SRS Check Request 1896 Krag Carbine R. Rider? 32809

[thek98sniper]

I wondering if someone would be kind enough run this serial number for me. I picked up one today at a local gun shop with this serial number and appear to be all the correct parts, and marks. I would be interesting since it is in the middle of the "Rough Rider" range if it makes a hit. Thanks in advance. The number is 32809

[Dick Hosmer]

I'll look this evening.

[Dick Hosmer]

Almost forgot. 32827 is the closest listing that I found - 10th Cav, FWIW (which isn't much - only hits count).

[butlersrangers]

"Close" can get your attention!

[thek98sniper]

10th Cavalry or "Buffalo Soldiers" I have read. They have quite a story in Cuba. I see the govt. decided to admit African Americans into the service during the Span Am War and justified the doing do by saying "persons not susceptible to tropical diseases".
From the published History of the 10th Cavalry"...
"The Army viewed its "Buffalo soldiers" as having an extra advantage in fighting the war in Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines. There was an unfounded belief that African-Americans were immune to tropical diseases. Based on this belief congress authorized the raising of ten regiments of "persons possessing immunity to tropical diseases." These regiments would later be called "Immune Regiments"."
The story continues on...
"For the assault on San Juan Hill the Tenth Cavalry would be part of the Second Brigade which was composed of the First Cavalry Regiment, Tenth Cavalry Regiment, First Volunteer Cavalry Regiment, and a detachment with four Hotchkiss guns. Different elements of the American army began moving toward Santiago as early as June the 30th. On the march the artillery had to stop 143 times in three miles, due to poor road conditions."
Just the possibilities are quite interesting...but I know a miss is as good as a mile.
Thanks, Dick


http://www.spanamwar.com/10thcavhist.htm

[Dick Hosmer]

The 10th Cav predates the SAW - black troopers served on the frontier (particularly Texas) during the Indian wars. As a matter of fact, there were black regiments (referred to as U.S.C.T. - United States Colored Troops) during the Civil War as well. Of course, all the officers were white - I do not know when that changed - WW2? Later?

[butlersrangers]

I have read an account by a Northern Michigan N.G. Volunteer, who witnessed the storming of El Chaney (Santiago, Cuba) by Black U. S. Regular Infantry. "It was the bravest thing he ever saw"! They were the first into that fortification and captured the Spanish Colors, only to have them taken away by the officer of a white regiment, who wanted the 'Honor' for his men.
Probably one of the greatest slights was during WW-1, when U. S. Black soldiers had to serve under the French Flag and French Officers, in order to get into combat.

[thek98sniper]

Yes, I think it was the plains indians who originally coined the "buffalo soldier" term.
I have seen pictures of African American officers on various web sites that the poster indicates were taken during WW1.

[butlersrangers]

According to the U. S. Army web site, the first commissioned Black Officer, in the Regular Army, was 2nd. Lt. Henry Ossian Flipper. He was the fifth Black candidate admitted to West Point and the first to graduate (1877).
Some of his classmates made his life 'hell' and I believe he had to defend himself against trumped up charges.
He commanded Troop A, 10th Cavalry, at Fort Sill. (I believe there were earlier Black Officers in 'Colored' Regiments during the Civil War - IIRC).

[Kragrifle]

369th Infantry Regiment

[butlersrangers]

The U. S. 93rd Infantry Division (Colored), during WW1, included the 369th, 370th, 371st, and 372nd Regiments, I believe. Their patch design was influenced by the blue French 'Adrian' helmets that they wore.

[Rick the Librarian]

In my opinion, one of the worst acts of discrimination was the conversion of the (Black) 9th and 10th Cavalry regiments to stevedore units in WWII.

In another case on of the few Black officers, Lt. Col. Charles Young, was "retired" for medical reasons shortly before WWI. It was unjustified, because Young rode a horse a very extended distance to show how fit he was.

While I am no fan of the current "civil rights" leaders and philosophy going around today, treatment of Black soldiers is a blot on the honor of our military services that will never go away.

[butlersrangers]

Well said, Rick.
I recall reading about 'a line' being painted on the decks of a SAW transport ship. White and Black soldiers, who were on friendly terms at their post in Montana, could not visit aboard the transport. Not all men were blind to injustice. It bothered them and they wrote about it.

[Dick Hosmer]

Another blot on our history is the Japanese-American resettlement camps. I have come to know a few of the internees, and they at least are wonderful people - some bitter, some not so much, but all scarred.

