possible SKS stock fit problem (recoil lug doesnt contact reciever and mag body loose

Thresher

Thresher

CGN Regular
GunNutz
Rating - 100%
69   0   1
Location
East of the Rockies
Anyone notice this before? All my other SKSs have the forward recoil lug butt against the reciever. I bought an unmarked topcover Tula that has the arsenal acceptance stamps on the laminate stock and appears to be unfired. (theres NO wear internally, not even on the camming surfaces of the hammer.

The problem is, when assembled there is no play between action and stock but there is about a 1/8th" gap between the lug and the reciever where my others contact. Also, the magazine assembly has about another 1/8th" of horizontal play and a good amount of side to side play with the action open and my others either have negligable play or none at all. Its a damn shame this thing is the most pristine military rifle I have seen as far as lack of use.

Anyone else notice this and can confirm or deny this as a potential problem?
I know I'm obsessing a bit (as the wife said ;) but I handpicked this thing and it was a grad gift to myself from the wife, it holds a bit of value to me.

Sorry for being long winded and thanks in advance for any replies
 
no letters at the end, just two at the start. Its also a blondish stock infused with reddish hues every other layer if that helps your question any. I wasnt planning on shooting this anyhow but Id like to know I wouldnt get failured to feed if I decided to, and I dont like the gap in the forward recoil lug since none, not even the chicoms I have or the abused bbq painted 1951 tula with the off center bore have
 
Sorry I dont have it at my new house with me so no pics for awhile. Its definitely not a mix-master. No [\] or <> refurb mark, all matching numbers including stock, no force match or filed off or Xed out ones. No wear inside or out, no mark on the muzzle where the bayonette ring would contact if it had been flipped up and fixed several times. It has the blued rear sight with chromed markings in it not the grey one. The rest of the rifle is all blued, sharp and raised edges on all markings in the steel. Both ends of the oprod have no marks on it, completely and perfectly hot blued still, also no marks on the carrier where it would contact it. The same goes for the gas piston, no marks on the rear where it would contact the oprod. Ive seen re-finish jobs and I doubt this is one. Theres not a mark on the bolt carrier OR the reciever rails, 100% bluing on ALL internal surfaces of the reciever. The bolt itself has NO marks on it that start to show early on with normal use. I had a new chicom and in 50 rounds it had wear marks I could see, this russian does not. I honestly think it was put together knowing it was becoming obsolete and just greased and stored away. Honestly the finish on steel and wood is 100% except for one nick on the left of the buttstock between the mag housing and lower reciever line. My other laminate refurbs have nothing on them for markings other than the serial number, this one has a few cyrillic and other markings, by the recoil lug for sure and another few I cant seem to remember exact placement right now.
 
It's still a refurb of some level. The stock and receiver cover at the very least have been replaced. When you get it home check all the numbered areas closely. Look for file or grind marks under the numbers. Also look for spaces between numbers that look off or different height numbers. Quite a few refurbs were never refurb stamped.
 
Looked for all that stuff. My other ruskies have it, not this one. No flatspots where numbers were ground and restamped and the machining on the whole thing, around numbers or not is consistent and uniform, as is the bluing. I honestly doubt it was ever used, unlike my other 5 ruskies. There aint a mark on the damn thing at all.

Ive been a gun enthusiast and a military firearm enthusiast my whole life, and I scrutinize like crazy. I have enough SKSs that I dont need to convince myself this thing is something its not, I dont care either way if its a refurb or not, its just that it looks unused and has NO signs of refinishing. Im starting to think in 1956 it was slapped together, the magazine box and stock were not fitted as carefully as ones that were expected to be used on the line in earlier years, and just packed away.

Edited to add the bayonette also is not painted, yellow or sandblasted finish, its smooth as a prom queen thighs hardchrome silver
 
Did you try tighting the stock liner screw located on the side of the stock? Also it sounds like there might be a reason why there are no markings on it and it appears to be unfired. Although pic's would defenatly help.
 
What does the screw head look like on the bayonet? How many staking punches? Starting to sound like a mid 50s one that had the top cover replaced along with the stock at refurb. What does the top of the buttplate look like? Is it even with the stock or is there a tit on it? The light colored laminates came out after the factories quit making SKSs. There are some stock swaped refurbs out there that look nicer than some of the non-refurbs.
 
Not sure how many staking punches on the end of the screw shank but the head as everything else has not a mark on it. The stock on this one is a little darker then the one on the bbq refurbs I have but still alternating lighter blond in it, but more redish/ruby colored overall than them.

If it is a refurb Im wondering why its all matching, all blued, no Xed out #s and why the trigger group, reciever rails and all the working parts are completely virginal looking, when the other refurbs are bbq painted and have signs of firing. Im not saying youre wrong Im just saying its wierd if it is one since it flies in the face of how the others Ive seen were done. As I say, trust me the thing hasnt been reblued and the moving parts from the action have NO wear. This rifle loks unfired from the factory or damn close to it. Put it this way it looks so great Id fel guilty for even racking th action, which reminds me all of my other SKS have usage marks to one side of the oprod tunnel on the reciever from the carrier rubbing it on the way to closing, this rifle does not have that, it only has perfect bluing and machining marks are intact and uniform throuout the area. Also, the topcover has a tighter fit than all the other SKSs I have, it has NO play and was a bit of a pain to remove compared to the rest Ive torn down. I took it apart two, maybe three times and there is now a much more pronounced mark on the topcover from the takedown latch than when I took her out of the box.If it is a refurb its a damn unusual one. Heck the catch on the floorplate doesnt even have any wear on it nor does the retaining latch, and all my others show some signs of wear there.

The guy I bought it from (I wanted an unmarked, final year of production 1956 Tula, all matching prefferably non refurb) told me that was exactly what it was, I saw 7 or 8 pictures he had of it up and figured it looked so nice, even if he was wrong and it was a refurb I just had to have it

I had heard prior to this that on some late Tulas they were fitted with laminates from the get-go right off the production line, not sure if thats correct though
 
True some of the Letter Series were originally built with red laminates. These have a letter after the normal serial number,and also have a small Tula star on the left side of the receiver. From your description I'm still leaning towards a refurb of some extent. There's plenty of refurbs out there with nothing but a stock swap done to them
 
This one has the star on the left rear of the reciever. I would like to know however, since it has TWO recoil lugs and the stock fits tight, if the first one not abbutting against the reciever is a probem, or would the stock beat itself to death (non issue since I wont shoot it but Id like to know I could) HAs anyone had or noticed this on their rifles and did it cause a problem? Second, does anyone or has anyone noticed mag wobble like that and if so did it cause malfunctions and failures to feed?

Thanks for your attention guys

Edited to add now that I think of it since Ive only seen it twice and the papers are with the rifle, I cant remember if the letters are before or after the numerals. Im leaning to before. In any case the last two figures are a "C" and a "0" maybe its an o instead of a zero, dont know for sure but it looks flat sided like a zero rather than the letter o
 
Woodbeef sems to have a problem believing that non refurbed sks's exist. But they do I have one. The 1955 and 1956 years had no markings on the reciever covers, only a star behind the serial number. An indicator is the inspection stamps around the front cross bolt in the stock if they dont have those it is likely arefurb.
 
bshooter said:
Woodbeef sems to have a problem believing that non refurbed sks's exist. But they do I have one. The 1955 and 1956 years had no markings on the reciever covers, only a star behind the serial number. An indicator is the inspection stamps around the front cross bolt in the stock if they dont have those it is likely arefurb.
Click to expand...


Oh yes,please tell me about these Russian SKSs. While you're at it where did you get the 1956 production date from?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom