Can the NVA be defined by Machining Methods?

[Loose}{Cannon]

Why could they not be serialized in china by NV reps?  Has nobody ever gone to another country to inspect and serialize rifles they bought or whatever? 

Reminds me of the US making mosins and having inspectors here.....

We also have a good idea that serial Numbers were applied last, so could they not have been sent rifles ready for NV to serialize themselves?

They are Chinese rifles all right, exactly how and when it went down are about the only questions I have.

[Loose}{Cannon]

I still wanna know why the fat rounded star on the '62' guns, but a sharp pointed star on the rest.   

[running-man]

So mulling M08's quote:

Or are we just looking at four different lots from the same year of production, 1959, 60 or so.

over in my head, I'm thinking of a way that this could be plausible - assume:

Serial number follows the standard Chinese Nth SKS-Files year of production theory: 6XX,XXX = 1961.
Perhaps the second digit of this run is actually a progression of time indicator.  It wouldn't be the first time we've seen something like this.  We found that the /?5\ (or /0406b\ if you prefer [and LC just had an aneurysm  ]) guns have what appears to be a month prefix with an nth year of production code immediately after it (see /406\b Info and Data Collection)  Maybe this is similar or the second digit is counting something else like a production quarter or build team or something.

6000 rifles is a pretty small production run in the grand scheme of things.  If these are indeed 1961 guns, we know the 6 mil /26\ guns suffered mightily from the chilling effect of the Sino-Soviet split, with the factory barely able to churn out 20k T56s in that series whereas prior and later years were measured in the 100's of thousands.

With these guns, the 6XXXXX S/N is present on all piece parts.  Very different from the Chinese practice of only assigning the last 5 digits to the piece parts like was done on /26\ guns through the 6 mil series and beyond.  I can't see them sending out a completed gun with zero markings on all piece parts to the NVA, they had to assign them to the proper guns after fitting somehow.  They would have been S/N'd with the full S/N on all piece parts at assembly as heres no way they would have left the 6X prefix off every piece part for the NVA to add on later.  Having NVA 'assistance' at the build arsenal is certainly plausible I think.  This is a good though provoking thread...

[Loose}{Cannon]

THAT is a very interesting thought.  Thinking of the early m21, they sure knew how to throw an oddball into the mix. 

[running-man]

I still wanna know why the fat rounded star on the '62' guns, but a sharp pointed star on the rest.   

Yeah, I think Worm was on to something, but the '55-'56 date of the flag transition just doesn't fit the rest of the data (side swivel, small/large font, 600k S/N, etc).  Even w/o the feature discrepancies, it's a tough pill to swallow to think that the Chinese were producing star marked guns for aid when they were just spooling up production themselves.  Heck the Russians were still churning out Tulas at that time.  I think there's got to be some kind of time lag we're just not understanding here.

[Greasemonkey]

Why could they not be serialized in china by NV reps?  Has nobody ever gone to another country to inspect and serialize rifles they beought or whatever? 

Reminds me of the US making mosins and having inspectors here.....

We also have a good idea that serial Numbers were applied last, so could they not have been sent rifles ready for NV to serialize themselves?

They are Chinese rifles all right, exactly how and when it went down are about the only questions I have.

Oh boy, what if

What if China was training the NVA to manufacture them. Russia went to China with partially made rifles, too teach and train them, the Soviet-Sino, it was a very limited run, followed by a few years of Russian technical overwatch and proofing. So the NVA go to China, get the neccesary enginering and associated training for manufacturing barrels, proofing, and overall crash course in mass small weapon production. All the while, the weapons the NVA side made while training in China, were marked as so.  China also trained Albania a few years later.

Vietnam had very little if any weapons production ability prior to this time frame. To say they just jumped up and cranked out ~6000 or so SKSs with no weapons manufacturing training is hard to believe. Their ability to build weapons had to come from, who else, but China. If they could build the SKS after the training, building a native homegrown AK later would be a cake walk. After all, why build an already obsolite weapon.

And what if,  the Star1 difference, is possibly just not another factory that opened in China that was closer to Vietnam. The NVA crew and production were moved closer to 'nam to save or cut down on transit cost/ time or some other unseen reason. That same Chinese factory later had one of the factory numbers other than /26\.

[Loose}{Cannon]

Hey Matt..    How many bringback 6m /26\ guns have you seen?

[martin08]

The training and joint production NVA officials/inspectors would only make perfect sense.  It is the usual practice for manufacturing expansion from one country to another.  Heretofore, we had only seen this practice with Russia as the trainers, and China, Romania, Yugoslavia as the trainees, and followed shortly after by East Germany and North Korea.

There would simply be no precedence for an independent company to set up shop and start cranking out the SKS.  So, China was the Mentor, and North Vietnam was the Student.

So, 1961 was a year with low 6mil production yeild.  The Russians were shown the door that year, granted.  But the Chinese had already shown the ability to produce tens upon tens of thousands of units at Jianshe.  Are we seeing low 6 mil yield because the Russians made an exit, or because the Chinese started cranking out guns with different markings, and the M21 and Star-1 in particular.   And the Chinese had far more production in 1961 than their indigenous  output would indicate.

Clues/thoughts:

1.  The pregnant Star-1 and the skinny Star-1.   Do we have a solid break point?  This is a tough clue to decipher.

2.  The break in stock font came in the middle of a batch run on the 64-prefix guns.

3.  Condition.  Does the relative condition in which the Star-1 guns can be found rule out production into the year 1965?  I think so, or we would find late Star-1 guns in great condition, when compared to early Star-1 guns.  We don't see that phenomenon of increasing condition as guns get newer - they are all pretty much equally beat up.

4.  Receiver Q/C markings.  Another tough call.  We have a consecutive pair to examine, and the receiver markings are totally different.

