Soviet Re-arsenal re-barreling?

[Boris Badinov]

In a recent thread on CGN, a forum member claims to have a chrome-lined 1950 gun in his collection. I am doubtful, however I am aware that it isn't entirely impossible -- however improbable it would seem. From time to time over the past 7 or 8 years I have encountered  claims of Soviets re-barreling sks45's during refurbishment. In that time, however, I haven't seen any definitive proof that this ever happened.

It seems as if the entire process would overlly labor intensive, and that most practical means of addressing barrels too worn to return to service, would be simply tossing the entire barreled action into the scrap heap and putting the rest of the rifle back into service as replacement parts.

What definitice evidence -- if any -- is there that the Soviets re-placed barrels on the sks45?

[Loose}{Cannon]

What definitice evidence -- if any -- is there that the Soviets re-placed barrels on the sks45?

Doubt there is any, but I dont think it would be much trouble to bust off an old barrel and slap on a new one. The receiver is a highly milled component that would be regarded as valuable so long as its not broken.  Especially a non chrome barrel, I imagine pitted or otherwise un-serviceable 49/50 barrels having a much more likelihood of being replaced.

[running-man]

I got nothin Boris. 97% of the photos I have are in the stock, so no help from the alignment marks and barrel match #'s.  I'm very wary of any internet poster's ability to differentiate chrome vs non-chrome lined barrels too. You have to physically hold and check a few hundred guns before you'd be able to make any kind of determination I'd think.

As for the practicality of it, i dont see why it wouldnt be a standard part of the refurb process to replace worn and pitted barrels. They took the time to XXX stocks, grind and restamp numbers off mags and trigger groups, and to black bbq paint the bolts, carriers, and receivers. I don't think barrel swaps to get a near new gun would be too much of a task. As far as i know, the barrels didn't change outer dimensions, so all the RSBs, gas blocks, and FSBs would be reused, eliminating the need to go searching for an early style gas block or a late RSB for any particular rebarrel.

I've got no proof they did this, but I generally dont see swapped or mismatched RSB, gas block, or FSBs on Russian guns. This is how I always reconciled it in my mind. 

[Boris Badinov]

What lead to this query was the claim of a 1950 dated gun with an early bolt assembly AND a replacement chrome-lined barrel.

I struck me as particularly odd that an arsenal would put in the effort to refurb a rifle with the early bolt and carrier design. It would make more sense (to me) if it were a replacement barrel on a 1950 gun with the type2 bolt design.

Also the gun in question came through one of the Canadian distributors. Which has me considering the possibility that the dated cover is a replacement and that the rifle is in fact just a 1951 gun with chrome barrel and a early firing pin-- which also sounds weird.

[Greasemonkey]

What definitice evidence -- if any -- is there that the Soviets re-placed barrels on the sks45?

Doubt there is any, but I dont think it would be much trouble to bust off an old barrel and slap on a new one. The receiver is a highly milled component that would be regarded as valuable so long as its not broken.  Especially a non chrome barrel, I imagine pitted or otherwise un-serviceable 49/50 barrels having a much more likelihood of being replaced.

I would also tend to agree with this.... many nations were known to replace worn barrels and reuse the receiver and the rest that met their guidelines.. Finland, France, Switzerland, Britain, even the United States, plus others done this. Finland was huge in this type of operation on captured Mosins, 99% of Finnish Mosins are all Russian receivers, they just rebarreled with their barrels. Why chuck a perfectly good labor intensive receiver that meets/exceeds all criteria when you could throw a new barrel on it for maybe a tenth of the cost, and a tenth of the time of building a new weapon, and just have a fully viable rebuilt weapon ready for action.  When your fully equipped to do it in a massive rebuild shop, it's not that hard.

MAS36s, Enfield rifles, 1903's, 1917 Enfield, K31s, Garands, M1 Carbines all got rebarreled... I"m sure even Sweden rebarreled their Mauser given how close they checked bores.

[Justin Hell]

I have a few issues that I try wrap my head around. 

I can see rebarreling, why not? What I don't get is changing barrel components around, without skipping to the chase and replacing the whole assembly. For instance, replacing the spiker small stock ferrule on a 49 to meet blade bayonet and stock standards.  If recycling was a paramount priority...we should also see '55s with the occasional 90 or 45 degree gas block.  From my reading I am beginning to surmise that it wasn't a shift changeover at Tula and suddenly they exclusively made blades.  More and more of the stuff coming up in Canada makes me think that blade and spikes had a concurrent period in later 49 and early 50. I speculate it was probably sometime mid Decemberish that it may have began to transform....what would really be nice to isolate is when the receiver covers became stamped vs engraved....

There is enough evidence from what I have found in the 49 dept. on Russian sites to make me suspect rebarrelling didn't happen. What I have seen refurbished in that era at most have replacement laminate stocks, while retaining all of the original features...even the spikes. Beyond that, they appear to be unfettered.  I have not seen a spiker refurb that has even a 45 degree block...I did not see any from 49 that still had original bluing...indicating pretty drastic refurb with the BBQ dip....I feel for the poor dumb bastard that had to fit a laminate to a few of them. 

