Oddities of a /135\ 24 Million

[Tiger]

I've acquired an arsenal /135\ in the 24,000,000 serial range, and there are a couple of strange things about it. The most obvious oddity is that the barrel looks like it was turned at the speed of light. It's so rough it's nearly threaded over its entire length, except for its attachment areas, which are quite smooth. All attachments are cast, and I'm not entirely sure that the receiver wasn't forged before milling, as I do see milling marks, but can't discount possible casting marks. The bayonet lug is a bit twisted; the threaded/unpinned barrel connection is short, and while the barrel is marked by a number as well as an  alignment arrow, the receiver has neither. It's a Polly #4 import mark, and sports a short spike, in its long spike slot. Mag serial is a mismatch, and the dust-cover is a Norinco-branded scope mount. All other serials seem to match. Learn me something, maybe? I'm not sure how to post images, when it tells me that I'm using an outdated browser.

[Bubbazinetti]

Welcome from N.H. Tiger.

I think your Type 56 is a 1979 model.

You have to go thru a hosting service for pics. A lot of us use imgbb.com. It's a free service. Upload your pics there and then link them to your thread.

[Larry D.]

Hi Tiger.
Welcome from Arizona.

[Phosphorus32]

Welcome!

Regarding posting pictures, I’d suggest you try a different browser, or update the version of the one you’re using. They do update security issues on the latest versions, so it’s worthwhile for reasons other than picture posting.

Sounds like an interesting Type 56. The barrel ought to be pinned. They are tricky to see sometimes. If it’s a cast receiver that’s really quite a find from a collectible perspective.

[Boris Badinov]

Many (perhaps all?) cast receivers have two vertical barrel pins. One on the left and one on the  right side of the lug.

If its a single pin, its most likely a milled receiver and not cast.

I look forward to photos!

[Tiger]

Thanks for the welcome! Looking closely, I think that the potential casting signs are actually just very rough milling marks, and I doubt the photos will give enough detail to determine, but they're on the way. I see no signs of barrel pins, and haven't heard of any castings from this arsenal. I forgot to mention that it has a side sling mount. As far as uploading images goes, it doesn't cooperate at all. So, I've pasted the links.

https://ibb.co/wghJYCk
https://ibb.co/6W29W64
https://ibb.co/q15XDDJ
https://ibb.co/Fbb3G30
https://ibb.co/kGjwVfx
https://ibb.co/vYKgk4j
https://ibb.co/C6Dj9BW
https://ibb.co/WnNRNYM

[Bubbazinetti]

Fixed it for ya;

[Phosphorus32]

Pictures are worth a thousand words  Milled receiver, short-lug threaded barrel, not pressed and pinned.

[Tiger]

Pictures are worth a thousand words  Milled receiver, short-lug threaded barrel, not pressed and pinned.

Thanks a ton. Is there any explanation for the sloppy barrel turning? I've never seen that. I initially thought it was just very cheaply produced for the commercial market, until I read up on the arsenal marks.

[Phosphorus32]

Pictures are worth a thousand words  Milled receiver, short-lug threaded barrel, not pressed and pinned.

Thanks a ton. Is there any explanation for the sloppy barrel turning? I've never seen that. I initially thought it was just very cheaply produced for the commercial market, until I read up on the arsenal marks.

I'm not a machinist but others have discussed that dull lathe cutting tools could be involved in this pattern, or more generally, a preference for speed of production with minimum labor input over attention to tool maintenance and fine finishing.

[Bubbazinetti]

I heard it was a expedient way to keep reflections down so it doesn't shine as much in the dark. Dunno