Words of wisdom? I've seen 3-digit but never a 2-digit SKS-45 of any production year. think1
(https://i.ibb.co/n6FF8mb/Screenshot-2018-12-21-02-17-31-1.png) (https://ibb.co/PFddzjN)
(https://i.ibb.co/hVMXNDx/Screenshot-2018-12-21-02-17-43-1.png) (https://ibb.co/Hq2NynL)
(https://i.ibb.co/JHLdkNY/Screenshot-2018-12-21-02-17-50-1.png) (https://ibb.co/x6vs5yn)
(https://i.ibb.co/3fQ2GXt/Screenshot-2018-12-21-02-17-59-1.png) (https://ibb.co/bHDTqhp)
(https://i.ibb.co/3FtD19Z/Screenshot-2018-12-21-02-18-11-1.png) (https://ibb.co/t2y7BTr)
(https://i.ibb.co/F4NV453/Screenshot-2018-12-21-02-18-26-1.png) (https://ibb.co/hFhfFB9)
(https://i.ibb.co/qr1mC3n/Screenshot-2018-12-21-02-18-41-1.png) (https://ibb.co/LZp9rXP)
(https://i.ibb.co/djPP2Vq/Screenshot-2018-12-21-02-18-47-1.png) (https://ibb.co/zQXXRBY)
(https://i.ibb.co/JWYvs7R/Screenshot-2018-12-21-02-18-55-1.png) (https://ibb.co/SDkt3nX)
(https://i.ibb.co/XsP6bHL/Screenshot-2018-12-21-02-19-04-1.png) (https://ibb.co/d2vXrZM)
(https://i.ibb.co/S6TxjfQ/Screenshot-2018-12-21-02-19-15-1.png) (https://ibb.co/cy5vBYb)
(https://i.ibb.co/3CWxP6J/Screenshot-2018-12-21-02-19-22-1.png) (https://ibb.co/FDJQdZP)
(https://i.ibb.co/v3fZYKW/Screenshot-2018-12-21-02-19-30-1.png) (https://ibb.co/qNhk5P8)
(https://i.ibb.co/7vGtZtQ/Screenshot-2018-12-21-02-19-57-1.png) (https://ibb.co/kKh2w2J)
In a letter block of 10000 (or 9999, if they didn’t use zero) there will be:
10 (0.1%) one digit
90 (0.9%) two digits
900 (9%) three digits
9000 (90%) four digits
So yes two digit serial numbers are relatively rare at just 9 of 1000. Not the type of “rarity” that brings a premium in my experience.
AB9999 is an order of magnitude rarer than any two digit S/N. But then again, so is AB9998, AB17, or AB5730 for that matter. Like P32 says, it's just a number, no premium.
Does the low serial no premium apply to ANY SK's? Not even for a 1 or 001 or 0001 doesn't have a teenie premium?
I would imagine if you found Soviet Sino 001 or Yugoslavian Long Barrel M59 with a serial of 001, then a premium might be valid. With Russian or Romanians it's hard to judge, no one knows exactly which is the first of a series because we don't know every prefix or suffix.
Usually price premiums are driven more by features, lack of features, year or certain other things more so than a serial.
Makes total sense!!! Thanks for the lightning fast reply.
Quote from: Greasemonkey on December 21, 2018, 03:42:59 PM
I would imagine if you found Soviet Sino 001 or Yugoslavian Long Barrel M59 with a serial of 001, then a premium might be valid. With Russian or Romanians it's hard to judge, no one knows exactly which is the first of a series because we don't know every prefix or suffix.
Usually price premiums are driven more by features, lack of features, year or certain other things more so than a serial.
Yup, if you've got serial number 1 for a firearm that used a true indexing, numeric characters only, serial number, like the M1 Garand, Springfield Armory, Serial Number 1, then you have something with a huge premium. For firearms that used a letter block serial number and especially the eastern bloc countries that obfuscated that letter block code by having it non-progressive, then it's not particularly valuable.
I guess I would be willing to pay an extra $25 for a Romanian serialized GN1-1959 and about $0 extra for GN2-1959. It's just the first carbine of the letter block some time in the beginning/middle/end of the year.
That's a nice looking gun. It will bring a premium just for condition.
Quote from: martin08 on December 21, 2018, 03:59:51 PM
That's a nice looking gun. It will bring a premium just for condition.
True...we've been down in the weeds prompted by the opening question :)) but from what we've seen of it, that looks like a really nice non-refurb.
Quote from: Greasemonkey on December 21, 2018, 03:42:59 PM
I would imagine if you found Soviet Sino 001 or Yugoslavian Long Barrel M59 with a serial of 001, then a premium might be valid. With Russian or Romanians it's hard to judge, no one knows exactly which is the first of a series because we don't know every prefix or suffix.
Usually price premiums are driven more by features, lack of features, year or certain other things more so than a serial.
I would say that the PS series is the first Romanian series made GM. The no date guns that magically increment to '57 part way in...
PS0001 would be a gem of a find. thumb1
Definitely a nice gun by the OP. Lots of nice '52s out there.
Quote from: running-man on December 21, 2018, 09:45:35 PM
Quote from: Greasemonkey on December 21, 2018, 03:42:59 PM
I would imagine if you found Soviet Sino 001 or Yugoslavian Long Barrel M59 with a serial of 001, then a premium might be valid. With Russian or Romanians it's hard to judge, no one knows exactly which is the first of a series because we don't know every prefix or suffix.
Usually price premiums are driven more by features, lack of features, year or certain other things more so than a serial.
I would say that the PS series is the first Romanian series made GM. The no date guns that magically increment to '57 part way in...
PS0001 would be a gem of a find. thumb1
Definitely a nice gun by the OP. Lots of nice '52s out there.
A No-Date Romanian drool2. I'd hand over either of my Russians for one.. chuckles1
I was just trying to keep it simplified.. the PS/no date series of Romanians generally show up about as much as a as issued '50 Russian. At least thats what it seems like to me.. ::)
What does the Cyrillic GP equate to? The lot or batch or???? (It's a nice non-refurb but seller is asking over 1700 bucks!)
Let me give this a shot. Test my learning skills from all the info many of these guys have provided me over the past few months.
So the "GP" converted from Cyrillic alphabet means that rifle is the 41723 rifle manufactured in 1952. Of course that is if I have the "P" correctly identified. "G" is the 4th letter and "P" is the 17th letter of Cyrillic alphabet and you put those numbers in front of the numeric serial and you get 4-17-23= 41723. I'll need an expert to check my work. This was more for me to make sure I have this down but IF I'm correct it will answer your question Matcha.
If this is wrong please delete so others don't read incorrect information. LOL....seriously though.
Quote from: Bob_The_Student on December 23, 2018, 06:50:45 AM
Let me give this a shot. Test my learning skills from all the info many of these guys have provided me over the past few months.
So the "GP" converted from Cyrillic alphabet means that rifle is the 41723 rifle manufactured in 1952. Of course that is if I have the "P" correctly identified. "G" is the 4th letter and "P" is the 17th letter of Cyrillic alphabet and you put those numbers in front of the numeric serial and you get 4-17-23= 41723. I'll need an expert to check my work. This was more for me to make sure I have this down but IF I'm correct it will answer your question Matcha.
If this is wrong please delete so others don't read incorrect information. LOL....seriously though.
I believe this to be incorrect. Kehaya and Poyer have zero data that this numbering system was in use during SKS production despite including it in their publications. Indeed, we see indications from the feature changes on transitional SKS45s that the prefix incrementation was not sequential or even in any kind of alphabetical order for that matter. It was in all likelyhood not totally random either, but we just haven't cracked the Russians code yet.
I guess I'll tell you what I tell everyone else about the body of SKS information out there: follow the data. If one of the 'experts' makes a proclamation, you are not out of line to ask them "how do you know this is true?" If they bluster away and tell you about how they were there during the original inports, have xx in their collection, or have xx years experience, that's all well and good but none of those things helps one litttle bit when it comes to verifying the authenticity of a statement on the production of a series of guns.
The past 20 years have seen many advances in SKS theory, unfortunately the internet (and published works for that matter) never forgets and old & outdated, unverified, or just plain inaccurate information will never go away. This is one of the reasons we founded this site as it was clear that SKSBoards was more interested in maintaining the status quo and keeping values of certain members' collections elevated rather than probing the data to get the right answers. thumb1
Ha... you knew where I got some of my info from (Kehaya/ Poyer). I'm glad I attempted that so now I know that don't hold water, probably. Still learning even when I think I learned that part. So, can I throw this book away now. It seems it's always wrong. Original black bolt carriers, it stated 1952 Izhevsk (thought only '53 - '54) and now this. Time for me to never refer to this thing again, I think.
Ok, like I said delete that if need be so bad info not out there. I'm totally fine with that. If you think it's best to leave then I'm ok with that also.
The book is ok..... for basic stuff like what could possibly fit what in dire need. Some stuff in it is ehh.. it's not the beat all, end all final word. Tons of information has changed, if it was even correct, since it was last printed, as such info changes faster than the paper printed word, even printing a copy today, something could change before it hits the retailers, and poof... Instant obsolescence.
Hey..... I even own a copy, works great for leveling a wobbly stool. thumb1
As for these rifles.....just when you think you have it down pat.... The carpet can be ripped out from under you and you feel like your back being a noob again. That's the fun part, being open minded enough to discuss, ask questions and trying to debunk it all and then try to rationalize the whole new screwy mess till it changes on you again.
Quote from: Bob_The_Student on December 23, 2018, 01:15:33 PM
Ha... you knew where I got some of my info from (Kehaya/ Poyer). I'm glad I attempted that so now I know that don't hold water, probably. Still learning even when I think I learned that part. So, can I throw this book away now. It seems it's always wrong. Original black bolt carriers, it stated 1952 Izhevsk (thought only '53 - '54) and now this. Time for me to never refer to this thing again, I think.
Ok, like I said delete that if need be so bad info not out there. I'm totally fine with that. If you think it's best to leave then I'm ok with that also.
According to some Russian researchers, Izhevsk started making SKS in 1952.
Going through my safe I found a 2 digit S/N. I was surprised that it is on a 54 Izzy, due to the fact that it had 2 letters before the digits. I thought that in 54 they had one letter before and one after the digits. The stock and bayonet are not original to carbine. The stock has only S/N on it and the bayonet is black.
https://ibb.co/album/npv5wF
Quote from: Bob_The_Student on December 23, 2018, 01:15:33 PM
Ha... you knew where I got some of my info from (Kehaya/ Poyer). I'm glad I attempted that so now I know that don't hold water, probably. Still learning even when I think I learned that part. So, can I throw this book away now. It seems it's always wrong. Original black bolt carriers, it stated 1952 Izhevsk (thought only '53 - '54) and now this. Time for me to never refer to this thing again, I think.
Ok, like I said delete that if need be so bad info not out there. I'm totally fine with that. If you think it's best to leave then I'm ok with that also.
My edition has a tula stamp notated as Izhevesk (or vice versa) So either they didnt check it very well before print or its not that accurate in general
EVERY tidbit of information here is appreciatedand leads to cracking the Russian's SKS production code. In any case, I've learned that a 2-digit code, IMO, doesn't justify the $1,999 "Buy Now" price - unless perhaps it's a non-refurb, xclnt condition Izzie.
Quote from: Matchka on December 24, 2018, 02:11:16 PM
EVERY tidbit of information here is appreciatedand leads to cracking the Russian's SKS production code. In any case, I've learned that a 2-digit code, IMO, doesn't justify the $1,999 "Buy Now" price - unless perhaps it's a non-refurb, xclnt condition Izzie.
:o chuckles1
Uh, no. If it has full bring back papers, photos of the vet picking it up from the field, and a bfpu T-33 to go with it, yeah, I'm in for 2K or better ;) For this one, no.
