New Guy With New (To Me) Romanian

[cztulsa]

[cztulsa]

[cztulsa]

[montigre]

I don't know that I'd be as comfortable with that statement as you are montigre.  Even having any given rifle in my hands for a thorough inspection, I would never be able to make the call that a gun is unrefurbed/unissued/unfired.  There are just too many things the collecting community simply doesn't know about the refurb process for me to ever be comfortable using any one of those three labels.  "As-Issued" does not imply that the rifle has had no work done to it - guns in this category may have had a light reshellac or a replacement of an unnumbered component.  They most certainly have been taken down, inspected, and cleaned if nothing else.  Unless one knows the entire history of the firearm from birth on the assembly line, to issuance, to storage etc., I think it's an impossibly tough sell to try and definitively call something unrefurbed/unissued/unfired.  (Think of some of the M1 Garands sitting in the Springfield Armory Museum collection that were pulled directly from the line for presentation to various high level individuals collections and from there made their way to the museum)

I see and understand your point.  However, as a collector, there should be some acceptable vernacular to use when describing a gun that has no obvious marks indicating an arsenal refurb or rebuild.  I'm not going to get into unfired, because all of them were at least fired at the factory, so that descriptive should probably be omitted.  However, to speak to the as issued or unissued guns, I have 2 SKSs that I can state with 99% certainty that their condition would be described as "as issued".  One is a matching Yugo 59/66 that came with the log indicating it was never issued; only checked over and is in pristine condition.  The other is a matching KBI imported Tula Russian that is also in pristine condition, came in the original importers box, but obviously has no log and has no factory refurb marks.

The other SKSs I own (except for my '54 Tula mix master range buddy), though matching and in very good shape, I obviously cannot state they are unissued without some form of noted provenance, but by the same token, lacking clear-cut refurb marks or obvious signs of factory work (over sanding, mis-matched shellac, incorrect period parts, etc) I can not honestly state that they are not in "as issued" condition as they appear to be.

Are we just splitting hairs here in our descriptions for the unissued SKSs? 

[cztulsa]

OK - one last pic, because I've about worn this thread out, but I'm a bit excited by this one.  I've never owned one I thought was "unfired", but this has to be as close as I've come.  Gave it a good cleaning, and there was still cosmo inside (and probably still some I missed).  Lots of cool stamps.  I ran a white rag inside the gas block and gas tube - no soot, only a trace of cosmoline. The bolt and carrier show no real wear; the bolt face looks brand new.  I know they fire them, but this one may have gotten a quick refurb, and then straight to storage?

[Greasemonkey]

One is a matching Yugo 59/66 that came with the log indicating it was never issued; only checked over and is in pristine condition. The other is a matching KBI imported Tula Russian that is also in pristine condition, came in the original importers box, but obviously has no log and has no factory refurb marks.

Is the date in the book the date it was built, or later. Yugoslavian books were chucked during a refurb and a new book issued, while it may be unissued in its current state, it is not technically unissued. Why rebuild a never issued rifle, it was issued, used hard and then rebuilt, it's on it's second life.  And I bet the Russian has had something done to it, at least a through inspection, they just didn't pull it off a storage shelf, box it and ship it.


Romanian wood can vary wildly, some are just bla, monotone, hohum hunks of wood



Others are just like...POW....BLAM  



One of my favorites, a 1960 just like the OPs, just to show how wildly mismatched one can get, it has nothing matching, not a single part, even the rear sight leaf is mismatched. I got a whole collection of serial prefixes and numbers and a Yugoslavian bolt, a nice beat to death stock, and I wouldn't trade it for another. It's a Johnny Cash rifle, One piece at a time SKS 

[Loose}{Cannon]

Looks as 'as issued' as a Romy can get to me..   

How much?  Wanna trade?   Two chinese? Hit me....

[cztulsa]

Not even really sure what one in this condition is worth - I have a grasp of Russians and Chinese, but Rommys are kind of gray to me.  This one is a keeper; I've been watching for one for the last few years, but they don't come up very often locally.  Passed on one about a year ago for a bit less, but it wasn't near as nice as this one.  I'd say it's worth at least the $400 I paid for it, anyway.

