Once more, into the swamp....

[5MadFarmers]

Been busy. Changed jobs last summer and that has resulted in not having time/brain power for this stuff. Regardless I've been amassing interesting Krag bits in the meantime. Book will be delayed until I grow a second brain or free up the first.

The production reports had an anomaly that gave me some fits. When you're handed a piece that doesn't fit the puzzle either the piece or puzzle is wrong. The piece cannot be so...

Cadets, 1892 rifles getting 1896ish, 1896 carbines kind of 1892ish, and 1896 carbines not 1892ish. What is the order? Infernal puzzle. There is only one correct answer and that answer is inescapable: there isn't such an order. They made 1896 carbines and rifles at the same time. It's inescapable. We know they did that later so we'll have to assume the tiger didn't change it's stripes. "High hump" or (somebody on this board used the term and I prefer it) lug sights exist in both carbine and rifle editions. The lugged rifle sight indicates that it should be for the: cadet or early 1896 rifle. Those sights, coupled with the production report, give us two pieces of information both pointing to early 1896 rifle production. So it wasn't "rifle, then carbines, then rifles" as they made rifles during the carbine production run. So 1896 rifles with serials in the mid-20K range should exist. Reports of them surface from time to time (25973, etc).

Taking that as a given, and I'm not going to debate it as it's just an assumption to step to the next bit, we're still faced with the dilemma of the 1892s, cadets, and 1896 carbine/rifle break. The difference now is that we've simply added 1896 rifles to that "carbine block."

24685 has long been accepted as the earliest 1896 carbine. Thus it is probably not a bad number to cut the 1896 rifles and carbine to. Anything earlier is, for this exercise, not a model 1896. This thus gives us our first divide point right? <24685 is not 1896.

Now we're faced with the cadets and 1892 rifles (late ones). I'm aware of the Gunderson gun and the "17K/18K is the cadet range" faction of the community. I simply disagree. It's, this is readily obvious, an opinion. I don't know that they're not that early and nobody knows that they are. So it's a valid debate topic until evidence surfaces (if it ever does). I'm not going to debate that here either but do accept that is all opinion on all sides and worthy of debate.

23820 is about the start of the 1895 marking. 24685-23820=865.

If the assumptions are right, and 500 cadets sit in there, the odds are better than 50% that any gun in that range is a cadet.

Anyone know the story on 24267? Claimed cadet found at MGM? It's in range.

I'm under the impression that the above is likely correct. They made the cadets at the end of 1892 rifle production on 1895 marked receivers along with a final driblet of 1892 rifles. Then started production of 1896 guns - mainly carbines but also a small stream of rifles.

I bought an 1896 rifle at that Mattoon auction on New Year's Day. It wasn't until I arrived home that I realized why. The brain wasn't firing on all cylinders but it was firing nonetheless. The rifle sports a lugged 1896 rifle sight. Makes the second I have. They're out there. IMHO that is the sight used on the cadets and early 1896 rifles.

[madsenshooter]

I agree that Gunderson's wasn't a cadet, just a rifle that fell into a modified cadet stock. No doubt takes longer to modify wood than it does to rebuild metal, so the cadets didn't all fall back into modified cadet stocks when they were turned into service rifles. And some other 92 rifles likely fell into the modified cadet stocks as they were finished being rebuilt. In my opinion, take it for what it's worth, that's what Gunderson's rifle with such an early serial # was. But it was also the woodshop's show and tell stock, with the changes made to the cadet stocks enumerated.

[Mark Daiute]

I am totally ignorant of the Krag Cadets. Add to that this talk of lugged sights. Would someone please post a photo of a lugged sight?

Thanks,

Mark

[madsenshooter]

The Cadet rifles or which we speak Mark, are a model of Krag rifle that was issued to West Point cadets in 1896. Thus, Model 1896 Cadet rifle. They were basically model 1892 rifles without sling swivels. They had a carbine style lower band and it's retaining spring, cleaning rod beneath the barrel, no butt trap, square toed butt. There were 404 of them, plus a few museum specimens that were built on 1896 receivers. In 1900 the rifles were turned in to the Armory and upgraded to service rifle configuration, the Cadets got regular 98 rifles. They left us with one of those history's mysteries things since the serial #s of the original rifles weren't recorded, or rather no records have survived. A few 92/96 rifles in the rebuilt cadet stocks have turned up with serial #s in the 17-18K range. Some feel this is the range for all 404 of the rifles. I don't. I think they were all made on 1895 marked receivers and that the serial #s are in the range 23820-24685. Few survived in the Cadet configuration, though I had pics of one of the museum specimens at one time. It's serial # was over 30,000. Oddly, the 404 were shipped to the individual Commandant of each of the 4 Corps at the academy. The museum specimens were shipped to the Chief of Ordnance there. No doubt there were records of the serial numbers once upon a time.

