SKS need help , please

[Boris Badinov]

Reference to posts # and reason why each one is refurb? For rifle I posted the reason is star, correct (conclusions from what you see, not from what you assume i.e. no info on EPed numbers)?

First rifle:
This gap is a suspicious, totally inconsistent with new manufacture guns

The И at the end of the stock serial. Dates on stocks were abandoned in late 1955. Also the very faint Polish property stamp above the stock serial (WP) indicates sanding and refinish.

View attachment 246324


Second Rifle:

SEE reply #22:
Only two right side crossbolt stamps (none int the 3 and 6 o'clock positions) = possible indication of sanding and refinish.
Extremely faint left crossbolt stamp in the middle of 4 very bold crossbolt stamps. = indication of sanding, refinish and restamping.






Third rifle:
Star on the stock, duh.
And total absence of proof that it is all matching




For all of these rifles: In order to prove that the stock is original, there first needs to be evidence that the rifles are all matching. For this there needs to be photographic evidence of all serial numbers. But even all matching rifles can be non-original as well as heavily refurbed. For this, the gas tube and piston serials are crucial. Replacement gas tubes will very often exhibit remnants of the previous serial numbers. And the tube surface will often have evidence of reblue or paint prior to re-serialization.

Additionally. it would be helpful to see the annealing strips on the receiver covers. From the few pictures provided, all three rifles appear not to have the annealing stripe. This would be evidence of reblue or paint during refurbishment. It may also just be the lighting of the photos. Without more photos is a no-call. No way to say if they are reblued or not.

 

[Horilka]

I'll answer one by one.

First rifle:
This gap is a suspicious, totally inconsistent with new manufacture guns

The И at the end of the stock serial. Dates on stocks were abandoned in late 1955. Also the very faint Polish property stamp above the stock serial (WP) indicates sanding and refinish.

First rifle is refurb. She has replaced stock, mistakenly serialized with "И". This is common for replacement stocks on letter series and my best guess that Ivan at GRAU arsenal was not aware that "И" is a year code and not a part of serial. On top of that stock exhibits features of recent tampering and refinishing. And WP does not belong there. So it looks like we are in agreement here.

 

[pcvando]

Laminate only on ORIGINAL guns is the claim I'm making.

Where have you posted the photos of your all matching, non-refurbs with all of the serials. Would be great if you could proved me wrong.

Convince me. Show what you got.

It’s not even worth it because your going to keep tooting your own horn regardless of the findings...

Let me get this straight because I’d love to show you my NON REFURB MATCHING FACTORY examples of letter series rifles...

You are saying, all letter series guns had laminate stocks originally? That’s absurd.

 

[PinkyPlinker]

I'll answer one by one.


First rifle is refurb. She has replaced stock, mistakenly serialized with "И". This is common for replacement stocks on letter series and my best guess that Ivan at GRAU arsenal was not aware that "И" is a year code and not a part of serial. On top of that stock exhibits features of recent tampering and refinishing. And WP does not belong there. So it looks like we are in agreement here.

Having owned and sold the OP rifle I can say that it is absolutely a refurb and is marked as such on the receiver cover. Appears to be the 5th Grau diamond stamp. It was not claimed to be unrefurbished when I acquired it, nor when I sold it. Agreed, WP does not belong there, yet appears in two places. It is consistent with a handful of others, one owned by a member of our guest’s precious SKS Files. I advertised it as an oddity.

As for refinishing, the area around the SN was scrubbed (sanded) as often seen on refurbs and refinished whenever the SN was stamped. It did not happen recently, the age is apparent when held in the hand.

The stamps around the crossbolt are also inconsistent. I can’t explain them. I’ve had it two years, so sometime before that. The area around them is flaking shellac which clearly shows its age.

That’s all I can say about it.

 

[Jay]

And with that, I think we are done here.

Cheers
Jay