I totally abhor today's utterly ridiculous, tail wagging the dog, level of PC-ness, but there were some wrongs that needed to be called out and condemned. The proper course, as in nearly all of life, lies somewhere in the middle. Hopefully the pendulum will come to rest some day.

[Rick the Librarian]

Precisely my point, Dick ... I am NOT holding up today's skewed PC B.S., either.

Our next-door neighbors were J/A and they spent the war in an internment camp while the wife's brothers, three of them, were in the Army. They were (and still are) "family" - they took care of my mother over the years and in her last illness and I was given the honor of giving the husband's eulogy at his funeral.

[5MadFarmers]

In another case on of the few Black officers, Lt. Col. Charles Young, was "retired" for medical reasons shortly before WWI. It was unjustified, because Young rode a horse a very extended distance to show how fit he was.


"It was unjustified." Those aren't hindsight glasses you're wearing, they're nonsense glasses. How would you know if it was justified for not? From that snippet I gather they probably waited longer than they should have.

"was "retired" for medical reasons"

What specifically was the reason? We don't even need to know. What that indicates is they went through the process of retiring him. What did he do? File an appeal? Get a second medical opinion? No, that's not what you're claiming he did:

"because Young rode a horse a very extended distance to show how fit he was."

He rode a horse. "Look fellas, I'm ok, I'm just fine, I can ride a horse!"

Sounds like they waited too long.

[Shooter5]

Almost forgot. 32827 is the closest listing that I found - 10th Cav, FWIW (which isn't much - only hits count).
Grenades and artillery beg to differ.

[Shooter5]

The French, among many others including the relatively few enlightened Americans, were shocked at the US for its bigotry and prejudice. Read up on the heroics of Eugene Bullard to see how far it extended. The US has had a lot of things it could have done better and sooner but even after WW2, Mr Bullard was mistreated by the US military. De Gaulle invited him to the Arch de Triomphe in the 1950s and still President Eisenhower on down could not and did not see fit to do the right thing.

http://www.dodlive.mil/index.php/2012/02/first-african-american-pilot-a-war-hero-during-wwi/

http://www.amazon.com/Eugene-Bullard-Worlds-First-Fighter/dp/158838280X

El Caney was recently studied by US archaeologists.

http://www.buffalosoldiers-washington.com/Daggett%20Report.jpg

http://www.kearneyhub.com/news/local/unl-group-digging-into-history-of-battle-at-cuba-s/article_41cf3dd0-b23b-5283-a258-e1041ba3ca73.html






28803

I have read an account by a Northern Michigan N.G. Volunteer, who witnessed the storming of El Chaney (Santiago, Cuba) by Black U. S. Regular Infantry. "It was the bravest thing he ever saw"! They were the first into that fortification and captured the Spanish Colors, only to have them taken away by the officer of a white regiment, who wanted the 'Honor' for his men.
Probably one of the greatest slights was during WW-1, when U. S. Black soldiers had to serve under the French Flag and French Officers, in order to get into combat.

[Dick Hosmer]

Grenades and artillery beg to differ.

Absolutely true, but also, completely unrelated to the point at hand. Even consecutive-numbered weapons could have had entirely different histories.

[5MadFarmers]

In my opinion, one of the worst acts of discrimination was the conversion of the (Black) 9th and 10th Cavalry regiments to stevedore units in WWII.

At first blush this one would slide through unnoticed. It looks well assembled. Upon a bit of poking though cracks in this appear. Then the entire veneer comes apart.

The wife worked with a lady and I had the opportunity to correspond with her father. About his service in WW2. Very early in the war he was drafted. He'd attended the University and was working as a school teacher when drafted. After a bit of time in the service he attended OCS and was commissioned. Thence to France where he commanded a QM truck company.

What an affront. That's an affront that will forever besmirch the honor of the US Military. See, I can play "false affrontry" as a hobby too. How'd I do?


treatment of Black soldiers is a blot on the honor of our military services that will never go away.

Just playing to the theme.

The picture of those forlorn cavalry troopers toiling away loading and ships daily, perhaps sweating profusely and having visions of the days when they rode their horses in parades, is evocative. It's also nonsense. The great bulk of the blacks drafted served in various QM units. Whether that's fair or unfair is immaterial to the fact that large numbers of blacks were going to be entering the US military machine. Who'd lead them?

I suspect you have your answer. So painted one way we get a vision of them loading boxes all day. Painted another we get the vision of the military needing Sergeants and that ilk for those units. Which do you believe is the more likely reality?

