1950 SKS with spike bayonet

[jstin2]

I had info about another 50 with a spike bayonet on survivors. I asked sksnut for pictures. He sent me 4 pictures of his carbine and also stated that is was refurbed as most are. I tried to post pictures, but my computer skills are next to nil. I only had running-man's email address and asked him if he could post them. Looking at pictures it is a early 50 - engraved date, hand stamped tula star, 90 degree gas port, eyelet latch pin and a spike bayonet. Stock is later design and not tapered. There was only one problem, the stock ferrule was not for a spike bayonet due to pin placement and possibly size. If stock ferrule was replaced at refurb. they probably would have replaced gas port to a 45. In my opinion the spike is not original to carbine and was added on later. When pictures are posted, you can give your opinion.

[Loose}{Cannon]

What would be wrong with the gas block requiring it to be replaced?

[jstin2]

The only problem with the carbine that I have mentioned is that the stock ferrule is not for a spike bayonet, but there is a spike bayonet adhered to it.

[Loose}{Cannon]

Gotcha.....  Its a blade gun because of that ferrule.  Im not surprised

[jstin2]

If there is one person who is hoping to find another 50 SKS with a spike bayonet it is me. But if the pictures does not prove it, I have to show and tell what I see. I have learned a lot from people on different forums, to know what to look for. As I said before, being on these forums is a learning tool and if you think you know everything, something new pops up.

[running-man]

Here are the photos jstin is talking about. I don't really think you can draw any conclusions off this one beyond it being an early gun that's been refurbished. 

-RM

[Justin Hell]

I keep leaning more and more towards a period of spike/blade concurrence. It might have been a week or two...using up old parts, transitioning to new parts...I doubt there was someone making sure there was one gas block to every receiver latch, but I also doubt they would waste anything...so as new developments came along, they implemented them....and there may have been a period of hodge podge components...possibly more than once where you will find original components that don't fit the cookie cutter version of what each year is supposed to have for their components.

This is why we research, and it seems like little by little we make progress. I look forward to finding out more...and finding another 50 spiker wouldn't hurt.  The main thing is trying to make sense of the serial progression.  Secondary is trying to determine what WOULD be done at refurb...vs what COULD be done at refurb. Since rebarreling even non chromed barrels didn't seem to happen at all or if so, rarely...it seems likely that very little that resides on the barrel would every require replacement either....since many other can's o' worms get opened in doing so when dealing with the slight variations that make 49s and 50s incompatible...in the most pissantly miniscule ways.

I think folks have a tendency to lean towards year models for guns being like year models for modern cars. The minor changes asserted towards  years may be tainted with weird guns like yours...where parts were being used until they were gone, while new changes were being implemented. Where modern thought gives you the idea that you won't find a 92 bumper on a 93 truck....despite them sharing an identical almost bolt pattern that could be fudged to work.

(as I was typing RM posted that 50...one photo shows a potentially saggy bayonet that might have been forced into position by the photographer in the previous photo. There is an unblued sight leaf, which isn't uncommon...but certainly isn't original. The stock doesn't look to be the slender forend type like the normal spiker, but more akin to the blade type....probably reworked/fashioned to fit a spike.  It is also double pinned...so perhaps they had to reinforce that area to route out some more stock to allow for the spike?  I have a double pinned Russian I bought simply because I thought it might have been a reworked 49....

Also....this has a top pinned stock ferrule.  That is not what goes with a spike.....so why would they leave the spike and replace the ferrule?  It is the opposite of my problem with my 49/50 debacle.   Joy...

I am also not entirely convinced that isn't a M44 bayonet....I faked one for kicks for mine....looks and sags very similarly.

I do not see a rivet on the mag from either angle...so that says something too....49/50 parts convergence maybe?

I would want to see about a dozen photos that aren't there for some more exacting evidence.  I think the main thing to look for now is the pin placement betwixt 49 and 50 FSBs....which is where I think I found evidence of a difference.  Most folks don't get to tear apart these guns...and try to restore them.  Unless someone could convince an ex employee of Westrifle to admit they 'made' some 49s...and ask about the pins on those FSBs...we might never know. 

The original FSB on my 49/50 thing looked like a flawless bayonet delete job....and the pin placement matches no other I have seen. Makes me wonder if they considered not having bayonets at all...it probably was Kalifornia...but it looks designed that way to me....the rear pin placement from a known early 50, and a known 51 do not line up. Those both shared the same pin placement as each other....but not to my gun.   That and the pain it was to fit a 50 cover vs a 49 are the two things that make me think mine was a 49 blade...originally.  Otherwise, I would lean more towards mine being an early 50.

[pcke2000]

the stock and front ferrule are not correct for Russian spike bayonet. The bayonet looks wrong too.

