1949 Russian SKS with correct stock and bayonet

[Phosphorus32]

ю is also a known first letter on ‘49s. The first letter is a almost certainly a month code. The Soviets progressed through the alphabet but didn’t use the same letters every year, therefore ю will always be a late in the year production for the years where that letter is used.

[running-man]

Here are all the photos I have of other guns with a Ю prefix in the area of interest. This prefix was used through 1952 according to the database.

Not sure much can be gleaned from these, they are not the best for what we want to see.  A photo of the bottom of the gas tube with the bayo extended would be ideal but we certainly don't have anything like that with these.

'49 ЮB348 (West Rifle gun):


'49 ЮП1084 (decommissioned in Russia):


Unknown year (has a '52 cover on it) ЮП203:


'50 ЮK2584:


'50 ЮH1131:


'50 ЮЮ1345:


'50 ЮЮ1090:


'50 ЮЮ1076:


'50 ЮГ2022:


'50 ЮГ1756:


'50 ЮP2056:


'50 ЮP278:


'50 ЮB2908:


'50 ЮB2848:


Finally, here are known transitional 50's not of prefix Ю:
CO2934:


EM923:


EB623:


EB538:


EБ194:


and finally EБ485:

[Boris Badinov]

I just checked the Russian serial database, it shows the prefix letters on this gun to be known on a few 50s, and then a few uncertain ones, that came with 51 covers....
It sure would be nice to see all the serials on this one.
It kinda makes no sense if the gas block anomaly is a previously unseen trait, AND it has the correct bottom pinned ferrule... It makes me wonder if all the ones in the database WERE 49s with the wrong cover?  I am fairly certain that this takedown lever has to be from refurb.



юв  1949? shown here
юR  1950 seen on 'known' 50 carrier I am considering purchasing.

Could this be the December 49 / January 50 crossover? 

There are six  юв prefix serials in the data base.
OF those six rifles, five have 45° gas ports and the sixth gas port one is as uncertain

[Justin Hell]

I just checked the Russian serial database, it shows the prefix letters on this gun to be known on a few 50s, and then a few uncertain ones, that came with 51 covers....
It sure would be nice to see all the serials on this one.
It kinda makes no sense if the gas block anomaly is a previously unseen trait, AND it has the correct bottom pinned ferrule... It makes me wonder if all the ones in the database WERE 49s with the wrong cover?  I am fairly certain that this takedown lever has to be from refurb.



юв  1949? shown here
юR  1950 seen on 'known' 50 carrier I am considering purchasing.

Could this be the December 49 / January 50 crossover? 

There are six  юв prefix serials in the data base.
OF those six rifles, five have 45° gas ports and the sixth gas port one is as uncertain

Perhaps then, this carbine is constructed from parts added to a 50. Maybe that's why there is a strange 90 degree block nobody has seen before with the cleaning rod divot...could it have been fabricated altogether? The real kicker is the correct bottom pinned stock ferrule though... Something besides the bayonet possibly isn't right.  It could be as simple as someone pulled a populated 49 barrel and put it on a 50 serialed gun.  We don't get to see the RC serial or the stock for that matter...
It would be a major pain to locate a 50 with the correct index to pull it off, but not impossible....especially if it actually happened in Russia. Since the takedown lever is obviously from a refurb, it's likely that if any weirdness happened, it likely was during a refurb. I doubt though, the bayonet was done anywhere but here.
It is certainly a headscratcher.

[running-man]

There are six  юв prefix serials in the data base.
OF those six rifles, five have 45° gas ports and the sixth gas port one is as uncertain

The reason I have the sixth as uncertain is that I only have two photos of it. (Edit I did some google-fu and found a few other low-res photos that still exist [barely] of it, 45° gas block) (ЮВ3009):







For the other ones:

(ЮВ2848 gas block seen above):







(ЮВ2908 gas block seen above):





ЮВ1385:





ЮВ1442:






ЮВ2782:

[running-man]

So bottom line is that there are documented 1949's with 90° gas blocks, documented 1950's with 45 degree gas blocks, and uncertain heavy refurb guns with 1951 covers that also have 45° gas blocks that are otherwise indistinguishable from their 1950 bretheren. 

