Russian SKS Qn, which one to buy?

Chemist

Sponsoring Business
Business Member
Rating - 100%
395   0   0
I'm not that familiar with the Russian SKS's...read the forums etc but I still have a few questions. What would people suggest, laminate stock or solid wood stock? I'm thinking post 51 as they have chrome barrels. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
 
Go to w ww.yooperj.com for answers to most if your Q's. Personally I'd go with a laminate stock. The wood may or may not be good, I haven't heard much about the Russian wood, but I know the chinese wood is like balsa- that's why I went with a Tapco T 6 stock and I love it. :ar15:
 
The answer depends on what you want it for.

If you are a collector, find one that is in unissued condition. The next best choice is one that has been refurbished to as new, with a blued finish. All Izhevsk or Tula components, plus stamped numbers matching is best.

If it's a shooter, then find a nice refurbished example with the least wear. Birch stocks are very strong and durable. Laminate stocks are tough as nails, but are prone to splitting at the wrist, hence the re enforcement bolt. Make sure you find one that has a tight stock fitting, and a reasonable trigger.

If it will be used for some kind of bubba job, find a good example with no collector's value.

Please read curtton's excellent sticky at the top of the forum page for some insight into these fine carbines.
 
Last edited:
I agree that laminate stocks overall are certainly tougher then birch, beech or walnut wood. Less prone to swelling from moisture, but cheaper to make. Very much like plywood.

Locating, cutting, and seasoning appropriate wood for rifle stocks is a time consuming process. Many stock blanks can have knots or other faults, and there is much wastage of wood in creating the final stock. Hence the use of two or even three piece stocks by the Soviets (or Finns, for that matter) to eliminate waste. I find the overall appearance of laminate stocks quite attractive.

But the wrist bolt was installed on the SKS, M-44 and M91/30 laminate stocks because.....?
 
Early M-38, then later M-44, and M91/30 laminate stocks were first issued without wrist bolts. I have examples with both types. I've also seen wrist bolts installed on some M91/30 and SVT-40 stocks, when refurbished. That modification is rare on birch stocks. Wrist bolts were not used on Czarist period rifles. Not even the Finns used wrist bolts on their birch stocked Mosin Nagants. That must say something regarding the strength of the wood. Solid birch, beech and walnut stocks will crack if exposed to enough abuse.

The Soviets during the Great Patriotic War were quite conservative regarding scale of equipment issue and very practical and minimalist in design. Post 1945, laminate stocks were becoming more common, especially during refurbishment of inventory. Don't forget the massive loss in men and equipment of all types during the war plus the destruction of major industrial centres. Laminate wood is very practical when ordinary birch wood is in short supply.

If there was nothing wrong with the design, or the production methods of laminated wood, nor any feed back from field use indicating a flaw or failure at the wrist from recoil stress, why install a reinforcing bolt, if not necessary?
It wasn't done from 1891-1950's for birch wood stocks on millions of rifles and carbines.
 
Back
Top Bottom