Gunboards Forums banner
1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Diamond Bullet Member
Joined
·
1,774 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Okay, I don't have photos right now, but I picked up a Chinese SKS today for a decent price. It has almost no marks on it save for a Triangle 1 on the receiver near the rear sight block and a serial number on the left side of the receiver. It's an 8.9 million serial number with all the numbers close together - no gaps in the series. All numbers match.

The features are as follows, using Yooper John's descriptions: The receiver is an early-style with the lightening cuts inside and along the bottom. The rear sight block is the early style. The barrel is screwed-on with the long collar. The bolt carrier does not have the lightening cuts milled on the side. The bayonet lug mount is the old style (as on the Russians) but the bayonet is a spike. The stock has the side-mounted sling and is a deepish red color with matching numbers to the rest of the rifle. The gas cylinder is an early one-piece style. The trigger housing is milled with the long forward section that is not flush. The import mark is an early stamped Century mark on the barrel, rather haphazardly-stamped (not dot-matrix-style).

It has no arsenal mark on it at all save for that Triangle 1 (but not in the location of the East German ones).

It also lacks any kind of Chinese characters on it at all.

Can anyone tell me about this rifle? I've searched Yooper and the Chinese SKS site but have found nothing definitive about maker or date or anything. It is mostly an early-feature SKS but with a spike bayonet (and stock with thin wrist inletted for spike bayo).
 

·
Silver Bullet Member
Joined
·
3,306 Posts
typo

Sounds interesting. Pictures will really help when you get a chance. The description is a real stumper. The long lug threaded barrel sounds appropriate for an 8 million series Type 56, but it should have a blade bayonet and the SN range stops at 8,209,000, i.e., an 8.2 million serial number, in your terminology. Besides, an 8 million series Type 56 should have a /26\ stamp and the 五六式 marking.

I suspect this could quickly become a challenging game of 20 questions, but one that may be quickly resolved with the upcoming pictures. Looking forward to seeing it :thumbsup:

BTW, the /1\ was determined by Chumak to be a refurbishment mark for an arsenal in Irkutsk (first thought to be Liski), not a DDR property mark?
 

·
Diamond Bullet Member
Joined
·
1,774 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
The Triangle 1 on this guy is not likely European in any way, just mentioned for reference. Any other markings but also shows no signs of having been scrubbed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,090 Posts
Yes, odd. Possible mix-master?

It would'nt be a /1\ ex-ex-DDR, ex-Liski now Irkutsk stamp on a Chinese gun.

Also the lightening cuts on the bolt carrier started in the 11mil range (or 10 mil, i forget which) on the /26\ guns.

Some of the smaller triangle proof stamps on the forward receiver round and and on the receiver bottom (beneath the wood) can look like /1\ when they are in fact lightly struck /7\ or /K\ or /y\ etc, for example. It is also not uncommon to find the /26\ stamp almost invisible from wear, grinding, light strike, or beneath the wood.



Post up some pics if ya get an opportunity.
 

·
Diamond Bullet Member
Joined
·
1,774 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 · (Edited)
Totally took it down and inspected with a magnifying glass and it lacked any markings other than the serial number, a kind of 7, and a few assembly marks. The triangle 1 is definitely a 1 and not a letter or other number. The serial number is closer to the top of the bolt carrier race-way than the wood stock. There is pitting on the rifle, but who knows when that occurred.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
214 Posts
It's likely an '89 late build specifically for export like this one:



They are nice guns, usually in brand new replacement stocks with all scrubbed and matching numbers throughout the gun.

I find that it's preferable *not* to think in 'millions' when talking about Chinese type 56s. Think in terms of prefixes regardless of numeral length and the rabbit holes tend to be reduced just a little a bit. :thumbsup:
 

·
Diamond Bullet Member
Joined
·
1,774 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
I understand about the "millions" but establishing it isn't a rifle in the 200,000 range or anything. It could be a newly-made rifle in 1989, except it is made almost entirely of early components save for the bayonet. Sure, it could have been parted up from parts-bins, but that would tend to indicate a greater hodge-podge of parts that seem lacking here. Of course, with Chinese arms, the mystery is what it is. There seems some significant disagreement between Yooper and the Chinese SKS site about dating and the like.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,090 Posts

·
Diamond Bullet Member
Joined
·
1,774 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Bore is excellent and I've always preferred the slimmer stocks that go with the spike bayonets as opposed to the thicker blade bayonet stocks.
 

·
Silver Bullet Member
Joined
·
6,556 Posts
I don't think the style of parts is always useful in trying to put a date on the Chinese SKS rifles. Maybe this can be done within a particular factory, but between factories I have examples of "early" and "new" features being all mixed up on brand new, all matching, un-issued condition imports. Threaded barrels with stamped trigger housings, pinned barrels with milled trigger housings, etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,090 Posts
Rear sight has a 3 mark battle sight. What does that signify ?
That's the late style 'battle setting". "П" - was used for a long time. Then, Roman numeral "III" and then the number "3".

Most rearward setting on the SKS sight is battle site hold center aim on a torso-sized target from 0-300 meters and it will hit the target somewhere between the shoulders and the waistline, iirc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,090 Posts
I don't think the style of parts is always useful in trying to put a date on the Chinese SKS rifles. Maybe this can be done within a particular factory, but between factories I have examples of "early" and "new" features being all mixed up on brand new, all matching, un-issued condition imports. Threaded barrels with stamped trigger housings, pinned barrels with milled trigger housings, etc.
I think it's the serial pattern and the absent arsenal stamp -- along with the non-contemporaneous line-up of parts that give this away as a 1989 commercial model. Per RM's examples and research.
 

·
Silver Bullet Member
Joined
·
6,556 Posts
I think it's the serial pattern and the absent arsenal stamp -- along with the non-contemporaneous line-up of parts that give this away as a 1989 commercial model. Per RM's examples and research.
I don't disagree. I was just agreeing with Davis's comment that sometimes the Chinese rifles don't follow expected patterns. Fun stuff for collectors! :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
214 Posts
I understand about the "millions" but establishing it isn't a rifle in the 200,000 range or anything. It could be a newly-made rifle in 1989, except it is made almost entirely of early components save for the bayonet. Sure, it could have been parted up from parts-bins, but that would tend to indicate a greater hodge-podge of parts that seem lacking here. Of course, with Chinese arms, the mystery is what it is. There seems some significant disagreement between Yooper and the Chinese SKS site about dating and the like.
I think "Made in '89" is probably not a good use of terminology, "rebuilt in '89 using old stock components" is a better one.

The RSL is a post year 14 model for certain, possibly later than that. I don't think the rifle is as homogeneous as it appears at first blush. They probably started with a mostly complete early rifle and replaced only what was truly needed. That thing has certainly seen a pretty hard life regardless of whether it gained the majority of the rust and pitting in China or here in the states after import. I honestly believe it could be either; some of the early imported Chinese guns during the 88-94 boom period were in pretty poor shape and very hard for retailers to move (the whole buy a $99 Chinese SKS and get a free case of ammo promotion comes to mind). I agree with jjj that across factories, you simply can't rely on a single component characteristic to date the carbine. This is one of the biggest reasons we have a whole board section cataloging the various different arsenal component configurations that exist.

I suspect Yooper and I agree on more than we disagree, though I haven't talked with him for several years. He's been updating his site over the past couple of years, but I believe he's still got some pretty outdated info still up. I will say that I have seen zero proof offered up *anywhere* for the 1956 + millions dating hypothesis whereas I think the evidence for the nth year hypothesis is remakably robust with several different lines of evidence all leading up to the same conclusion.
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top