Having them in those roles meant they didn't get the wonderful chance to play shoot 'em up with the Germans. If that's true for them it's true for the dude I mentioned. Oh the humanity of it all.

As I was typing this I got to wondering: "how did this thread turn into what it did? The great feel sorry for the ill-understood alleged wrongs of history."

I then walked back through the posts. #7 started it. Who posted that?

Aw, I see it now.

[Dick Hosmer]

Joe, did you get up on the wrong side of bed this morning? Run out of hot water in the midst of your shower? Sheeeeeeeeesh!!!! [GRIN]

[5MadFarmers]

No, not really.

Patterns are a strange thing. Watching this thread go from an SRS check request to somebody being falsely offended, and that's a honed skill, over some senile dude being retired during WW1 was an interesting study. Only took about 10 posts. A game similar to 7 degrees of separation from Kevin Bacon. How, who, what, or why does that pattern exist? What causes it.

I tracked it back to post #7. I'll diagram it:


I have read an account by a Northern Michigan N.G. Volunteer, who witnessed the storming of El Chaney (Santiago, Cuba) by Black U. S. Regular Infantry. "It was the bravest thing he ever saw"! They were the first into that fortification and captured the Spanish Colors, only to have them taken away by the officer of a white regiment, who wanted the 'Honor' for his men.
Probably one of the greatest slights was during WW-1, when U. S. Black soldiers had to serve under the French Flag and French Officers, in order to get into combat.

Three pieces there. Read posts 1-6. Any negatives? Not really. Then post #7. Three pieces. The first is about th El Chaney charge.
The second takes it negative for no apparent reason. "only to have them taken away by the officer of a white regiment, who wanted the 'Honor' for his men."
The third leverages the negative established in #2: "Probably one of the greatest slights was during WW-1"

In three sentences a thread with no negatives is taken from something somewhat related through the "professionally affronted" to a completely unrelated negative.

Post number 8 is something of an attempt to recover the thread by the OP:


Yes, I think it was the plains indians who originally coined the "buffalo soldier" term.
I have seen pictures of African American officers on various web sites that the poster indicates were taken during WW1.

Post number 9, from #7 post, only takes two sentences to do it this time:


According to the U. S. Army web site, the first commissioned Black Officer, in the Regular Army, was 2nd. Lt. Henry Ossian Flipper. He was the fifth Black candidate admitted to West Point and the first to graduate (1877).
Some of his classmates made his life 'hell' and I believe he had to defend himself against trumped up charges.

The first sentence is, again, somewhat related to the previous post but really not. It simply sets up a negative in the next sentence which is unrelated to anything.



Some of his classmates made his life 'hell' and I believe he had to defend himself against trumped up charges.

So in five sentence, via two posts, it's taken it from any relationship to the thread topic. Of the five sentences three are gratuitious negatives.

Let's count them:
*only to have them taken away by the officer of a white regiment, who wanted the 'Honor' for his men.
*Probably one of the greatest slights was during WW-1, when U. S. Black soldiers had to serve under the French Flag and French Officers, in order to get into combat.[/quote]
*Some of his classmates made his life 'hell' and I believe he had to defend himself against trumped up charges.

What does that have to do with the thread topic? Nothing. Just unrelated negatives set up with almost no effort at all. That's a talent.

With that setup in place Rick comes in on post #12. Primed to be offended at history overall with his heart bleeding over things he doesn't even understand. Over the topic of the thread? Of course not. It was set up in posts #7 and #9.

That really is a talent.

Imagine walking into an NRA meeting where the topic is Winchesters. Let's see if I can do it in three sentences. Remember I'm not a trained professional at this:

"Oliver Winchester's daughter in law ended up with about half of his fortune."

Somewhat related.

"The death and destruction caused by his trade drove her crazy. She built a huge house which is now a tourist attraction."

So I'm not as good at spinning the negative. Again, I'm not skilled in this art. Third sentence must be related to #2 marginally but not to #1. It also has to be negative and be primed to set everybody down negative lane on something completely unrelated to the original topic.

"The other big house which is a big tourist attraction is the White House. Obama is in there now. The guy is wrecking the country."

Some kind of strange threadjacker there. It only takes three sentences. Toxic to a board.

[butlersrangers]

I have no intention of hijacking a thread or being toxic (or politically correct). U. S. Military History is interesting. The segregation of Black Soldiers and their involvement in the C.W., S.A.W., and later wars is interesting, to me. The early posts established that a Model 1896 Krag carbine's serial number was not in the SRS records. A response made mention of a carbine attributed to the 10th Cavalry. There was a response about Black Soldiers, "immunes", in the SAW, by the original poster. I brought up the topic of Infantry, especially a Black unit (25th Infantry), carrying the position of "El Caney". I believe the SRS request was answered. It was relevant to share information on Black U. S. Military units and the experiences of early Black Officers. I found the responses of others interesting. When men overcome barriers and perform well in the face of unfairness, it can be inspirational to others. I don't believe I was negative or calculating.

