$1780.00

[Mark Daiute]

Surprised no one has mentioned the OALW carbine that just went for 1780.00.

Kinda looking for the new owner to post here.

[Dick Hosmer]

if he does, he'll wish he hadn't!

Truly, ignorance is bliss. As Bill used to say, "Nice gun, I wonder who made it." Except, in this case, we know.

[Mark Daiute]

The information about OALW was made available to the seller. We need to note that the seller clearly stated that the rifle was a rifle cut down to a carbine and still it went for 1780.00

[Dick Hosmer]

Which only means that the seller was honest, but, the scenario is still absolutely absurd, and indicates that the info was apparently not believed, and that P.T. Barnum and Ben Franklin were right.

Guys can't move real carbines for that. A POS by any other name is still a POS. Just my $0.02.

[da gimp]

OALW? teach me Dick., what does that mean?

[dave]

Well there was more then one idiot bidding or it never would have went that high! I had one once, a very pretty thing it was! Paid 300 and sold it for 300 or so, years later.

[Dick Hosmer]

OALW? teach me Dick., what does that mean?

OALW (which stands for "Ostberg Armory and *Locomotive Works") was/is the private mark (which appears in several forms/sizes over the years) of a tinkerer - now deceased - from the midwest who was (in)famous for assembling Krag "carbines". They are also called "Red Ryders" from the pronounced reddish tone of the stain he favored. He did good work - some of them are very nice looking, but they aren't real. To his credit, he did, unlike other fakers, mark his work - but - you had to be in the know or it did no good.

*same guy was also involved in toy train (Lionel) "refinishing", etc.

This info all from the late (and greatly missed) Col. Bill Mook, one of the deans of Krag collecting. He told me Ostberg's first name, but I have misplaced the note - it MAY have been Sidney (help needed here)

[Rick the Librarian]

Two people I sorely miss ... Michael Petrov, for his knowledge of M1903 sporters AND Bill Mook on Krags! :(

It's not the seller's fault - if a couple of knuckleheads want to bid up an item, that's their problem! :D

[butlersrangers]

Thanks for the explanation of "OALW"!

[Rick the Librarian]

Thanks for the explanation of "OALW"!

Me, too -- I knew I had heard the term but was too lazy to look it up. :D

[Big Al]

Surprised no one has mentioned the OALW carbine that just went for 1780.00.

Kinda looking for the new owner to post here.

I e-mailed the seller off and on the whole week that cut-down was for sale. It was a beautiful looking piece but when he responded that it was missing the C on the rear sight, I knew, thanks in part to you gents, that it was a cut-down which happened to have a correct front sight. Still, it spent a good part of the week under $400, and I was prepared to buy it at that price, just based on looks and condition. Imagine my surprise when, after the seller disclosed that he had been contacted by several individuals and collectors, and that it was not a true carbine, two guys got into a bidding war the day the auction ended and drove it up to $1,780. I told my wife that I almost e-mailed the seller and told him to get the money fast. :).

Here's a link to the gun...

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=456792830

[madsenshooter]

There's that star with a circle under the barrel's "P" proofmark. I still think that was used to denote star-gauged barrels. Makes no sense to not have some sort of permanent mark. Otherwise guys would be taking the cards with the measurements and selling them with regular barrels.

[butlersrangers]

That's a lot of money for a 'parts gun'. The rear sight is 1902 top on an 1898 base. The front sight base mounting and the "C" blade look suspect - IMHO.

[Griff Murphey]

I think the official gunbroker listing is misleading because it calls it a genuine US military arm but fails to point out it's a replica. Other message traffic may be out there but we don't know if the bidders saw it. The guy who bought it probably thinks OALW is an official arsenal mark. When the "gotta have it" bug kicks in and the buyer has the bit between his teeth sometimes there's no stopping him.

[Fred]

OALW (which stands for "Ostberg Armory and *Locomotive Works") was/is the private mark (which appears in several forms/sizes over the years) of a tinkerer - now deceased - from the midwest who was (in)famous for assembling Krag "carbines". They are also called "Red Ryders" from the pronounced reddish tone of the stain he favored. He did good work - some of them are very nice looking, but they aren't real. To his credit, he did, unlike other fakers, mark his work - but - you had to be in the know or it did no good.

*same guy was also involved in toy train (Lionel) "refinishing", etc.

This info all from the late (and greatly missed) Col. Bill Mook, one of the deans of Krag collecting. He told me Ostberg's first name, but I have misplaced the note - it MAY have been Sidney (help needed here)


Did that guy also shave the butts off of Krag rifles so that they would appear to the unsuspecting to be unaltered 1892 stocks? Whenever he and Sandy (General Hoyt S. Vandenberg) used to come out to the MO Valley shows in K.C. to sit with George Hensel and me at our tables, Bill would walk by the guy's table or hear mention of that guy's work and he'd really be pissed.