[montigre]

One is a matching Yugo 59/66 that came with the log indicating it was never issued; only checked over and is in pristine condition. The other is a matching KBI imported Tula Russian that is also in pristine condition, came in the original importers box, but obviously has no log and has no factory refurb marks.

Is the date in the book the date it was built, or later. Yugoslavian books were chucked during a refurb and a new book issued, while it may be unissued in its current state, it is not technically unissued. Why rebuild a never issued rifle, it was issued, used hard and then rebuilt, it's on it's second life.  And I bet the Russian has had something done to it, at least a through inspection, they just didn't pull it off a storage shelf, box it and ship it. 

Actually, the year of manufacture of the 59/66 was 1971 (it has an "H" prefix) and the arsenal papers I received with it are dated June 30, 2006.  The papers list that the gun was still without any discernible wear (NAJ 0%), verified its caliber (KAL 7,64mm) and listed the condition as "unspoiled" (TEH. Brezhibno [translates roughly into English as "condition like a charm"]). 

Branko Bogdanovic, in his book on Yugoslavian Mausers, noted that it was standard practice for the Yugo military to remove each gun in storage every 5 years, clean it, perhaps test fire it, and then reapply the cosmoline and return it to storage or crate it for sale.  Since Branko was in the Yugo army and had to personally perform this duty, he represents a pretty good primary source for this data.

However, with regard to the Russian SKSs, since Russia did not produce logs with their exported SKSs one can only assume a particular SKS to be in "as issued" condition, but it seems it would be a fairly safe assumption to make only IF there are no other hints of a rework on said gun. 

[Loose}{Cannon]

Not even really sure what one in this condition is worth - I have a grasp of Russians and Chinese, but Rommys are kind of gray to me.  This one is a keeper; I've been watching for one for the last few years, but they don't come up very often locally.  Passed on one about a year ago for a bit less, but it wasn't near as nice as this one.  I'd say it's worth at least the $400 I paid for it, anyway.

I would say about $600 with sling.   Or....  Two chinamen.

[running-man]

I see and understand your point.  However, as a collector, there should be some acceptable vernacular to use when describing a gun that has no obvious marks indicating an arsenal refurb or rebuild.  I'm not going to get into unfired, because all of them were at least fired at the factory, so that descriptive should probably be omitted.  However, to speak to the as issued or unissued guns, I have 2 SKSs that I can state with 99% certainty that their condition would be described as "as issued".  One is a matching Yugo 59/66 that came with the log indicating it was never issued; only checked over and is in pristine condition.  The other is a matching KBI imported Tula Russian that is also in pristine condition, came in the original importers box, but obviously has no log and has no factory refurb marks.

The other SKSs I own (except for my '54 Tula mix master range buddy), though matching and in very good shape, I obviously cannot state they are unissued without some form of noted provenance, but by the same token, lacking clear-cut refurb marks or obvious signs of factory work (over sanding, mis-matched shellac, incorrect period parts, etc) I can not honestly state that they are not in "as issued" condition as they appear to be.

Are we just splitting hairs here in our descriptions for the unissued SKSs?

Many would consider it to be splitting hairs.  The term for a pristine gun here is 'as-issued'.  People often use the terms non-refurbed and as-issued interchangeably much as they do clip and magazine, receiver cover and dust cover, etc.  I'm certainly not going to beat anyone over the head as the terminology police like you see on other forums where certain jackwagons envicerate the newbies who would dare to call their type 56 a "Norinco".  I do, however, think it's good to think about what something means to make sure we're all saying what we really mean though.  My definitions would be something like this

• as-issued: As the gun looked when it was first issued.  Parts are all original as far as can be determined by comparison with other comparable pristine looking specimens.  No blatantly apparent refurb stamp or other signs of refurb on the gun, though nothing about the true refurb condition of the gun is known or inferred.
• non-refurbed: Never having gone through a refurb process.  Since the entire refurb processes of Iron Curtain nations are simply not known, this is an absolutely unknowable condition.  Anyone who claims a gun is non-refurb is making a guess (perhaps educated, but a guess nonetheless) that they have no proof to back up.  Might as well say that XYZ SKS was in the personal possession of Stalin/Mao/Hoxha/Tito at one time too!   