[5MadFarmers]

I have no intention of hijacking a thread or being toxic

Yet you did both. I doubt you can even help doing that. You do it full time at KCA. I don't use that site. The two are related. Directly.


U. S. Military History is interesting. The segregation of Black Soldiers and their involvement in the C.W., S.A.W., and later wars is interesting, to me.

Thus you hijacked the thread.


I brought up the topic of Infantry,

No, this topic is about that carbine. You didn't bring up a topic, you hijacked this one.


I don't believe I was negative or calculating.

A read of posts #7 and #9 refute that.

Over 10% of the total posts at KCA are from you. It's a high noise low signal board. Tell me the two are not related. Good Krag information is exchanged here. Very little there. This is a high signal low noise board. You typically don't post here. Tell me the two are not related.

If people want you to surf the Intertubes for them they can get that at KCA. Do you really need to troll both boards? If you're going to start trolling this one please stop posting at that one and I'll provide Krag information there instead of here.

[5MadFarmers]

I'm going to pile on that previous post and explain how it matters.

OP created a topic on a carbine. OP owns the topic. The topic is about his carbine.

In post #7 Butler Ranger hijacked the thread. He reinforced his ownership of the thread in post #9. Why?


The segregation of Black Soldiers and their involvement in the C.W., S.A.W., and later wars is interesting, to me.

Because it's interesting to him

In an alternate universe, the universe this board exists in without him hijacking threads, OP would still own this thread. Information on his carbine would be provided to OP. That is the universe which used to exist and does exist without ButlerRanger not hijacking threads because he has a pet interest he wants shopped to others.

That is why it matters.

Go through this thread and see how much information was provided to OP on his gun. It's why he came here. He owned the topic.

[butlersrangers]

To 'thek98sniper': I apologize to you, if I interfered with your getting information regarding your question(s) or sidetracked anything.

[ww321q]

hahahahahahahaha! You guys are great ! I'll start a new post so we can do this again. :)

[Dick Hosmer]

Unfortunately perhaps, I can, as usual see some good points on BOTH sides of this cat-fight.

On average, 95% of the serial number questions are doomed to failure - in actual practice it seems closer to 99%. That makes for a very short thread - which, I guess is OK, but, if along the way other things get teased out, that is what can turn a doomed thread into a discussion, where even more interesting points may come up, as memories are jogged. This is a chat room, after all - and one is always free to drop out of a thread if it no longer interests them.

What I personally miss is the technical, part ID questions, etc. which seem to have dried up. I guess everyone knows everything now. Well, everyone except some of the sellers on Gunbroker.

[dave]

The indians came up with the name due to blacks hair which reminded them of Buffalo's manes.

[5MadFarmers]

Unfortunately perhaps, I can, as usual see some good points on BOTH sides of this cat-fight.

On average, 95% of the serial number questions are doomed to failure - in actual practice it seems closer to 99%. That makes for a very short thread - which, I guess is OK, but, if along the way other things get teased out, that is what can turn a doomed thread into a discussion, where even more interesting points may come up, as memories are jogged. This is a chat room, after all - and one is always free to drop out of a thread if it no longer interests them.

What I personally miss is the technical, part ID questions, etc. which seem to have dried up. I guess everyone knows everything now. Well, everyone except some of the sellers on Gunbroker.

What you are not seeing is legion. Some of it due to the "boiled frog" effect.

Firstly, the Matco Trollkit Butlerrangers has ($150 with coupon at Harbor Freight) includes the Threadjacker 2000(R). I've seen it before - many people have it. I've also seen that "three steps to owning a thread" bit for the Threadjacker 2000 used before. What came as a surprise was the "bleeding heart negativity" coating on that bit. It came as a surprise. Now that I've seen it I'll notice it elsewhere.

Butlerranger set up is Trollkit at KCA. Started hijacking threads. Why? To masturabate. What other term can be used for that? Pseudo-intellectual masterbation. In order to do that he has to push the OP off the stage of their own thread. Then he owns it and gains the audience for free.

That's not enough though. So he starts threads to do that. Nobody pays attention so he does it in a mirror.