Considering that for the majority of Russian SKS manufacture, they were in a rebuilding period...and the SKS was always a bridesmaid, but never the bride. I find it pretty cool that they seemed to be still working out some kinks on it for as long as they did. (bad gas block innuendo intended...hope you got it)

I can totally see them unbarreling and reusing receivers but totally upgrading them in the process....and scrubbing them. They liked to scrub things and reserial. I don't think they did many of the early ones, simply because there weren't many that needed rearsenaling.  It would not be hard to upgrade an early receiver to accept the updated take down lever though...some 49/50 receivers may be in the melee of refurbed guns.  When you don't see evidence of random early parts used on other refurbs it kind of makes you question just what they would do.

I do believe there were some minor variances between 49 and early 50 even though. Fitting an early 50 cover to my 49/50whathaveyouSKS was a bear of a job, whereas finding a replacement 49 cover took little more than reblueing the scrubbed serial that was dabbed into the BBQ pit for a sec. Fitting a known early 50 trigger group to my receiver was also an unexpected surprise. There may be enough variance in them for it to not be worth the effort to rebarrel. How much could one use/neglect a gun to require a new barrel within two years?  Perhaps the OP's gun in reference was just an early trial in chroming? It falls into the last evolution time frame that the SKS ever had until the Chinese started cost cutting measures....and the Albanians just got all wacky with it.

All this being said, one day away from my 11 month anniversary of really reading into early Russians much at all. My first and only...so far....just happens to fit into the weird few months these transformed into what essentially was the cookie cutter SKS for many years and nations to come.

[newchi]

My vote is, of course they re-barrelled them.  There are lots of ways to wreck a barrel without shooting it out. 

[running-man]

Justin, I think you and I are looking at this from totally different ends of the spectrum.  To reuse a '49 receiver, you simply have to have an early RSB as a late one will simply not fit.  Because of this, and because you don't see early FSBs and curved gas blocks on early receiver guns (at least I don't), my thought is that when they rebarreled an SKS, they reused 100% of the components attached to the barrel.  With the barrel off already, it wouldn't be much of a task to pull the FSB, stock ferrule, gas block, and RSB and then refit them all together onto the new barrel after it's indexed onto the receiver.  I would think it very rare that the majority of these barrel mounted components wouldn't be reusable.  Voila, you have a gun with a new barrel and mostly original components.  Then they fit everything else according to what the gun needs, with the exception being blade bayos being used with early spike stock ferrules (and we've seen them weld the reinforcing plug on these to avoid the cleaning rod hole weakening the whole setup.)   

The only things I see heavy evidence of being swapped for non like year hardware are things like rear sight leafs, receiver covers, magazines and the like.  As you've noted, this probably took some fitting, but being in a refurb shop, they could grind to their hearts content and at the end of the day, if they had a working firearm that's all that mattered. 

[Loose}{Cannon]

I struck me as particularly odd that an arsenal would put in the effort to refurb a rifle with the early bolt and carrier design. It would make more sense (to me) if it were a replacement barrel on a 1950 gun with the type2 bolt design.

Yet many refurbs are in the country with spring loaded fp bolts.

[Boris Badinov]

I struck me as particularly odd that an arsenal would put in the effort to refurb a rifle with the early bolt and carrier design. It would make more sense (to me) if it were a replacement barrel on a 1950 gun with the type2 bolt design.

Yet many refurbs are in the country with spring loaded fp bolts.

But with chrome lined barrels?

[Boris Badinov]

This would present the argument that some percentage of "all original,""as-issued," "non refurbs" are actually rebarreled guns.

[Boris Badinov]

I'm still seems that shot-out, irreplaceable sks barrels more likely accompanied their receivers into the scrap heap and back into the smelter.

Is  there any know evidence of arsenal rebarreling on any of the sks variants? Seems like a rebarreling require some form stamp somewhere on the barrel or receiver, no?

[Greasemonkey]

Ok.. how many shot out, corroded Yugo barrels are seen vs. how worn are the receivers on the same rifle?  If it would pass headspace test, hardness and what ever random checks they did, why not just change out the barrel?

Which is easier to manufacture a receiver or barrel?  Time is money, time to rebarrel vs time to build a whole new weapon, plus figure in materials.

A spring loaded firing pin is a basic item, that a field armorer could fix if a problem arose. If it passed muster in the refurb shop, it will go till it fails. Russia was going  to do it as cheap as possible to arm as many as possible, quickly. Besidese time their main battle weapon had became the Ak... The SKS was kept more for guards, rear line troops, training, supplying other Warsaw pact members with arms, etc.

How often is a Russian SKS ever seen with a barrel like a Yugoslavian, worn/corroded slam the "f" out... I've never heard my Russian has almost zero rifling... My Russian bore is so pitted from corrosion.. On Yugoslavian nonchrome bored that's common. Most Russians are toted as bright and shiney, so this leaves one of 3 options... 
1. Everybody lies about their bore
2. They were never shot much
3. Russia rebarreled and updated worn ones with chrome bores

Maybe 4....  Russia redid a bunch for import... A new refurb sells for more than a used highly worn beater... Commie business thinking..