The only reason I think this is a big deal is because SKS-Files has been accused by other forums of simply making stuff up, making incorrect wild-a** guesses, leading noobs astray, coming to incorrect conclusions and doing shoddy work in general.  Best not to give them additional ammunition with which to beat us over the head with.  We think we have a reasonably good handle on what constitutes an as-issued specimen based on the data we've collected but we don't know enough to make a claim that any given SKS is unissued/non-refurbished/unfired.  If a member thinks they can, that's great, but don't be too surprised if someone calls for something more substantial than "I think it is because..." when you make that assertion. 

[Loose}{Cannon]

I'm not as issued....  Started falling apart around 2004.   


How much for the Romy?   

[Phosphorus32]

I'm not as issued....  Started falling apart around 2004.   


How much for the Romy?   

I'm a bit worse for wear myself and could probably use at least a light refurb. Only shoot blanks, need to upgrade my glass, my exterior finish is showing signs of age and abuse... 

[montigre]

Many would consider it to be splitting hairs.  The term for a pristine gun here is 'as-issued'.  People often use the terms non-refurbed and as-issued interchangeably much as they do clip and magazine, receiver cover and dust cover, etc.  I'm certainly not going to beat anyone over the head as the terminology police like you see on other forums where certain jackwagons envicerate the newbies who would dare to call their type 56 a "Norinco".  I do, however, think it's good to think about what something means to make sure we're all saying what we really mean though.  My definitions would be something like this

• as-issued: As the gun looked when it was first issued.  Parts are all original as far as can be determined by comparison with other comparable pristine looking specimens.  No blatantly apparent refurb stamp or other signs of refurb on the gun, though nothing about the true refurb condition of the gun is known or inferred.
• non-refurbed: Never having gone through a refurb process.  Since the entire refurb processes of Iron Curtain nations are simply not known, this is an absolutely unknowable condition.  Anyone who claims a gun is non-refurb is making a guess (perhaps educated, but a guess nonetheless) that they have no proof to back up.  Might as well say that XYZ SKS was in the personal possession of Stalin/Mao/Hoxha/Tito at one time too!   

The only reason I think this is a big deal is because SKS-Files has been accused by other forums of simply making stuff up, making incorrect wild-a** guesses, leading noobs astray, coming to incorrect conclusions and doing shoddy work in general.  Best not to give them additional ammunition with which to beat us over the head with.  We think we have a reasonably good handle on what constitutes an as-issued specimen based on the data we've collected but we don't know enough to make a claim that any given SKS is unissued/non-refurbished/unfired.  If a member thinks they can, that's great, but don't be too surprised if someone calls for something more substantial than "I think it is because..." when you make that assertion. 

Okay, I can agree with the your premise that the term "non-refurbished" should not be used when describing these guns especially since all of our C&Rs have likely gone through at least one inspection, whether worked on or not, that would technically constitute a form of refurbishment and we have no way of knowing exactly what may have been done to it at the arsenal when inspected.  I also agree that the term "un issued" should only be used when there is proof of provenance associated with a particular gun (like the log for my M59/66). 

With that out of the way, how is it best to differentiate between an as issued C&R that is in "pristine" condition and an as issued C&R that shows obvious wear, but still sports all of the original parts?  I've been chopped on a little here already by using the term "factory original" instead of "as issued" when describing one of my SKSs (I believe it was the '52 Tula I recently purchased).  Was that term just not one that is accepted within the collecting community? 

cztulsa, you have a very nice "as issued" Romanian SKS!!!