Then the "boiled frog effect" comes into play. I don't follow the KCA. For a good reason. I don't care for that type of show. You, and others here, do. Thus you've been boiled.

It's like living in a house with a senile Uncle Charley. At first he comes down with no pants. "Put your pants on." That battle continues until he gets his way. Next he comes down sans underpants. Eventually everybody in the house gets used to that. A stranger comes in and is shocked and offended. Everybody is shocked that the stranger is shocked. Why? They've grown used to it.

That's where you're at. You see it full time at KCA. Thus it's normal to you. Trust me, it's not normal. It didn't exist here.

"Give him a chance." We just did. Tired of a lack of an audience at KCA he's arrived here with his Trollkit. At first it was just unzipping. In this thread he pushed OP off stage and started doing it. To you that was normal. To me it isn't. So am I over-reacting? No, you're underreacting. He'll do it again. He can't help himself. You need to take a course on "enabling."

This board has gained a reputation for being the place where people can get answers to the questions they have on their guns. KCA has a reputation but not for that. People thus get pointed here. There are three parties involved:
1) Those that were pointed here because they can get their questions answered.
2) Those that have built that reputation.
3) Butlerranger.

He already has a stage at KCA. Not letting him do that here means no real loss to him. He really doesn't have enough material for two shows anyway.

Those that have established the reputation for this board are being shorted.

Those that were pointed here get a double shocker. Their questions aren't answered and instead they get that show. Double whammy.

Am I being too harsh? I don't think so. This board has a reputation and it took work on everybody's part to establish it. Having Butlerranger turn it into his second stage would be bad for the board.

So he should keep that show at KCA where you're all used to it.

Am I being too harsh? No. No different from shooing kids away from smashing pumpkins in the neighbor's garden.

Anyone that does see it can easily go to KCA and see it on full display.

If those running Jouster have a problem with this post - fine, mention it or ban me. Trust me - you'll then get a show.

====

The thread as it would have existed without that Trollkit being used to push OP off stage for the masturbation show:


Default SRS Check Request 1896 Krag Carbine R. Rider? 32809

I wondering if someone would be kind enough run this serial number for me. I picked up one today at a local gun shop with this serial number and appear to be all the correct parts, and marks. I would be interesting since it is in the middle of the "Rough Rider" range if it makes a hit. Thanks in advance. The number is 32809


(Dick Hosmer) 32827 is the closest listing that I found - 10th Cav, FWIW (which isn't much - only hits count).

Many often use the SRS lists and do that "closest is X unit" thing. Then the guns gains an air of being in that unit when the reality is the opposite.

Let's say there was a ship coming to America. Three decks (A/B/C) with 25 people on each. The ship sinks and the people board lifeboats. Five people to the boat. You had an Uncle on the ship and want to know what deck he was on.

The records for that sinking give us who was in two of the 15 life boats. Both from Deck A:
Bob, Dick, Ned, Tom, Paul (boiled frog boat).
Alice, Annie, Annamarie, Abigail, and Annabel.

"Hey, my uncle's name was Dirk. He was probably on that deck as his name is close to Dick." It doesn't work that way. The first boat loaded from deck C might have had Bo, Dirk, Nate, Tony, and Pappy.

So the chances of Dirk being on A deck is 15 of 75. B and C deck have 25 of 75 each.

The fact that your gun isn't on the list for that unit simply establishes that the chances it was in that unit are less. For all kinds of reasons.

Stage 2:
The first Krags were rifles. Let's say 25,000 but it was a bit less. Then came 10,000 carbines. "Cavalry." Yes and no.

Rifles went to "non-mounted" uses. So perhaps guards in addition to traditional infantry units.
Carbines went to mounted uses. Engineers is an easy "non-cavalry" use case.

I have the records for three chests of rifles used in a Geological Survey. Those weren't even in the Army.

The bulk of the records are for "traditional" units. There were other uses. Doesn't mean it didn't go to a Cavalry unit - just means they used Carbines for many things.

I guess you could get a total count for the Cavalry units and see how many would fill their need. Then say the rest of the 10,000 were the other uses. That's probably somewhat true but not completely. That would mean the earlier the carbine the more likely it went to Cavalry. Range is roughly 25,000 to 35,000 so you see where your gun sits. Again, that's not a fixed though as the guns weren't in serial order.

====

That's a thread minus the threadjacker 2000.

[Dick Hosmer]

I believe the chances of Dirk originally being on any given deck is 1 in 3. What happened to the other 13 lifeboats? Do we assume that all lifeboats were filled, not caring from which deck? If any of them sank, was Dirk lost? Since Dirk was apparently not on either of the two boats mentioned, then there would be a 1/15 chance of him having been on A, and a 1/25 chance of him having been on either B or C.

