (Lucius-pattern)" in page 176

On Codex: Militarum Tempestus (7th Edition) "[...] this lasgun does not use a clip-like power pack [...] but instead a hyper-yield power array worn as a backpack rig."

- paragraph "Ryza pattern hot-shot lasgun" page 8

So sure, call them whatever you want. But it is just your doing if someone misunderstands that when you deliberately mix quite well established terms within canon.