But what do I know...

[Boris Badinov]

Still waiting for evidence. Nearly a decade since I first heard of rebarreled sks's and I still havent seen a photograph of one.

Still seems more likely that a worn out bore ends up in the smelter along with the receiver its attached to. The rest of the rifle is then parted out-- a very plausible explanation for the abundance of  mismatched/ forcematched triggers, mags, covers, and stocks that ended up refurbished guns.

Replacing and/or upgrading stocks, triggers, magazines, and other parts are straightforward, and simplistic procedures (most of us can do this ourselves) in comparison to the time consuming tasks involved in replacing worn out barrels. Impossible? No. Impractical? IMO, absolutely yes.

 

[Greasemonkey]

Is  there any know evidence of arsenal rebarreling on any of the sks variants? Seems like a rebarreling require some form stamp somewhere on the barrel or receiver, no?

TRB in Bosnia rebarreled and sold those oddball M59/66s. They were doing a total rebuild. The B-10 and B-16 models...that at first were sold as M-59s.  They were advertised as.. "rebuilt, cleaned and refinished utilizing new unissued barrels by TRB"

So it has happened I guess..if what they say is true.. I have never seen one in person.


Why would it require a stamp.. if done 50-60 years ago, they were planning on WWIII... Not making money off their enemy with surplus junk 30 years later after it was done.

[running-man]

Replacing and/or upgrading stocks, triggers, magazines, and other parts are straightforward, and simplistic procedures (most of us can do this ourselves) in comparison to the time consuming tasks involved in replacing worn out barrels. Impossible? No. Impractical? IMO, absolutely yes.

See, I don't think that a repair arsenal with all the proper tooling would have that tough of a time replacing worn barrels.  They'd have presses and jigs to pull everything off on that old barrel in no time.  All the proper sized vises and spanner wrenches to pull barrels off easily too.  The headspacing would be the hardest thing to do I'd think.

You're 100% right about not seeing any evidence.  I haven't either, but again, it's not a feature that's captured very well in photographs and I wouldn't trust many SKS owners to be able to differentiate a chrome vs non chromed barrel.

This is a great discussion, as it makes us think!  Perhaps there is indeed a 'rebarrel' stamp that they used that we simply haven't deciphered yet.  There are lots of common marks on barrel lugs that could mean anything.  It might be worth trying to look for a pattern on heavy 'furb guns...

 

[Loose}{Cannon]

What exactly would a 'sign' of re-barrel be? 

Perhaps a dif font on the corresponding fitment numbers.....

I agree with RM, if some weirdo named Cannon an bust off components and twist off barrels..... Im sure the russians could do it pretty darn quick!  Can also headspace one in a matter of a few minutes as well.

[Boris Badinov]

Why would it require a stamp.. if done 50-60 years ago, they were planning on WWIII... Not making money off their enemy with surplus junk 30 years later after it was done.

Why are there any stamps on any Soviet SKS's or any military gun for that matter?

They stamp them for future armorers. Like the log books that came with 59/66's, they are a record for those making future repairs to refer to whem making a determination on whether a part will remain, be repaired or replaced.


Regarding the Yugoslavian sks: with no chrome lining I would expect that the Yugoslavian variants would be the most likely variants  on which to find rebarreled actions.

But they Yugoslavians were operating under very different circumstances than the Soviets and with far less access to vital resources and infrastructure. Post war USSR had a massive horizontal and vertical industrial complex-- recycling receivers to add new barrels is time consuming and impractical.

Ergo, the abundance of mismatched/forcmatched parts and stocks on Soviet refurbs. To the smelter with the labor intensive, shot out, barreled receivers and to the recycling bin with the rest of the parts and the stocks.  We've all seen or own 45's with xxxx'd out stocks-- did those barreled actions 1) end up in another force matched stock along with all the matching parts? Or 2). Is it more likely that the barreled actions were tossed and the stocks and parts ended up forcematched or scrubbed and restamped on refurbished guns? The latter seems far more likely (for the Soviet guns) to me.

[Loose}{Cannon]

Why are there any stamps on any Soviet SKS's or any military gun for that matter?

Fitment numbers, quality control inspectors stamps, lot/heat numbers, Provisional black powder proof, Final black powder proof, Point of aim proof, Concentric "00" Accuracy proof......  all kinds of stamps, but none of them have to do with telling a rework tech what to do with it. Iffin a fubared barrel is coming off .... what purpose does a stamp serve?

[Loose}{Cannon]

Crazy thought inbound....

If that gun on CGN does indeed have a chrome bore.... it was replaced.  Does it have any 'new' or otherwise not seen before mystery stamp on the lug or forward area of the receiver?   Im guessing it does not.... which would tell me there is no special stamp on a rebarrel.