[5MadFarmers]

I have a copy of that image somewhere. Upon looking at it again I think it confirms that the cadets were in fact built on the 1895 receivers. In fact it was useful to study the image again as now I'm firmly convinced the 23-24K range is correct.

Notice that rifle has the 1896 handguard and later no-lug sight? That's post rebuild of course. The receiver and stock didn't leave SA together the first time.

[Dick Hosmer]

The Cadet rifles or which we speak Mark, are a model of Krag rifle that was issued to West Point cadets in 1896. Thus, Model 1896 Cadet rifle. They were basically model 1892 rifles without sling swivels. They had a carbine style lower band and it's retaining spring, cleaning rod beneath the barrel, no butt trap, square toed butt. There were 404 of them, plus a few museum specimens that were built on 1896 receivers. In 1900 the rifles were turned in to the Armory and upgraded to service rifle configuration, the Cadets got regular 98 rifles. They left us with one of those history's mysteries things since the serial #s of the original rifles weren't recorded, or rather no records have survived. A few 92/96 rifles in the rebuilt cadet stocks have turned up with serial #s in the 17-18K range. Some feel this is the range for all 404 of the rifles. I don't. I think they were all made on 1895 marked receivers and that the serial #s are in the range 23820-24685. Few survived in the Cadet configuration, though I had pics of one of the museum specimens at one time. It's serial # was over 30,000. Oddly, the 404 were shipped to the individual Commandant of each of the 4 Corps at the academy. The museum specimens were shipped to the Chief of Ordnance there. No doubt there were records of the serial numbers once upon a time.

Excellent commentary - I would only digress as to the "square butt" - I believe that the correct butt for the cadets would be the "transitional/intermediate" one - curved toe, but also without trap. As the owner of (cutoff b/a) 24434, am eagerly awaiting resolution of this issue, hopefully within my lifetime!

[5MadFarmers]

The swamp has been drained. The last bit just fell into place. The cadets, oddly enough, were the easier of the two problems with that year. I can stick a fork into that year now. Moving right along.

Tom Pearce has been selling off bits on eBay lately. I called him a few months ago to drain his brain. Tom is a really smart and observant guy. That also goes for you guys here. You really are a good sounding board. Make me think.

[madsenshooter]

You're probably right Dick, in fact I don't know where I got the square toed butt idea in my head. Just fell outta my fingers as I was typing. 5, I think the 1896 cadets originally had the 96 handguard vs the shorter 92. Lost my pic of Mary Hebditch's, which I think was one of the museum pieces, and can't remember what was on it. Had several pics of it, one with a collector from Hawaii holding it.

[psteinmayer]

I have just been schooled... as I was also a little fuzzy on the whole "Cadet Rifle" thing too!

This is why I love this forum... a never ending source of knowledge!

[madsenshooter]

It's something I got into Paul, because there were some very famous folks through the academy during the period 1896-1900, when these rifles would have been in service there. Chief among them in my opinion, one Douglas MacArthur. I'd just love to have a rifle Doug might have handled. But who knows, somewhere along the line he might have handled my 92/96. Oh, I remember the collector from Hawaii's name, Mike Wait.

[Dick Hosmer]

Actually, that's Mike Weight, and here's another story (short version):

My dad worked for a Hawaiian-based company, even though he never left the mainland, but he died in 1946, when I was 8. One of his very best friends, who worked for the same company in the islands, was a man nicknamed "Red" Weight. I never met him, but they were very close, and his name was constantly mentioned in our house even though he passed away not too long after my dad. . . . . . Fast forward for more than 50 years. . . . . . Mike Weight advertised a rare trapdoor (M1888 Positive Cam) on Al Frasca's site. I bought it, and something made me ask him, almost as an afterthought, if there was any connection. . . . . "Red" was his dad's brother! One of Mike's cousins still remembers visiting my mom in San Francisco, in the 1950's as a little girl, traveling with her mother. Talk about the past coming alive!

