For the SKS fans, what's wrong with this FS ad

There's no such thing as a Chinese SKS built in 1954. They didn't start producing them until something like 1955 or 1956, and those ones had some Russian parts.

This rifle is definately not a Sino-Soviet as some people call them since the serial number is totally wrong, it has a spike bayonette, and the rear site blade is marked with a D instead of U. I think the rear sling swivel is in the wrong spot too.

Nope, this is probably 70's or 80's production.

Even so, it is a nice example of an SKS :) I wonder how much it sold for?
 
Wood looks too nice for a real Chinese SKS...maybe put it in the back of a pickup with half a cord of loose firewood wood and drive up and down a logging road a while and then it would look more genuine. And goop the hell out of it with cosmoline. But even looking like it is, I'd give a nice shiny new $20.00 bill for it.
 
1. chinese didnt start production till 1956 so 1954 is wrong.

2. serial numbers are close but not matching.

3. rear sight "D" indicates late model.

4. trigger housing is stamped not milled, indicating late model.

5. bolt carrier didnt have extra milling also indicating late model.

6. spike bayo indicate late model.

7. factory 36 didnt excist in the 50s

this is no way its an early model. im curious what it sold for if the buyer paid a premium then he should ask for a refund.:mad:
 
Last edited:
Counterfeit Chinese SKS. I can see the humor in this, afterall, almost everything gets copied and counterfeited in China....;)
 
You guys nailed it. I like how he even put "this is from a long time collector".......buy the gun not the story, no matter who it's coming from.
Doesn't hurt to do 5 minutes net searching either:)
 
Looks like factory 316, a second wave (post 1968) producer. As noted previously, it also has late production parts. The spike bayonet was not introduced until mid series 10 (1966) at Factory 26 in any event and was then integrated into all susequent T59 production. The side mounted sling loop is unusual for a later model.

Parts matching is close but no cigar. Parts are from two different carbines.
 
Last edited:
You would think that Type 56 would have said something to even an ignorant person? Yeah, man, 1954 vintage type 56. Right.

It's much like a gun I bought: stamped with 1885 and advertised as 'late 1885- early 1886' vintage. LOL, you are a master of the obvious, dude!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom