Jianshe Arsenal /26\ Progression Comment

[Bunker]

Just a comment on the progression.  I was digging through some of the Chinese bbs forums and a few threads related to Chinese serial number algorithms caught my eye. Seems their consensus (no solid reference) is exactly as Loose Cannon concluded regarding /26\ but they have a simple algorithm that applies to the weapons mentioned and even applicable to the Type 81 (so they say).  It's pretty straight forward:

millionth digit + weapon designation (production year) - 1

Type 56 in a half example: 3xxxxx1: 3 + 56 - 1 = 1958

In the case of the Type 81, it wouldn't be the millionth digit but would be the same algorithm, plus the Chinese decide when it starts, which will be sometime after initial startup/production.  In the case of the SKS it was presumably started at the 2M series from what we now know (thanks Loose Cannon).  Now whether that applies to non /26\ military weapons is the question.  I read yes and no but I haven't dug into that deep enough to know one way or the other.  Same goes for the Type 81 but the difficulty with this particular weapon is there aren't a whole lot of good "public" examples to look at.

The outcome is exactly as Loose Cannon concluded but unlike Loose Cannon, they didn't back it up with hard facts, just a simple algorithm.  Don't know if in the Chinese firearms world this is commonly known or they are in the same boat as us, or maybe they're not suppose to talk about these things publicly.

[Loose}{Cannon]

Thanks bunker, but I should say that its not all my research, as our dating system and progression data was a group collaboration.

I have searched and read many chinese web pages and cant say I have seen this.  Can you please post some links?

I dunno why they would add only to subtract.         1958 would simply be the 3rd year of production and the serial will start with a 3. In other words, serial has a 3 as the year designator so its the third year of production being 1958. The T53, T54, and T63 follow the same practice.

[Bunker]

Sorry...my thanks to the entire team!

Possibly and pure speculation on my part...if you subtract lets say the first year of production or whatever you want to subtract in the algorithm it will work depending on weapon platform.  In the case of the SKS, subtract 1st year or production (all the way up to where the 2M series begins).  They would know what the variable was and could easily plug it in.  Again...just speculation.  Here is a link that they discuss this in and others pretty much regurgitate the same message.  You'll see some debate but it sounds like the consensus is what I posted.  It's six pages and of course translation is what it is and a lot is not related to this topic.

http://bbs.tiexue.net/post_4870901_1.html? 

[Loose}{Cannon]

Hey, as long as the same result is reached, I dont care how they get there.   

We believe this most definitely applies to the rest of chinese sks carbines except a few of the DB 旅 (Lushun) guns, early m21, and some scrubbed guns.  Have you read this page? Q: When was my Chinese Type 56 SKS made? in Chinese SKS (Military) - Page 1 of 2

Im going to read your link now... thanks.

[Loose}{Cannon]

I can see right off the bat I have seen this thread but didn't read the entire thing because the OP used the old 56+1=1957 bs and referenced Canadian Gun Nutz as the source for dating.   

Ill keep reading as Im guessing some other poster chimed in with the correct method.

I see you noticed they call it the "56 in a half".     

[Bunker]

I have read that and I think the team as done exceptional research!  I'm a firm believer but many don't take the time to read all of your hard facts to support this.  They are too narrow-minded to accept that what was once thought/believed is really not the case and the evidence you folks have presented clearly proves that.  I was sold the first time I read the progression and also followed those heated threads where you guys debated this.  That was actually one of the main reasons I joined this forum...in my view far superior to the others, one in particular.  My two cents but you guys are really bringing good stuff to the table in all areas and a great sense of camaraderie amongst members here! 

[Bunker]

Also, they speak of certain features related to those photos, such as bayonet.  They lost me there but maybe you can make sense of those as it relates to specific production periods.

[Loose}{Cannon]

Good stuff Bunker, we appreciate your support.  I noticed right off the bat that you dig deep in your research and have already brought it to the Russian section.  Our members like yourself are our best assets.

[Loose}{Cannon]

Also, they speak of certain features related to those photos, such as bayonet.  They lost me there but maybe you can make sense of those as it relates to specific production periods.

so far I see poster named Sub Gang is a 3644 post member in china stating the following.

57 years have not triangular spines gun so the landlord is 56 + 16-1 = 71 years

He is telling another member that a 1957 does not have a spike bayo and its dated off the first two digits because its a late gun (in this case a 16) and broke it down to 1971 which is on par with our dating system.  He posted this in 2012 before our sytem existed. Good stuff

[Loose}{Cannon]

Looks Like member White Rabbit is chinese living in Canada. He was buying a chinese sks and all the chinese guys in china went down memory lane.  He was told a few times how to date the gun using our system and only one person was using the old method.

[Bunker]

I believe you guys have debunked the old system and it's apparent the Chinese enthusiast/collector either knew or came to the same conclusion.  The algorithm makes perfect sense to me and depending on the minus variable, which I assume is a direct correlation to a production period not to be considered in the calculation, it could likely be applied across the board.  What's nice is you guys have factually proven it but here in the US we still have doubters.  We know it's applicable to the earlier weapons but I would be interested to know if the algorithm is applicable to the Type 81 as suggested.  I will do some digging but the problem is we don't have a lot of good examples in the public domain. 

[Loose}{Cannon]

I'll see If I can find any samples in china web land. 

[pcke2000]

Also, they speak of certain features related to those photos, such as bayonet.  They lost me there but maybe you can make sense of those as it relates to specific production periods.

I have read the post you mentioned, it's not reliable. I think the author actually got info from english-speaking websites.

[Loose}{Cannon]

The OP is a guy named White Rabbit and he is quoting old info from CGN. The guys in china told him correctly which matches our system.