[montigre]

I'm a bit worse for wear myself and could probably use at least a light refurb. Only shoot blanks, need to upgrade my glass, my exterior finish is showing signs of age and abuse... 

Same here....Already underwent a moderate refurb (love my ortho docs!!), my glass is not as clear as when new, but my bluing and shellac is still going strong. 

LC, I doubt you'll get your paws on that cute Romanian any time soon....

[Greasemonkey]

Quote from: running-man on Today at 08:49:07 PM

    Many would consider it to be splitting hairs.  The term for a pristine gun here is 'as-issued'.  People often use the terms non-refurbed and as-issued interchangeably much as they do clip and magazine, receiver cover and dust cover, etc.  I'm certainly not going to beat anyone over the head as the terminology police like you see on other forums where certain jackwagons envicerate the newbies who would dare to call their type 56 a "Norinco".  I do, however, think it's good to think about what something means to make sure we're all saying what we really mean though.  My definitions would be something like this

        as-issued: As the gun looked when it was first issued.  Parts are all original as far as can be determined by comparison with other comparable pristine looking specimens.  No blatantly apparent refurb stamp or other signs of refurb on the gun, though nothing about the true refurb condition of the gun is known or inferred.
        non-refurbed: Never having gone through a refurb process.  Since the entire refurb processes of Iron Curtain nations are simply not known, this is an absolutely unknowable condition.  Anyone who claims a gun is non-refurb is making a guess (perhaps educated, but a guess nonetheless) that they have no proof to back up.  Might as well say that XYZ SKS was in the personal possession of Stalin/Mao/Hoxha/Tito at one time too!   

    The only reason I think this is a big deal is because SKS-Files has been accused by other forums of simply making stuff up, making incorrect wild-a** guesses, leading noobs astray, coming to incorrect conclusions and doing shoddy work in general.  Best not to give them additional ammunition with which to beat us over the head with.  We think we have a reasonably good handle on what constitutes an as-issued specimen based on the data we've collected but we don't know enough to make a claim that any given SKS is unissued/non-refurbished/unfired.  If a member thinks they can, that's great, but don't be too surprised if someone calls for something more substantial than "I think it is because..." when you make that assertion. 


Okay, I can agree with the your premise that the term "non-refurbished" should not be used when describing these guns especially since all of our C&Rs have likely gone through at least one inspection, whether worked on or not, that would technically constitute a form of refurbishment and we have no way of knowing exactly what may have been done to it at the arsenal when inspected.  I also agree that the term "un issued" should only be used when there is proof of provenance associated with a particular gun (like the log for my M59/66). 

With that out of the way, how is it best to differentiate between an as issued C&R that is in "pristine" condition and an as issued C&R that shows obvious wear, but still sports all of the original parts?  I've been chopped on a little here already by using the term "factory original" instead of "as issued" when describing one of my SKSs (I believe it was the '52 Tula I recently purchased).  Was that term just not one that is accepted within the collecting community? 

Just me....and it's gotta come out...   sometimes I think way to much emphasis gets thrown on this whole mess... I've seen alot of purdy rifles, and the posters only concern is, is it refurb or not refurb, no, oh it's nice, enjoy it, range report or whatever.. It is what it is, it can not be changed. I'm of the mind, regardless if it's completely refurbed, rebarreled and scrubbed, reserialed and restocked or as it was tugged out of Ivans or Vlads paws after their rigor mortis set in. I don't care if somebody else don't like it cause it's refurbed, I don't buy my weapons to impress other collectors, I'm all about me when I plunk down my dollars, if I get movement in the Cintas drawers, I'm gonna buy it.

The whole mess of refurb or original, factory this, light refurb that, scrubbed 6 ways from Sunday, restamped over and XXX'ed out just overly complicates things.

[running-man]

Okay, I can agree with the your premise that the term "non-refurbished" should not be used when describing these guns especially since all of our C&Rs have likely gone through at least one inspection, whether worked on or not, that would technically constitute a form of refurbishment and we have no way of knowing exactly what may have been done to it at the arsenal when inspected.  I also agree that the term "un issued" should only be used when there is proof of provenance associated with a particular gun (like the log for my M59/66). 