Apparently, amateur pyschiatry does not count as highjacking? Methinks the pot doth attempt to blacken the kettle.

I did slip and break my self-imposed rule about no longer giving the association of the "close" (a term which begs definition) number, as it is - as you say - entirely meaningless.

Let's get back to Krags. How is the book coming?

[5MadFarmers]

I believe the chances of Dirk originally being on any given deck is 1 in 3. What happened to the other 13 lifeboats? Do we assume that all lifeboats were filled, not caring from which deck? If any of them sank, was Dirk lost? Since Dirk was apparently not on either of the two boats mentioned, then there would be a 1/15 chance of him having been on A, and a 1/25 chance of him having been on either B or C.

That's really bad math.

5 lifeboats per deck. Three decks. We've eliminated two boats from deck A with Dirk not being on them. Ratio of remaining boats, per deck, is 3/5/5. Chances for decks B and C are better than A. Having two boats, with negative results, for deck A reduces chances for that deck.


Apparently, amateur pyschiatry does not count as highjacking?

What's amatuer about it? Mind you I threadjacked it back on topic.


Methinks the pot doth attempt to blacken the kettle.

That statement is always bi-directional. Think about that and you'll chuckle.



I did slip and break my self-imposed rule about no longer giving the association of the "close" (a term which begs definition) number, as it is - as you say - entirely meaningless.

No, not meaningless. As diagrammed it simply reduces the chances for that unit.


Let's get back to Krags. How is the book coming?

After all that you want me to threadjack OP? No.

OP should post pictures of 32809. Then we'll know if "R. Rider" in his post refers to a certain OALW as that term too often does.

[Dick Hosmer]

Not bad math at all. The question posed was which deck had he been on, NOT which lifeboat he might or might not be on, after the sinking. Apparently you presume that the lifeboat loading was orderly? What if it was not? Perhaps Dirk was off dallying with Penelope, or worse, Lorenzo (or perhaps both). Possibly - since you introduced masturbation to the discussion - he was in the hold dallying with himself? The fact that you now have some knowledge of A does not change the original odds.

For the OP to say that 32809 is in the middle of the Rough Rider range is flawed in any event - given one pronounced clot in the 20s and one in the 60/70s. True in the literal sense, but requires the incorrect assumption that the entire run was a possibility.

Yes, I chuckled, and you ducked - how is the book coming? This thread has been jacked so many times it should be off.

I haven't recorded the numbers of any OALW (fakes assembled by the Ostberg Armory and Locomotive Works - yes the guy dicked-over toy trains, too) guns, for those not in on the secret.

Golly this is fun.

[butlersrangers]

I'd like to see pictures of "k98sniper's" Model 1896 carbine.

[Dick Hosmer]

I'd like to see pictures of "k98sniper's" Model 1896 carbine.

What a refreshing suggestion, to say nothing of getting away from the not unrelated topics of psychiatry and masturbation.

[Shooter5]

Buffalo soldiers were stationed at Ft Buford when Tatanta Iyotanka (Sitting Bull) surrendered, 10th and 25th IIRC?

http://history.nd.gov/historicsites/buford/

[5MadFarmers]

Not bad math at all. The question posed was which deck had he been on, NOT which lifeboat he might or might not be on, after the sinking. Apparently you presume that the lifeboat loading was orderly? What if it was not? Perhaps Dirk was off dallying with Penelope, or worse, Lorenzo (or perhaps both). Possibly - since you introduced masturbation to the discussion - he was in the hold dallying with himself? The fact that you now have some knowledge of A does not change the original odds.

Ok, we'll do it the other way. The following is a list of guns in the 10th Cav:
32827, Y, Z.
The following is a list in the 42nd Cav:
A, B, C.
The following is a list in the 43rd:
E, F, G.

OP has 32,809. It's one of the "unknowns" above. That leaves:
10th: Y and Z.
42nd: A,B, and C.
43rd: E,F, and G.

Now tell me what I'm missing? The fact that we know which unit 32,827 was in decreases the odds for the 10th Cavalry. Odds are higher, by a third, for the 42nd or 43rd. And that is where I think the confusion comes in.
Odds are 1/3 higher for the 42nd over the 10th - not overall.
Odds are 1/3 higher for the 43rd over the 10th - not overall.