[Bunker]

The OP is a guy named White Rabbit and he is quoting old info from CGN. The guys in china told him correctly which matches our system.

Read through it at least four times and that is how I interpret it too.

[Loose}{Cannon]

Been busy and haven't been able to look for T81s but haven't forgotten. 

[running-man]

I've actually been in the extreme early throes (as in thinking about what my plan of attack will be!) of rewriting the entire Q: When was my Chinese Type 56 SKS made? thread.  There are additional examples that I think need to be emphasized a bit better and maybe make it a bit shorter and less wordy. 

The T53/M44 examples are solid and need very little explanation I think.  They used the first digit (in this case the millions position) to designate nth year of production by the 3 million series in '55.

We have found many T54/PM examples, unfortunately there is a bit of ambiguity because of the 1960 through 1961 hole that transitioned to the 1962 through 1964 guns which got off track. The fact that they jumped up to the 11 mil first digits to designate '64 as the 11th year of production does speak volumes to me though. 

Type 50/PPSh-41 & Type 54/PPS-42 derivatives have been seen (I've collected photos of several, but I haven't had a good chance to see how, if at all, their S/N progression really works out.)  It may be they were mostly built before the Chinese really had a uniform numbering sequence worked out for national arsenals and they are sequentially numbers w/o a rollover nth year of manufacture 1st dight.

Photos of T63 examples are out there and seem at first blush to be consistent with the T54 SKS progression, but unfortunately w/o dates stamped on the gun, it's really a guessing game.  Additionally, there are many type 56/AK variants out there, but again, no dates means it's a guessing game when it comes to year of manufacture.   I don't have many T81 examples unfortunately.   It's hard to get good info on those full auto and select fire firearms that aren't in your typical american household...

I've always assumed that year of production was always a fixed number away (equal to a difference of 1) from the type XX designation of when the weapon officially entered service.  It could easily be that the type XX designation year is not the 1st year of production, and hence you'd need to subtract a different number in the algorithm like Bunker states.  I haven't seen one like it, but it's certainly plausible, if not a bit more complicated for the Chinese to have to keep track of than just always subtracting 1.

When I convert a S/N to a date on a Chinese type 56 SKS in my head, I typically use 1955 + nth prefix = year of production because I can add to five much more easily than I can add to six and then take away one.  1956 + N - 1 works too though.   

[running-man]

Sorry...my thanks to the entire team!

Possibly and pure speculation on my part...if you subtract lets say the first year of production or whatever you want to subtract in the algorithm it will work depending on weapon platform.  In the case of the SKS, subtract 1st year or production (all the way up to where the 2M series begins).  They would know what the variable was and could easily plug it in.  Again...just speculation.  Here is a link that they discuss this in and others pretty much regurgitate the same message.  You'll see some debate but it sounds like the consensus is what I posted.  It's six pages and of course translation is what it is and a lot is not related to this topic.

http://bbs.tiexue.net/post_4870901_1.html?

Finally got a chance to look over these Chinese pages.  Interesting group of people.  It's apparent that the majority of them simply aren't allowed to own something like this, so it's not surprising that they don't have all the info we'd expect out of the population of the originating country...

This one reply by Sub Gang was interesting, I highlighted something I noticed:

Vaguely remember the gun number of the gun first two digits production date is calculated by adding 56 minus one
So the landlord of 56 and a half year of production is 160xxxx 16 + 56-1 = 71 is 71 years of production
That's wrong, please forgive me
Others, such as you calculated for the 57 years of manufacturing that should be flat and you stab figure is triangular spines

I think you compare this algorithm is tricky, because I am also very tangled issue this year. Because, after all, only the Mitsubishi thorn late. I posted algorithm is an algorithm 26 plants, and I was 625 plants. If you can give a specific source of information, the more better. Thank you very much.

Regardless of which plant or the kind of standard firearms are of this algorithm is to teach the theory when learning firearms remember the year, but the passage of time is not too detailed.
For example eighty-one automatic rifles 1xxxx then calculated as 1 + 81-1 = 81 years made 15xxxx 15 + 81-1 = 95 years of manufacturing

On behalf of the manufacturer behind the first two digits is the number of this year's production figures for this type of firearms

He's saying that the date code is not /26\ specific, and also not weapon specific, which I think we'd generally agree with for most anything built after ~1957 with the Sino-Soviet split years of '59-'60-even '61 being oddballs across the spectrum as well as the '70 thru '76 prefixed guns with actual year codes. 

He also says that the remaining number after the year code is the current year of production for that plant and type of firearm.  We pretty much take this for granted being that it's a reset S/N, but it's good to see that others confirm this as well. 

Interesting that he says the type 81's can be dated via this method too.  Seeing this and knowing the T63 is sandwiched in between gives pretty good credence to the T63 dating scheme being identical too.

[Loose}{Cannon]

Precisely.     

[running-man]

Did you guys see this one?:

I clearly remember, in 1967, school hours. In the production of 56 half of the workshop, hung a banner high; elaborately made good 260, to contribute to the world revolution!

Article 56 on the figure of half production factory code, I have the following views; the gun body triangle numerals are not manufacturer name. I companies in the production of 56 half-spent, but also used the 56 and a half (military service). I know the figure of the so-called 26 Arsenal interpretation is wrong, there are not any 26 military factories. Make first military enterprises are the first three digits, then this gun, it is the state-owned 296 Factory (Chongqing Construction Group) production. Figure mark should be interpreted as 260, the company's product code.

We knew the /26\ and factory 296 were intrinsicly tied together with the late T53 runs.  Now here's something tying 296 to 26 with the /26\ being a product code.  That's very interesting...