1940 PU SCOPE IDENTIFICATION

All Military Snipers are discussed here!


Preservation forum, please no altered military surplus rifles or discussions on altering in this forum. Please read the rules at the top of each forum.
Post Reply
jackdm
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri May 05, 2017 2:31 am

1940 PU SCOPE IDENTIFICATION

Post by jackdm »

Hello everyone, I am a new guy on this forum, I am French, so, thank you for excusing my bad English.
My question is: I just bought this PU scope in Russia, the serial number seems to me origin, but by looking in the section PU scope identification, "The Ratnik PU Scope Collection" on the site,
I found mine manufactured: Plant nkvd No. 3 Kharkov in 1940, only 5675 pieces were produced. The one I own has Serial No. 8327
Is it a scam or production is not really known?
Thank you for your answers.
_DSC0036.JPG
_DSC0037.JPG
_DSC0041.JPG
_DSC0044.JPG
_DSC0045.JPG
_DSC0046.JPG
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
Miller Tyme
PE - PEM - PU
PE - PEM - PU
Posts: 2001
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2011 2:24 pm

Re: 1940 PU SCOPE IDENTIFICATION

Post by Miller Tyme »

The scope is legit, and as to your S/N concern I would be bothered by it since more than likely production didn't start at "1".
“The only real power comes out of a long rifle" - Joseph Stalin
User avatar
Alsky
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 3:46 pm
Location: Central Pa

Re: 1940 PU SCOPE IDENTIFICATION

Post by Alsky »

Your scope is actually an SVT40 scope and not a PU. However it is the appropriate scope for on a PU rifle.
jackdm
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri May 05, 2017 2:31 am

Re: 1940 PU SCOPE IDENTIFICATION

Post by jackdm »

The production surely started in N ° 0001 on the first picture in the Ratnik PU Scope collection, we can see an scope dated 1940 with the N ° 0023
Ratnik
Posts: 107
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2012 10:30 pm
Location: Ukraine

Re: 1940 PU SCOPE IDENTIFICATION

Post by Ratnik »

Numbering of 1940 year ends somewhere in 14xxx.
I take info about produced numbers from the research of other person (there is a link in the bottom of the image), so there are two possibilities - information about produced number is not correct, or they were numbered not in cosecutive order. As to me, production numbers most likely are accurate.
Post Reply