All Original HARDWOOD 1957 and 1958 Letter Series?

[Justin Hell]

Also, what all examples can you provide as to the WestRifle  "totally unsuitable for data collection purposes with their 'enhanced' stocks"?

Rhetorical question for the shadow audience?

..........

[Justin Hell]

Where was this posted... remind me.

Heck man, it's out there somewhere.  It was probably two years ago, i've slept since then!  I'll see if i can find some of the egregious ones and post them here.  I specifically remember a 1949 in a laminate stock with a tula star and 1949 date on it. The gun was a total dog otherwise.  Not sure what they were aiming for there.  I'll get something by this evening.

I seem to remember that one too... wasn't it one of those ones that was rather short lived and the OP took his ball and went home?

[Loose}{Cannon]

Couldn't the crossbolt stamps just as easily be exclusive the stock manufacturing and inspection process and have nothing to do with the barreled action?

Bingo

Under zero circumstances would any military firearms manufacturer apply inspection stamps to a stock that had anything to do with measurements/tolerances of the metal components within it. Stocks are expected to be replaced....  the QC stamps having to do with fabrication, fitment, and calibration of the metal components will be stamped in respective locations.....  which they are. 

The crossbolt stamps in the stock are without question in reference to the fabrication of the stock itself.   Crossbolt bore hole diameter, countersink diameter, width, axis location, not to mention all the internal in-letting measurements.

[Boris Badinov]

Where was this posted... remind me.

Heck man, it's out there somewhere.  It was probably two years ago, i've slept since then!  I'll see if i can find some of the egregious ones and post them here.  I specifically remember a 1949 in a laminate stock with a tula star and 1949 date on it. The gun was a total dog otherwise.  Not sure what they were aiming for there.  I'll get something by this evening.

...and the re-serialized receiver (iirc it was  BO prefix?) with the shadow leftover from the original serial. That one still gives me chills. To imagine. that if they had just spent a little more time on the grinding wheel,  no one would have been the wiser.

[Boris Badinov]

Couldn't the crossbolt stamps just as easily be exclusive the stock manufacturing and inspection process and have nothing to do with the barreled action?

Bingo

Under zero circumstances would any military firearms manufacturer apply inspection stamps to a stock that had anything to do with measurements/tolerances of the metal components within it. Stocks are expected to be replaced....  the QC stamps having to do with fabrication, fitment, and calibration of the metal complainants will be stamped in respective locations.....  which they are.

But where did the notion come from? (mostly rhetorical question, so no need to answer...unless there is an actual origin for this notion.)

[Boris Badinov]

Couldn't the crossbolt stamps just as easily be exclusive the stock manufacturing and inspection process and have nothing to do with the barreled action?

Bingo

Under zero circumstances would any military firearms manufacturer apply inspection stamps to a stock that had anything to do with measurements/tolerances of the metal components within it. Stocks are expected to be replaced....  the QC stamps having to do with fabrication, fitment, and calibration of the metal components will be stamped in respective locations.....  which they are. 

The crossbolt stamps in the stock are without question in reference to the fabrication of the stock itself.   Crossbolt bore hole diameter, countersink diameter, width, axis location, not to mention all the internal in-letting measurements.

Actually, I do see how they could be associated with final production. But then, how to explain why so much variation in the quantity of crossbolt stamps? And also why only some have them on the right side?

[Loose}{Cannon]

Couldn't the crossbolt stamps just as easily be exclusive the stock manufacturing and inspection process and have nothing to do with the barreled action?

Bingo

Under zero circumstances would any military firearms manufacturer apply inspection stamps to a stock that had anything to do with measurements/tolerances of the metal components within it. Stocks are expected to be replaced....  the QC stamps having to do with fabrication, fitment, and calibration of the metal complainants will be stamped in respective locations.....  which they are.

But where did the notion come from? (mostly rhetorical question, so no need to answer...unless there is an actual origin for this notion.)

Im guessing (back in the day) they were seen to primarily only visible on guns that 'seemingly' are 'as issued'.  The presents of these stamps however only tell you that the stock is new and not itself been sanded and shellac reapplied.  Some refurbs received new stock, some received refurbished stocks. 

[Loose}{Cannon]

Actually, I do see how they could be associated with final production

I dont....   it literally flies in the face of common sense.   Unless you mean final production of the stock itself.   

There is a reason why the (K) stamp is on the lug etc, and its not on the stock.... thats retarded. 

[Loose}{Cannon]

Lets just think about this for a min....

Your working at a rework facility and 100 guns come in.  80 of said guns the stocks are reusable so are refinished and reused, however more serious issues such as Ivanov using the the stock to drive in tent stakes have to be replaced entirely.  Your going to need new or nos stocks as replacements.... 20 of them to be exact. 

[running-man]

I don't know that I subscribe to the thought that the cross bolt stamps have meaning for only the stock and not the completed firearm.  As far as I know, they have not been decoded yet and it's not a stretch to expect that final QC firearm stamps could be put there.  QC stamps need tracked as the firearm goes through its stages of production and are mostly irrelevant after it has been released and used (unless something catastrophic happens and they need to trace exactly what happened with a bad lot of guns).  If a stock gets replaced at a later date refurb, the original QC record of original production is really not relevant I'd think. 

[Boris Badinov]

So,...the greater the number of crossbolt stamps,  the more times the stock has been off the rifle post production?

[Loose}{Cannon]

We know from the log books of Yugos, that when in storage they were pulled periodically from the crates and inspected.  I dont see why a similar instance may happen with russians and they simply record the inspection right on the stock. However, if these stamps originate when the stock was built.... common sense tells me they are QC stamps related to the manufacture of the stock itself which as RM suggest, wouldn't be of any use to a rework facility to reapply after refinishing a stock. 

[jaroslav]

We know from the log books of Yugos, that when in storage they were pulled periodically from the crates and inspected. 

That's what I think. QC and periodical inspection. But... the early production would have more crossbolt stamps than the latter one.

[Larry D.]

We know from the log books of Yugos, that when in storage they were pulled periodically from the crates and inspected. 

That's what I think. QC and periodical inspection. But... the early production would have more crossbolt stamps than the latter one.

I was just about to post the same thought.

When I was working at the shop, there were random inspections.
QA would randomly pull a component and go over it with a fine tooth comb. He would then log the results and mark said component.
Maybe this is what we're seeing....

Of course I could be full of crap, as well......

[jstin2]

I found this 57 hardwood for sale. I at first thought it was original, but noticed that there is a refurb mark on receiver cover. Still it is in very good condition.
https://ibb.co/album/jczZrF

[running-man]

That gun is a total sham jstin.  I guess we can be thankful that the scammers don't understand all the intricacies of SKS serialization yet, but they will soon learn.  At some point it will be very difficult to stay one step ahead of them. 

[jstin2]

I bought this from a private seller, who had advertised all matching. Had a few pictures in ad and they looked good. I can't blame him for stuff done by previous seller or distributor. Once received, I could see what I have. Still for $325.00 CDN shipped, still not a bad buy.  Enlighten us with the problems with this carbine. This will be a learning experience for all.

[jstin2]

Is it the stock or gas tube which is in question?

[Boris Badinov]

Date designations were omitted from the stocks some time in 1955.

The И on the stock serial is a dead giveaway.

[jstin2]

I was wondering about И on the stock. Now the question is when and where it was done? Also what bout the cross bolt stamps? The value of carbine did not appreciate due to this. I took some more pictures of the markings on the stock. One thing that I noticed was that there was a faint M above the serial number.
https://ibb.co/album/gCsFyv