Quote from: jstin2 on December 23, 2018, 04:08:10 PM
Going through my safe I found a 2 digit S/N. I was surprised that it is on a 54 Izzy, due to the fact that it had 2 letters before the digits. I thought that in 54 they had one letter before and one after the digits. The stock and bayonet are not original to carbine. The stock has only S/N on it and the bayonet is black.
https://ibb.co/album/npv5wF
'53 and very early '54 Izhevsk guns had identical S/N formats as the Tulas. They changed to the X###_X formats sometime in mid '54.
pcke2000 - about the '52 Izhevsk you mean they started making parts in '52, started the manufacturing process? Or do you mean "researchers" have
seen a '52? I have never heard of a '52 but I learn something knew every time I ask a question. I'll be honest that book will probably not
be referenced by me very often anymore. Let's just say I have lost faith in obtaining real info from it. Thanks
jstin2- that's a beauty '54 at least the parts you posted. Thanks
Running-Man- I understand that things change with the learning of new info and manufacturing processes and how that can change before a book is
printed. I have the 5th edition ("The SKS Carbine") which is a 2014 copyright. So had any of the serial number information been
debunked before then? You said you have study SKS's for 20 years if you were hearing or determined that the serial number information
was inconclusive then I have to question why it would've been printed. Of course I'm speculating on this because I don't know when you
knew what you knew and what they knew and how they claimed to have their info. But it just seems that info hasn't panned out that I
have obtained from this particular book. NOT ALL but enough. I think of the M1 Carbine and how guys have Larry Ruth or Craig Riesch as
their go to books for information on the Carbines. Is there any SKS book that is so revered as M1 Carbine books I stated. I'm sure there
maybe some info in these books that may have changed also I'm ok with that. However, can anyone tell me in "The SKS Carbine" editions
have they been saying blued bolt/ bolt carriers are original and "polished" is for refurbs (page 90) for all 5 editions? If so it really calls into
question their research, IMO of course.
Thanks
My advice: Don't use that source as a reference for anything regarding the SKS.
It's got some facts, sure. But it makes a whole lot of claims which are poorly sourced, many of which are now provably imprecise or wholly incorrect.
Use all of the sks forums, but stick sks-files and gunboards ak/sks subforum for corroboration.
Quote from: Bob_The_Student on December 26, 2018, 04:02:25 AM
pcke2000 - about the '52 Izhevsk you mean they started making parts in '52, started the manufacturing process? Or do you mean "researchers" have seen a '52? I have never heard of a '52 but I learn something knew every time I ask a question.
The suggestion of a 1952 Izhevsk comes in S. V. Monetchikov's book Историа Русского Автомата (History of the Russian Automatics) that is primarily about Kalashnikovs. Chapter 15 is a short chapter on the SKS and the 1952 could even be a typo. The sentence is found in the translation of the book, included as a CD, and reads: "
Serial production of Simonov carbines were spent in 1949 Tula Arms Factory, and in 1952 - the Izhevsk Mechanical and continued until 1956"
Two inaccuracies, production of the SKS-45 only lasted "until 1956", which we know is incorrect. Tula produced the letter suffix guns in 1956-58. The suffix letters Д, И and К for 1956, '57 and '58 are also associated with years on AK-47s and Makarovs, so this year code is verified. The other inaccuracy is the year that production started at Izhevsk. 1952 seems very unlikely since 1953 is already reduced production compared to 1954, based on rarity of examples. No examples of a 1952 Izhevsk have been observed.
There are no excellent monographs devoted to the SKS.
You will want to take a look at this article, if you haven't already:
https://sks-files.com/index.php?topic=4210.0
Quote from: Bob_The_Student on December 26, 2018, 04:02:25 AM
Running-Man- I understand that things change with the learning of new info and manufacturing processes and how that can change before a book is
printed. I have the 5th edition ("The SKS Carbine") which is a 2014 copyright. So had any of the serial number information been
debunked before then? You said you have study SKS's for 20 years if you were hearing or determined that the serial number information
was inconclusive then I have to question why it would've been printed. Of course I'm speculating on this because I don't know when you
knew what you knew and what they knew and how they claimed to have their info. But it just seems that info hasn't panned out that I
have obtained from this particular book. NOT ALL but enough. I think of the M1 Carbine and how guys have Larry Ruth or Craig Riesch as
their go to books for information on the Carbines. Is there any SKS book that is so revered as M1 Carbine books I stated. I'm sure there
maybe some info in these books that may have changed also I'm ok with that. However, can anyone tell me in "The SKS Carbine" editions
have they been saying blued bolt/ bolt carriers are original and "polished" is for refurbs (page 90) for all 5 editions? If so it really calls into
question their research, IMO of course.