I think that is where the confusion came in. Odds of it being in the other units individually versus overall. The "percent" is really not relevant. The odds of it being in the 10th are lower than for any unit for which records do not exist at all.


For the OP to say that 32809 is in the middle of the Rough Rider range is flawed in any event - given one pronounced clot in the 20s and one in the 60/70s. True in the literal sense, but requires the incorrect assumption that the entire run was a possibility.

Aw, when you saw "R. Rider" you translated R. to "rough." I translated to "red." As in those OALW guns.


Yes, I chuckled, and you ducked - how is the book coming? This thread has been jacked so many times it should be off.

No, somebody else jacked something over at KCA so many times it should be off.


I haven't recorded the numbers of any OALW (fakes assembled by the Ostberg Armory and Locomotive Works - yes the guy dicked-over toy trains, too) guns, for those not in on the secret.

I have. There are more than expected as there is more to the story. The dude was actually quite bright. Found his patent. Did his life story. Was curious. His mom left behind quite the saga in print. That was an off brand of trains wasn't it. Little steam trains. Sounds like they'd be fun.


Golly this is fun.

No, not really. I quit even looking at the KCA due to that troll. Out of an audience over there it persists in coming here. Even though it's not wanted. That's typical for board trolls.

So I'll answer the question on the book.
The 1899 came in two pieces. Shipping booboo.

The earliest encountered 1896 carbine, earlier than that one you had, I was just cheated out of. No other term for that. Sold by an auction house to a local buyer for less, considerably, than I bid. I know they were taking my bids as I won another gun. While the smoke has settled on that gun being gone it hasn't on what that auction house did.

But. But those are just guns. In the grand scheme of things they're just guns. Life goes on.

I took this week off to finish that damned book. Why "damned?" Because I intended to finish it last year. I have other stuff I'd rather do at this point. A lot of other stuff. Like the massive WW2 uniform grid I've been working on for a couple of years. It's about two weeks away from done. It has been for some time... "Yeah, but this time it's coming out right." That it is, that it is.

So yesterday I drove up to see the Nephew off to the sandbox. Drove back this morning. Today it's get over car woozy. Tomorrow it's Krags. Solid for a week. However far I get is however far it's going. Full stop next Sunday. Then push it out the door as is. "It'll be missing much then." Seems likely. "Don't care." Nope. Not at all. That book was for PH. Peripheral stuff, that which isn't covered in the book, will be in the other books. Those I'll spend more time on. Have to - they're all interconnected. Thus no choice. Krags are another story. Don't really fit with that other stuff anyway.

So the book will be done Sunday. Then to the printer. Then people can buy it. Or not. Really I don't care. It's not a money thing for me at this point and hasn't been for some time.

I guess that trolling one could be considered "performance art." Not much different from Robert Mapplethorpe.

Not a fan. If people want information on Krags they can buy the book. That or email me. Board troll persists in trolling here. He'll start masterbating here again. It's inevitable. So I'll stop posting here too. Stopped at the KCA outright. Stopping here outright also.

No great loss for me. I'm knee deep in WW2 uniforms and field gear right now. WW1 is next. Don't need to focus on guns at all. I lose nothing by not posting here any longer.

Cheers.

[thek98sniper]

I've never tried this...but I'll have a cup of coffee or 2 and give it a shot tomorrow sometime.
Wish me luck, gentlemen.

[butlersrangers]

Since it creates distraction, I will refrain from posting on the 'Krag' page. I do look forward to 'thek98snipers' pictures. Good luck Sirs!

[thek98sniper]

http://smg.photobucket.com/user/herbsgunshop/slideshow/

[Dick Hosmer]

Since it creates distraction, I will refrain from posting on the 'Krag' page. I do look forward to 'thek98snipers' pictures. Good luck Sirs!

Quite un-necessary, and I certainly hope you reconsider.

Joe, in addition to being extremely intelligent, at the near genius/savant level, has a mercurial personality. This is not the first time he has picked up his marbles and gone home, nor, sadly, will it probably be the last. He will be back. I really like the guy when he stays on topic, but at times his attitude can be maddening. He has, literally, amassed a ton of data, and artifacts, but he did it as a mental exercise for himself. I believe he is fully capable of printing one copy of each of his books for his own library (in fact he once said exactly that) and moving on to some other challenge. I sincerely hope he does otherwise, but only time will tell.

[Dick Hosmer]

http://smg.photobucket.com/user/herbsgunshop/slideshow/

Hope you enjoyed your coffee - but, see - that wasn't so hard, was it? Nice looking carbine!