I'll note that it is very unusual to see "XY" prefix in consecutive years.  This happens every so often, but it's so uncommon that when I see it, I make a double take to make sure I didn't make a mistake in the transcription. 

[Boris Badinov]

Can someone please explain why the consensus is that the receiver take down lever isnt correct?

This is the best photo I've seen of the take down lever:


But i dont see how it is an obvious replacement. From the angle of the photograph its impossible to tell if its flat tabbed or eyelet style.

No?

[Boris Badinov]

Here is some barrel evidence that suggests a 1949 d.o.m:

As far as I can tell, the "stepped" barrel is a 1950 development. Every 1949 that I can remember does not have the machined ring or step.

This if from yoopers site. Its a good side by side comparison photo. The "step" is hard to spot until you know where to look:


This is the barrel from the curious auction rifle:



Check your 1950, 45° gas port carbines. I checked mine, and it has the step.

The absence of the machined step on the auction carbine supports possible 1949 d.o.m. , imo.

[jstin2]

I checked my 50 with a 45 degree gas port, forged eyelet lever and engraved tula star and date. It does not have a stepped barrel.

[Boris Badinov]

I checked my 50 with a 45 degree gas port, forged eyelet lever and engraved tula star and date. It does not have a stepped barrel.

Interesting. Thanks.

So the machined step may be a very early 1950 transition.

What is the serial prefix on your rifle?

[Boris Badinov]

The machined step can sometimes be very faint, almost imperceptible:


^1950 carbine from the post here:
https://sks-files.com/index.php?topic=5195.msg59157#msg59157

[Justin Hell]

Can someone please explain why the consensus is that the receiver take down lever isnt correct?

This is the best photo I've seen of the take down lever:


But i dont see how it is an obvious replacement. From the angle of the photograph its impossible to tell if its flat tabbed or eyelet style.

No?

One way or another, it isn't an original 49 or transitional 50, which isn't stamped...but milled, and considerably thicker than any of the stamped variety.

Interesting to note is the number of these 50s with stamped vs hand etched receiver covers...the serial/feature gap widens.

My early 50 EO has no step, 90 degree block, milled takedown loop.

[jstin2]

ЕЯ 1522

[Boris Badinov]

Ah, yes.

The "E-" prefix guns from 1950 exhibit many transitional features.

Now I'm curious to find out the serial prefix range where the machined step first appears, or begins to appear.

[Boris Badinov]

Here is my 1950 пш prefix, with the machined step:

[jstin2]

I no longer have the majority of my 50 collection, but looked at pictures on page 5, post 1950 transitions.  #6 is where I could see machined step.  фК 2584. Also #7
ЗВ 180

[Boris Badinov]

I no longer have the majority of my 50 collection, but looked at pictures on page 5, post 1950 transitions.  #6 is where I could see machined step.  фК 2584. Also #7
ЗВ 180

can you post a link to the your 1950 transitions thread?

[jstin2]

Not sure how to copy link, but go ahead and add link. Page 5 near bottom of page.

[Hotrod]

Can someone please explain why the consensus is that the receiver take down lever isnt correct?

This is the best photo I've seen of the take down lever:


But i dont see how it is an obvious replacement. From the angle of the photograph its impossible to tell if its flat tabbed or eyelet style.

No?

One way or another, it isn't an original 49 or transitional 50, which isn't stamped...but milled, and considerably thicker than any of the stamped variety.

Interesting to note is the number of these 50s with stamped vs hand etched receiver covers...the serial/feature gap widens.

My early 50 EO has no step, 90 degree block, milled takedown loop.

My early 50 EO also has no step. 90 degree block, Milled takedown loop.

[jstin2]

Hotrod - In my reply #8 I questioned if this transition was made in 49 or if it was refurbished. I questioned in another post that there must have been several production lines and if they were transitioning, it might have been in that line only. The stamped eyelet was done after the milled eyelet probably due to cost and time. The stamped eyelet was fragile and prone to breakage. Also you are right that it is not possible to say if it is a eyelet lever, but if it is not, then I would guess it was on a later production carbine. If the person who bought it, would post some pictures it would solve multiple questions. Best to know what you have and not to wonder what you don't have.