Thanks
In certain circles the SKS Carbine book is as revered.. Most weapons like M1 carbines, M1 Garands, and alot of Amercian weapons most of the information on production is available, even most information is available on Enfield and such. Then you have Lugers, P38s and Mausers... these were absolutely researched to the ends of the planet. Trying to compare the information on say an M1 Carbine to whats information is available for an SKS is almost like comparing a common apple to a kiwi fruit.
With SKSs your back to dealing with the the Iron Curtain, Cold War and Communist nations and their "you die if you tell secrecy", so with them, everything is a best guess, speculation and estimate based off features, known information and other things. They will not release any information to this day, but sometimes little bits leak out here and there from people who were serving there. With these books, you also have old 3rd hand importer information thrown in, other collectors information thrown in along with what information was guessed at, and it's all written by people who have probably never fondled, much less shot an SKS and it creates a huge mess.
Over the years, there have been times we have discussed things with these said collectors.... those discussions never ended well, even after showing them the proof, numbers etc. It goes no where and, well if one looks, those discussions probably still remain elsewhere... whistle12
Quote from: Phosphorus32 on December 26, 2018, 09:47:58 AM
Quote from: Bob_The_Student on December 26, 2018, 04:02:25 AM
pcke2000 - about the '52 Izhevsk you mean they started making parts in '52, started the manufacturing process? Or do you mean "researchers" have seen a '52? I have never heard of a '52 but I learn something knew every time I ask a question.
The suggestion of a 1952 Izhevsk comes in S. V. Monetchikov's book Историа Русского Автомата (History of the Russian Automatics) that is primarily about Kalashnikovs. Chapter 15 is a short chapter on the SKS and the 1952 could even be a typo. The sentence is found in the translation of the book, included as a CD, and reads: "Serial production of Simonov carbines were spent in 1949 Tula Arms Factory, and in 1952 - the Izhevsk Mechanical and continued until 1956"
Two inaccuracies, production of the SKS-45 only lasted "until 1956", which we know is incorrect. Tula produced the letter suffix guns in 1956-58. The suffix letters Д, И and К for 1956, '57 and '58 are also associated with years on AK-47s and Makarovs, so this year code is verified. The other inaccuracy is the year that production started at Izhevsk. 1952 seems very unlikely since 1953 is already reduced production compared to 1954, based on rarity of examples. No examples of a 1952 Izhevsk have been observed.
There are no excellent monographs devoted to the SKS.
You will want to take a look at this article, if you haven't already:
https://sks-files.com/index.php?topic=4210.0
P32, I think another inaccuracy in that quotation is that Tula started production in '49. We have verified 1948 production SKS45s carbines *and* individual receiver covers in the wild. Now maybe these weren't produced at Tula, but that begs the question, how is it that the author knows the '48s weren't built at Tula while the '52s were built at Izhevsk? Surely there is some evidence he would have to cite that says so. I don't put a ton of stock into this individual source, much like the many sources that claimed the SKS45 was used on the Belorussian front in WWII which has been shown to be completely incorrect in both the weapon used and the units and theater mentioned. dntknw1
Value is subjective. People will pay extra for what they feel is worth more. In MY opinion, low serial numbers would only matter to me if it was a first year production rifle (and I knew it was an early production prefix, too). Otherwise, for example, any 1951, 52, 53, etc Russian w/ a serial of "1" is still "later" than any of the previous year. But, to each their own.
Good discussion.
Why do you guys have to make so much sense?
Oh yeah, The good ol rn serial illic number #23 gun. This particular specimen might or might not have been an earlier production of the year 1952. Just before were the 1951's 50"s and 49's.
She's still as beautiful as the day of production
P32, Bunker's account of the SCS, et al - extremely interesting. Any update on Ruslan's book?