[Boris Badinov]

the stock and front ferrule are not correct for Russian spike bayonet. The bayonet looks wrong too.

I agree that the stock fore end looks  pot bellied-- for blade bayo-- and not the gradual taper of the spike channeled stocks.


But is there a difference between the profile appearance of the spike and blade ferrules?

[jstin2]

Stock ferrule for a spike does not have a V cut, the pin placement for a spike is at the bottom, whereas the stock ferrule for a blade is at the top. If you look closely, you can see that the pin placement on this carbine is at the top. Boris- if you contact r-m and ask him to forward the email I sent him, you can enlarge the carbine that was posted and see better the stock ferrule placement.

[Boris Badinov]

the pin placement for a spike is at the bottom, whereas the stock ferrule for a blade is at the top.

Aha.

Thanks.

[Justin Hell]

Even without being able to see the pin, you can tell the difference because Russian spike ferrules made no bayonet contact at all...unlike the Chinese which used the V notch for blades and the U for spikes...the stock and ferrule are slender enough to not have any contact with it at all. It relies on the stock to keep it tucked away.  I daresay you would have an easier time finding parts for a North Korean or East German than finding one of those ferrules.

It probably would be cheaper to have one fabricated than to buy one...if you could even locate one.  I have given up, and will just be happy with the blued blade...

If I had the stones to potentially mess up a perfectly functional gun to check...I would love to see if mine is notched on both top and bottom of that barrel section to indicate whether it originally was spiked and later retrofitted for a blade.

Mine does not have the glob of weld that seemed to be a preventative measure for cracking with the blade notch...nor do I recall when the blobbed ones were used on Russians. I want to say late 50 and 51 had that there...and that it seemed to come well into the blades use, and it was assumed to be due to them cracking because of the V cut..either during manufacturing or in use.  Apparently around 80 or so the Chinese started blobbing them briefly too...I have one of those ferrules that was sent by mistake in a huge lot of handguard ferrules.  From the looks of that one, it seems like it was done before they cut the V in, just to be safe when they did cut it. I can't remember whether the Russians appeared to be done before or after the cut....nor where that discussion even happened.  It is another irritating facet of the early Russian SKS though.

[jstin2]

I have a refurb 49 with blade and a later 50 with blade and they both have the glob weld of stock ferrule. My 51 does not have any weld on it.

[jstin2]

I just noticed that the stock is xxxxxx, so it has been replaced during refurb. But still the defining factor is the stock ferrule and pin placement and the way the spike sits without a support.

[pcke2000]

he has or had a CAI imported 1949 with correct spike bayonet, hardwood stock, and front ferrule. That 1949 rifle went through refurb at at least two different refurb arsenals and has a wrong receiver cover take down latch.

[newchi]

I just noticed that the stock is xxxxxx, so it has been replaced during refurb. But still the defining factor is the stock ferrule and pin placement and the way the spike sits without a support.

I find it hard to believe that the arsenal would replace a stock and leave the wrong bayonet on it.
I think the bayo was switched later.

[jstin2]

I have a spare laminate stock, so I thought I would try to fit it on a spike - stock ferrule. It would fit if I trimmed some wood, as the stock ferrule is smaller than others. I don't want to damage a perfectly good stock so I left it alone. But what I noticed is that my tapered 50 stock (laminate) was made for a spike bayonet and not converted. I took readings between the cleaning rod slot and the bayonet slot.  5 mm for spike and 1.5 mm for bayonet. That means that there is more wood between the slots on a spike stock. Will post some pictures next week for comparison. Leaned something new today.

[newchi]

my tapered 50 stock (laminate) was made for a spike bayonet and not converted. I took readings between the cleaning rod slot and the bayonet slot.  5 mm for spike and 1.5 for bayonet.

Damn you people, always making me go downstairs to look at stuff.

[pcke2000]

I have a spare laminate stock, so I thought I would try to fit it on a spike - stock ferrule. It would fit if I trimmed some wood, as the stock ferrule is smaller than others. I don't want to damage a perfectly good stock so I left it alone. But what I noticed is that my tapered 50 stock (laminate) was made for a spike bayonet and not converted. I took readings between the cleaning rod slot and the bayonet slot.  5 mm for spike and 1.5 mm for bayonet. That means that there is more wood between the slots on a spike stock. Will post some pictures next week for comparison. Leaned something new today.

you can find pictures of refurb laminated stock fit for spike bayonet on demilitarized 1949 SKS's on Russian forums.

[jstin2]

What I want to do is a comparison between the stocks where they fit into stock ferrule. When you see them side by side you will see the differences. Yes I have seen laminate stocks for spike ferrules (but not in detail), but I have never seen the actual differences. Photos will show next week unless somebody has pictures available now.