In the OP I spicifically state Russian, Chinese, Albanian, and Romanian. You won't find them on 1949 russians apparently.
Barrel/Receiver Index Numbers?
- Thread starter Loose-Cannon
- Start date
In the OP I spicifically state Russian, Chinese, Albanian, and Romanian. You won't find them on 1949 russians apparently.
LC is correct. 49's dont have them. IIRC some of the 1950 dated guns I've seen dont have them either, but those ones may have been machined off during refurb. And I've seen at least two, possibly three 1950 dated guns with the number stamped only on the receiver. (Maybe they breifly used a jig before indexing both barrel and receiver?)
All of the chinese guns I own or once owned (16 at one point) have/had paired number sets, as do both of my Romanians and my five Soviet guns (4 Tulas, 1 Izzy).
Apparently the EG, NK and Yugos dont have them. But those were very low output variants, and the small scale of production may not have required as refined a system-- numbered bins, hang tags, or ink on metal could have easily been employed to guarantee that indexed recievers and barrels were properly mated.
All of the chinese guns I own or once owned (16 at one point) have/had paired number sets, as do both of my Romanians and my five Soviet guns (4 Tulas, 1 Izzy).
Apparently the EG, NK and Yugos dont have them. But those were very low output variants, and the small scale of production may not have required as refined a system-- numbered bins, hang tags, or ink on metal could have easily been employed to guarantee that indexed recievers and barrels were properly mated.
The results of the brainstorming, Loose-Cannon presented here, how the Russians mated barrels to the receivers was great. It was exiting, I learned a missing link of assembly SKS. I'm surprised the rest of the members of CGN did't find it very valuable. Thank you Loose-Cannon and running-man from SKS FILES for figuring it out.
Very interesting, keep in mind that while the SKS was a front line weapon, Stalin was convinced that the US would invade the USSR - and it's a historical fact that many elements in the US military wanted to. The ability to produce "good enough" guns to arm the populace in as short an amount of time as possible (which had essentially saved Russia from the Nazis) was considered a key component of defence strategy. This step would certainly make it easier for the Russians to turn regular people into gun assemblers to provide weapons for that purpose - no gauging, just match the numbers and go.
JAROSLAV, Thank you for the post,. I did see it on SKS Files when it was first posted...... some very savy guys on that site.....
great info, well worth reading over several times.
The Soviets didn't produce the sks commercially either, though.
The sks45 was a front line weapon by default. With the introduction of the AK47, the SKS was already obsolete when it first went into full production. But it remained a full production, front line carbine while the kinks and logistical refinements of AK design and production were ironed out and put into place. Even after the AK was at full capacity, the sks continued to turn out at a robust pace. Because of the fanatical Soviet conviction of an impending Western invasion, Stalin was compelled to "fill the moat" ...so to speak. And from 1945 onward they filled it with an endless flow of military hardware.
China on the other hand, never considered the threat of a western invasion in the same way that Stalin obsessed over it. Geographically, China is just far better insulated from invasion. But the wide open steppes of Eurasia have beckoned to invaders for a millennia. Fully aware of this, the Soviets filled the eastern moat with weaponry. Not a curtain of iron really, but river of steel. The Volga of the West.