5.  Features/machining.  We have a front ferrule which seems to come from a single batch/run of parts.  We seem to have the same guy with the coarse file who relieved stripper clip guides in his own signature steep angled style.  Side swivel, long trigger relief cut.  Do we have enough pics to support similar features throughout the prefix stamp run?

[martin08]

Hey Matt..    How many bringback 6m /26\ guns have you seen?

Unfortunately, I'm not as great at compiling data as I am at compiling guns.  But I don't have any 6mil bringbacks.  I have Ghost, three early M21's, 8mil, 9mil, 13mil, two Star-1, NK and DDR.

[Loose}{Cannon]

I have never seen a 6m bringback posted anywhere.

I'm also confident the chinese were much more dependant on the soviets for components (especially barrels/receivers) then people may realize. 

I do not believe the m21 is from 61, but even if so, the nva marked guns plus the m21 plus the 6m totals all combined land FAR short of a normal production year.

I believe the 6m and nva marked guns could have been scraped together using whatever they had left to work with while they got the issue sorted out.  We know by the 62 7m  production was almost back to normal.

[Loose}{Cannon]

I have...

Soviet Sino
Two ghosts
One 57 6digi
Two 57 2m
Two 58 3m
Two 59/60 letters
One 61 6m
One 62 7m
One 63 8m

In the timeframe for comparison.  Unfortunately the carrier on the 6m does not have a serial matching.  I know John Galt and Fenceline have one...

[martin08]

Apologies.  I've been so concentrated on micro-features that I haven't even posted pics of the entire gun.

Note the leaching of the black pigment into the stock around the small metal parts.

[running-man]

I think the downturn in the 6 mil /26\ guns is a very real phenomenon brought about by the Sino-Soviet split.  You're talking 200k+ T56s in '57 & '58, to anywhere from 240k to 360k guns in the '59 to '60 timeframe.  '61 comes along and we drop to ~20k, then '62 comes and you see at least 170k if not more 7 mil /26\s again.

Just for fun, I added in known early M21s and these NVAs to the ~20k number for the '61s:

M21 No 8XXXXX: ~10180
M21 No 9XXXXX: ~49070
NVA marked: 62-65 prefix: ~5800

Total would be ~86000.  While a higher number, this is still a marked decline from the years immediately before and after.

[Loose}{Cannon]

Yup...  I totally agree

[Loose}{Cannon]

Behold... The matching carrier on John Galts 6m.     

[martin08]

I'm not really up on when Q/C stamps disappeared completely, so I'm not sure if the following M21 pics will help or hurt the 1961 production theory.

M21 No 801374, no Q/C stamps





M21 No 916112, no Q/C stamps





M21 No 946939, no Q/C stamps

[Worm]

NVA given spare, blank, non-serialized parts and receivers because they simply put in a request to China.

Couple NVA guys in a hut start serializing the guns using old pregnant star until they get new updated star and use that.

By serializing their own, AND starting at a high number like say, 62,000, they fool three groups of people:

-Their own into boosting confidence, making themselves look stronger to their own people being they are now "producing weapons" and holy ****! 60-somethin-thousand!
-The West for a similar purpose, into underestimating the NVA's capabilities.
-And us future collectors, so we kill ourselves over the mystery.

The end.

WHY BOTHER MAKING A COUPLE THOUSAND OF YOUR OWN SKS'S WHEN YOU HAVE THEM COMING IN BY THE THOUSANDS?

[Worm]

It's a fun mystery n' all but, I do think we're making this way too difficult.

Regardless, I'm gonna pay $1k for an NVA IF i feel like i need to be in the market, which, I never will be being I only own one sks now anyways.

Now, $2k+? In my opinion you'd have to be smoking somethin' pretty damn good to pay that for one, but to each their own.

These will always be called NVA sks's, regardless if China made them or not, which in my strong opinion, they did. NVA flag? NVA gun. But, not NVA made, just no possible or logical way.. from what I can gather.

[Loose}{Cannon]

Laff...  Worm

M08...  You seen the progression page?  They more or less went poof around the letter guns, but I have seen post letter guns 'sometimes' have one or two random stamps.  This is why I believe the nva marked guns and likely 6m were recycling parts and or using up old stock.  Even a complete receiver in a bin will have QC stamps from when it was completed as an individual part.

[Worm]

Why could they not be serialized in china by NV reps?  Has nobody ever gone to another country to inspect and serialize rifles they beought or whatever? 

Reminds me of the US making mosins and having inspectors here.....

We also have a good idea that serial Numbers were applied last, so could they not have been sent rifles ready for NV to serialize themselves?

They are Chinese rifles all right, exactly how and when it went down are about the only questions I have.

Oh boy, what if

What if China was training the NVA to manufacture them. Russia went to China with partially made rifles, too teach and train them, the Soviet-Sino, it was a very limited run, followed by a few years of Russian technical overwatch and proofing. So the NVA go to China, get the neccesary enginering and associated training for manufacturing barrels, proofing, and overall crash course in mass small weapon production. All the while, the weapons the NVA side made while training in China, were marked as so.  China also trained Albania a few years later.

Vietnam had very little if any weapons production ability prior to this time frame. To say they just jumped up and cranked out ~6000 or so SKSs with no weapons manufacturing training is hard to believe. Their ability to build weapons had to come from, who else, but China. If they could build the SKS after the training, building a native homegrown AK later would be a cake walk. After all, why build an already obsolite weapon.

And what if,  the Star1 difference, is possibly just not another factory that opened in China that was closer to Vietnam. The NVA crew and production were moved closer to 'nam to save or cut down on transit cost/ time or some other unseen reason. That same Chinese factory later had one of the factory numbers other than /26\.

^ all of this