1949 Tula Redux

[Phosphorus32]

Well, you've seen it before, but here are some more pictures. A trade was established and now it resides in Washington and my 1951 resides in Chevy Boy's neck of the woods.

Not much more to say except I'm happy    Just a lot of detailed pictures for reference. Remarkable how many 1949 features survived a heavy refurbishment at Arsenal No. 1, Balakleya.

[pcke2000]

Big congratulations again !!

[pcke2000]

Interesting to see bayonet has full serial e-penciled.

[Phosphorus32]

Interesting to see bayonet has full serial e-penciled.

Yeah, that is a new location for a serial number to me.

[pcke2000]

Interestingly, my 49 firing pin has a matching e-penciled serial number too.

The safety level is a real 49 level.

[Chevy Boy]

Did a lot of 1949 parts typically get “scrubbed” and replaced during the refurbishment process?

[hoopharted]

beautiful , i need a rusky for my stable again

[pcke2000]

Did a lot of 1949 parts typically get “scrubbed” and replaced during the refurbishment process?

It's more likely case by case. However, you can generally tell if parts are period correct.

[Bubbazinetti]

Very nice rifle boss.

[Phosphorus32]

Did a lot of 1949 parts typically get “scrubbed” and replaced during the refurbishment process?

It's more likely case by case. However, you can generally tell if parts are period correct.

Right, scrubbing and restamping parts was just a common procedure during refurbishment within the Soviet arms (and equipment) refurbishment arsenal system, regardless of the year of the SKS. So many parts on 1949 Tulas are unique to that year, as pcke points out, such that you can look for those period correct features: spike bayonet, proper stock, proper ferrule, bayonet lug, receiver cover latch with loop, magazine without a pin (lost on this one), general bolt shape, spring loaded firing pin...

[Phosphorus32]

Very nice rifle boss.

Thanks man! 

[pcke2000]

Did a lot of 1949 parts typically get “scrubbed” and replaced during the refurbishment process?

It's more likely case by case. However, you can generally tell if parts are period correct.

Right, scrubbing and restamping parts was just a common procedure during refurbishment within the Soviet arms (and equipment) refurbishment arsenal system, regardless of the year of the SKS. So many parts on 1949 Tulas are unique to that year, as pcke points out, such that you can look for those period correct features: spike bayonet, proper stock, proper ferrule, bayonet lug, receiver cover latch with loop, magazine without a pin (lost on this one), general bolt shape, spring loaded firing pin...

I would like to add 'safety lever'. I still believe 1949 to early 1950 (?) has different type of safety lever.

[Greatguns]

Did a lot of 1949 parts typically get “scrubbed” and replaced during the refurbishment process?

It's more likely case by case. However, you can generally tell if parts are period correct.

Right, scrubbing and restamping parts was just a common procedure during refurbishment within the Soviet arms (and equipment) refurbishment arsenal system, regardless of the year of the SKS. So many parts on 1949 Tulas are unique to that year, as pcke points out, such that you can look for those period correct features: spike bayonet, proper stock, proper ferrule, bayonet lug, receiver cover latch with loop, magazine without a pin (lost on this one), general bolt shape, spring loaded firing pin...

I would like to add 'safety lever'. I still believe 1949 to early 1950 (?) has different type of safety lever.

The lever is pretty much the same but it is friction based as opposed to the spring 'over center' based safety levers which, without the spring, just flop around.

[pcke2000]

Did a lot of 1949 parts typically get “scrubbed” and replaced during the refurbishment process?

It's more likely case by case. However, you can generally tell if parts are period correct.

Right, scrubbing and restamping parts was just a common procedure during refurbishment within the Soviet arms (and equipment) refurbishment arsenal system, regardless of the year of the SKS. So many parts on 1949 Tulas are unique to that year, as pcke points out, such that you can look for those period correct features: spike bayonet, proper stock, proper ferrule, bayonet lug, receiver cover latch with loop, magazine without a pin (lost on this one), general bolt shape, spring loaded firing pin...

I would like to add 'safety lever'. I still believe 1949 to early 1950 (?) has different type of safety lever.

The lever is pretty much the same but it is friction based as opposed to the spring 'over center' based safety levers which, without the spring, just flop around.

Sorry, that's not what I was talking about. The difference was regarding the direction of serrations on the lever.

[jstin2]

I compared my early 50 and 54 safety levers. Never noticed difference until it was mentioned. I added 2 pictures from a early 49(no knurls).

https://ibb.co/album/FkZhjC

[Greatguns]

Did a lot of 1949 parts typically get “scrubbed” and replaced during the refurbishment process?

It's more likely case by case. However, you can generally tell if parts are period correct.

Right, scrubbing and restamping parts was just a common procedure during refurbishment within the Soviet arms (and equipment) refurbishment arsenal system, regardless of the year of the SKS. So many parts on 1949 Tulas are unique to that year, as pcke points out, such that you can look for those period correct features: spike bayonet, proper stock, proper ferrule, bayonet lug, receiver cover latch with loop, magazine without a pin (lost on this one), general bolt shape, spring loaded firing pin...

I would like to add 'safety lever'. I still believe 1949 to early 1950 (?) has different type of safety lever.

The lever is pretty much the same but it is friction based as opposed to the spring 'over center' based safety levers which, without the spring, just flop around.

Sorry, that's not what I was talking about. The difference was regarding the direction of serrations on the lever.

Huh, never paid attention to the aesthetics of them. I'll have to compare next time I get them out.

[jaroslav]

It looks, that the gas tube and piston were replaced. The font on the first letter is different from the rest.

[Phosphorus32]

It looks, that the gas tube and piston were replaced. The font on the first letter is different from the rest.

You’re referring to the font of free hand electropenciled parts? I definitely look at fonts on stamped parts but I never thought to assume that all parts that are EPd have to be done by the same person in the same way on each part. That seems like a big set of assumptions to me.

I’ve never seen a gas piston quite like this one before. It’s subtle but different.

[jaroslav]

Yes. Different hand did the first letter.

[Phosphorus32]

Yes. Different hand did the first letter.

Yeah, I’m sticking to that’s impossible to determine, given that an electropencil is not a precision writing tool, the different radii of the two parts, and it’s a human doing the writing (no two letters will be exactly the same). You can see how wavy every part of the Ж is on the tighter radius gas piston.