One thing that has not yet been mentioned is that "1896" (as opposed to "Model 1896") is the scarcest of all the Krag receiver dates. Only 5000 arms were so marked - some are rifles, some are carbines. I own carbine 32383, in very similar condition to yours, and rifle 37045, which is, at present (and for the last 40 years or so) the highest known "1896". The word "Model" is thought to have been added around 37100. If any one can refine that, please post a picture (not a Photoshopped one of course!!!!!!). As an old fart, my brain was shaped at the time when "photographic evidence" was a valid and useful tool. Now, when every pixel can be dicked-with, a lot more care is required.

[CJCulpeper]

Hope you enjoyed your coffee - but, see - that wasn't so hard, was it? Nice looking carbine!

One thing that has not yet been mentioned is that "1896" (as opposed to "Model 1896") is the scarcest of all the Krag receiver dates. Only 5000 arms were so marked - some are rifles, some are carbines. I own carbine 32383, in very similar condition to yours, and rifle 37045, which is, at present (and for the last 40 years or so) the highest known "1896". The word "Model" is thought to have been added around 37100. If any one can refine that, please post a picture (not a Photoshopped one of course!!!!!!). As an old fart, my brain was shaped at the time when "photographic evidence" was a valid and useful tool. Now, when every pixel can be dicked-with, a lot more care is required.

My very first Krag was a full dress 1896 rifle with serial number 34036. I bought at an antique mart while passing through Maryland. I thought it was 84038 until there was a post from another fellow on the forum had confused the serial number on his krag too. Every thing was fine until I showed it to a buddy. The rim on the bolt face was missing and half broken and half hammered inward. Something was wrong and smelled of dead fish. We were looking at the bolt and began to think. For whatever reason I grabbed a fired 30-06 case and dropped it in the chamber. It chambered perfectly. It became very clear what had happened. The rifle was used to fire blanks. At least we hoped it had been used to fire blanks.

I took it back to the seller and he tried to tell me it was a rare arsenal modification. By then I had been reading Jouster's Krag forum for a year or so and knew better. The guy returned a bunch of money and sold it to me for what he claimed he had in it.

I figured it was done as a shooting gun so I contacted a good gentleman in NY to spin the barrel off for me. He asked me what I was going to do with the receiver and told me he did not have that range in his collection. His very big collection. I figured if he wanted it it must be something semi-special. I kept the receiver.

And that, gentlemen, is how I got hooked on Krags. Now I own sixteen of them and two thousand rounds of ammo. My krags are not what you would call collector grade or super rare krags but they are mine and I like them.

[jon_norstog]

One thing about this thread. You can't get very deep into Krags without learning some history, maybe a lot of it. And you don't have to learn much history before you have to ask yourself why the US not only quit putting black soldiers into combat, but pretty much stuffed the history of the "coloured" units down the memory hole. And ask yourself why the US military forgot everything it learned about small wars in the jungle during the Krag years, and had to learn it all over again in Vietnam. Learn it the hard way.

You can call it hijacking, but questions of history are just below the surface of any discussion of historic artifacts, like those rocks that lurk just below the surface of the water, waiting to eat your ship.

jn

[SgtSki]

Simple explanation is they all died and no body was left to impart the knowledge.

[madsenshooter]

I like k98sniper's carbine. I also wish I'd paid more attention to the two Kerr slings he just sold on ebay. I'll bet they're sturdier than the repros.

[thek98sniper]

Stay tuned...I've got several more Kerr slings that are D-flawless coming out soon, never saw ones nicer. Also, one of my clients just did a buy from the local Sherriffs department that destroyed some real old Colt 1911's. I got all the old "good" parts except the frames...the SNs were shaved anyway.
Good get on my ID, BTW.

[madsenshooter]

I'll do that, I like the way they look on a Krag, but the repros aren't tough enough for match use, the clothe pulls apart at the rivets. Back when the local Legion had Krags, they all had Kerr slings on them.

[dave]

I once owed OALW serial 189319, 98 rec., 1900 stock, rifle sight, OAWL #118. For any one recording such things!

[Dan Shapiro]

One thing about this thread. You can't get very deep into Krags without learning some history, maybe a lot of it.

When I first started collecting, my kids became interested; being more "computer savvy", they were a big help. Years later, #1 Son told me that he and his sister learned more about US History, helping me in my research before purchasing an item; then they'd ever learned in their school courses.

Because they were interested?

Don't know, most probably. But it wasn't limited to firearms research. There were times when we went off on interesting tangents. Manufacturing processes, labor strife (unions), politics, even poetry!