With that out of the way, how is it best to differentiate between an as issued C&R that is in "pristine" condition and an as issued C&R that shows obvious wear, but still sports all of the original parts?  I've been chopped on a little here already by using the term "factory original" instead of "as issued" when describing one of my SKSs (I believe it was the '52 Tula I recently purchased).  Was that term just not one that is accepted within the collecting community? 

cztulsa, you have a very nice "as issued" Romanian SKS!!!

That's where the "Current Condition" designator in the GB listings comes into play.  You could have a gun that is in "As-Issued" arsenal condition, and "Very Good" Current Condition and it would generally be more desirable (i.e. cost more $$) than a "refurbished" gun in the same Current Condition.  You could also have an "As-Issued" Arsenal Condition firearm in "Fair" Current Condition.  Put that up against a "refurbished" Arsenal Condition gun in "Very Good" Current Condition and I think you'll find certain collectors will lean different ways as to which gun they would rather have.  It's a good exercise to think about it though.  Sometimes the GB auctions still surprise me when people pony up big $ for a gun I consider not very desireable

I would rate CZ's gun as As-Issued, Good (perhaps Very Good if he got a cleaning kit and was able to come up with the original box/hang tag/instruction book, etc.)  It's quite a beautiful gun.  I know that S/N'd gas piston is driving him nuts, but honestly, that's pretty minor in the grand scheme of things especially compared to the typical chewed up mismatched stocks these guys often sport. 

[running-man]

Just me....and it's gotta come out...   sometimes I think way to much emphasis gets thrown on this whole mess... I've seen alot of purdy rifles, and the posters only concern is, is it refurb or not refurb, no, oh it's nice, enjoy it, range report or whatever.. It is what it is, it can not be changed. I'm of the mind, regardless if it's completely refurbed, rebarreled and scrubbed, reserialed and restocked or as it was tugged out of Ivans or Vlads paws after their rigor mortis set in. I don't care if somebody else don't like it cause it's refurbed, I don't buy my weapons to impress other collectors, I'm all about me when I plunk down my dollars, if I get movement in the Cintas drawers, I'm gonna buy it.

The whole mess of refurb or original, factory this, light refurb that, scrubbed 6 ways from Sunday, restamped over and XXX'ed out just overly complicates things.

I know Jimmy's been on his best behavior!    The only reason to care is to try and figure out how many dollars it's worth shelling out for XYZ specimen.  W/o a concrete set of somewhat universally desirable traits, there's absolutely no way to do this.  Sports card collectors order their desirable traits as do stamp and coin collectors.  Heck even beanie baby collectors have their own criteria for their collectables. 

Now it's a fair question to ask: "Should as-issued vs. refurb count so much in the grand scheme of SKS collecting?"  The market seems to say so.    Sometimes the market isn't right though... 

[rwhite135]

I'm a bit worse for wear myself and could probably use at least a light refurb. Only shoot blanks, need to upgrade my glass, my exterior finish is showing signs of age and abuse... 

Same here....Already underwent a moderate refurb (love my ortho docs!!), my glass is not as clear as when new, but my bluing and shellac is still going strong. 

LC, I doubt you'll get your paws on that cute Romanian any time soon....

Heck, I've been getting refurbed since I was 11.

As for LC wanting a cute Romanian there are websites for that...wait, you meant as in a Romanian rifle?  Nevermind, I didn't say anything... 

[cztulsa]

I would rate CZ's gun as As-Issued, Good (perhaps Very Good if he got a cleaning kit and was able to come up with the original box/hang tag/instruction book, etc.)

As in the cleaning kit in the stock?  If so, it's there.  Original box is likely long gone, as well as all the rest.  Was told that it came from an old collector who ended up in a nursing home, and his daughter was selling off all of his old guns.  This was sold in a 12-rifle lot, most of which were Chinese and Russian - and likely why my seller thought it was Chinese.