Mike has given up the island life, and now lives in Florida - we have never met, but, who knows, someday we might.

[madsenshooter]

I see he puts up some Krag parts from time to time on ebay.

[Rick the Librarian]

Actually, that's Mike Weight, and here's another story (short version):

My dad worked for a Hawaiian-based company, even though he never left the mainland, but he died in 1946, when I was 8. One of his very best friends, who worked for the same company in the islands, was a man nicknamed "Red" Weight. I never met him, but they were very close, and his name was constantly mentioned in our house even though he passed away not too long after my dad. . . . . . Fast forward for more than 50 years. . . . . . Mike Weight advertised a rare trapdoor (M1888 Positive Cam) on Al Frasca's site. I bought it, and something made me ask him, almost as an afterthought, if there was any connection. . . . . "Red" was his dad's brother! One of Mike's cousins still remembers visiting my mom in San Francisco, in the 1950's as a little girl, traveling with her mother. Talk about the past coming alive!

Mike has given up the island life, and now lives in Florida - we have never met, but, who knows, someday we might.

Thanks to Dick I was "introduced" to Mike and he sold me my first M1903 National Match a few years ago. Sorry to hear he's left island life behind. Sure like the rifle he sold me!

[psteinmayer]

How incredible to find those connections! It just goes to show... somehow, we really do touch so many lives throughout our time in this realm!

[5MadFarmers]

Lost my pic of Mary Hebditch's, which I think was one of the museum pieces, and can't remember what was on it. Had several pics of it, one with a collector from Hawaii holding it.

A name. Mary Hebditch. Died in November of 2005. The following year, 2006, Greg Martin had an auction with the collection of "Bud" Hebditch Jr. Her husband.

That's earlier than I was collecting and therefore digging. I wonder if that was in that sale?

November 14-16 2006. Anyone have a catalog? I'll dig and see if I can find it.

[5MadFarmers]

The Hebditch collection was sold in November of 2005, not 2006. Found a catalog set. I'll see if the cadet is in there.

[madsenshooter]

Or if anyone knows how to contact Mike, they could ask him to email some copies. I looked in my ebay msgs, since I'd contacted him, already gone.

[Dick Hosmer]

Mike's email sent to Joe - do you want it, too, Bob?

[madsenshooter]

No, that's fine Dick, I'll catch him on ebay again sometime.

[5MadFarmers]

That guns wasn't sold at that auction.

The Krags in the listed collection were a sundry collection of items - most not original. I hate to sound negative but the Krags in that auction were items a collector without knowledge would buy. Guns posing as thing they aren't. Makes me wonder about the cadet.

[madsenshooter]

Hard to say, Mike had been collecting for awhile before getting his fingers on it, he ought to know. He was handling it very daintily, like it was a one of kind item.

[Dick Hosmer]

That guns wasn't sold at that auction.

The Krags in the listed collection were a sundry collection of items - most not original. I hate to sound negative but the Krags in that auction were items a collector without knowledge would buy. Guns posing as thing they aren't. Makes me wonder about the cadet.

Sadly, Greg Martin is no stranger to such stuff.

[Kragrifle]

Mary Hebditch. I only heard Bill say Mary, so now I guess I know the last name. If I have the story straight, I thought I heard that the cadet ended up back at West Point along with the rifle that Frank Mallory took back there. I know the SN range on Mallory's rifle. Wonder what her SN was?

[madsenshooter]

It seems to me that when discussing it with Mike, it too was over 30,000, that's why I assumed it to be one of the museum specimens. Hmm, I'm going digging in my yahoo mail. Ah, finding things. Mike said that Mary's Cadet is the one photographed for Brophy's book, and he thinks that it may have gone back to West Point too. I can't find the pics he sent me though.

[madsenshooter]

Found the pics Mike had sent me. Thanks yahoo, for keeping such oddities! I think, but am not sure, that I also have a pic of the receiver, it's an 1895 receiver and the serial # appears to be 30042. That may have been a different rifle I was eyeing and not from Mike.

[Kragrifle]

Thick wrist stock would be correct for one of the four museum pieces. A well known collector had the third one of these and sold it 3-4 years ago. I had that one in my hands and the check book out, then got cold feet. Sins of omission are much worse than sins of commission. Wish I would have kept the SN.

[madsenshooter]

The 30042 was an 1896 carbine, pic I'd sent to Joe for his serial # compilation.