[Dick Hosmer]

I doubt it; there is really nothing you can do (with total invisibility) to "un-96" a stock. If it were only the butt, yes, maybe - but you cannot recreate the rounded end of the rod groove which is visible in front of the band - unless you made a fake forend, which woud leave a joint showing, unless done perfectly. Even the "narrow" form of groove filler would be impossible to remove without leaving traces. If I were worried about someone shaving something, I'd think first of squaring off the muzzle. Also recall that there are legitimate original 1892 stocks with curved butts, though they do not have traps. FWIW, I never heard Bill mention rifles in connection with Ostberg. Interesting topic - we could go on and on with this.

In a similar vein, I have (as an intellectual exercise ONLY) fantasized about a way to make a new tip for a trapdoor "carbine" stock where ALL joints are either buried or occur at a break in the profile, and the barrel bed is undisturbed. The work would be tedious to the max, but only an x-ray would reveal the patch. Bad Dick! No, I will NOT explain how to do it, nor have I actually tried it.

[Fred]

The guy was canting the angle of the butt plate in a bit from the heel down after altering the shape at the heel of the butt to a more acute angle. The mystery was, how he came up with an altered front band that looked so good. I think that his stuff was stained pretty well to hide any wood around the old rod channel that remained after he would drill down the length of the old rod channel plug. Hell, he might've been slimming the wrists of the 1896 stocks for all that I know to look like 92's.

[Kragrifle]

Actually the filler in the 1892 rod channel was held in place by a pair of small wooden pins that could be driven out . I have never seen it done but have seen three rifles reconverted in this way and externally they all looked pretty good. At one time I briefly owned one of these rifles until I bought my first good 1892. I never took it apart to see how the front band work was done, but externally it looked good.

[Dick Hosmer]

Actually the filler in the 1892 rod channel was held in place by a pair of small wooden pins that could be driven out . I have never seen it done but have seen three rifles reconverted in this way and externally they all looked pretty good. At one time I briefly owned one of these rifles until I bought my first good 1892. I never took it apart to see how the front band work was done, but externally it looked good.

The pins were only used with the narrow filler, but still left four holes to be plugged. The bottom of the groove was squared out for the full length, and the eliptical end of the cut, visible at the band, was removed. That is the first place to look - NEVER buy an 1892 on which the rod cut disappears under the band. If one's goal is only to install a rod and view the rifle from the side from ten feet away, then it can be done - but if the piece is to look right in one's hands, then I stand by my original comment that restoration is impossible, short of a new forend, which would itself ultimately be discoverable. I do not believe that anyone but a novice could be fooled by a faked 1892 stock.

[Fred]

Nobody was buying the stuff from him that I noticed. Bill didn't get pissed off because that particular fellow did good work and was fooling anyone, he was pissed off at him because of what the guy and his wife was trying to pull. He wasn't finding any buyers that were knowledgeable collectors. He was just out hustling people and buggering up good Krags.

[madsenshooter]

I see pins in both narrow and wide fillers of my 92/96 rifles, Dick. Pretty much the same location, so much so that the heads of the ones on the wide filler are awfully close to the edge of the filler.

[Dick Hosmer]

Now, I'll have to look, Bob - I only have the one, and it has been a long time since I looked at that area in detail.

[Kragrifle]

The width of the filler was probably determined by how much wood had to be removed to clean up the ram rod channel to where it could be filled neatly. Pins were used in all the conversions I have seen. As I said, I have heard that it was relatively easy to drive the pins out and remove the wood filler strip. I actually still own one of the two such rifles I have owned in the past. One day I will try and find the one I still have and inspect it better. On this particular rifle the metal has not been altered, only the stock. Years ago another collector showed me a similar rifle he owned that had not been messed with and it had original metal-flat crown, no hold open notch (cannot remember the serial number so cannot remember if cutoff had been altered). So based on his rifle and mine, it would appear there are rifles out there that had updated wood, but early metal features.

[Dick Hosmer]

Now I'm REALLY going to have to look! [GRIN]

According to Mallory, and Bill Mook, the whole 1892/1896 thing was a cross between musical chairs and an Asiatic fire-drill. Time to remember the truism that we are trying to divine through the mists what happenned - from a collector's point of view - to objects that were seen solely as tools, to be utilized as efficiently as possible. Of course there are going to be variables, and, if the truth were known, many of our closet treasures are likely not quite as pure as we'd want to believe. The "unfired" Springfield is a complete myth, with the "untouched" specimen a very close second.

This has drifted from the original point - I still say that an 1892 stock, once upgraded, CANNOT be restored to original appearance. A 'ten-footer', yes - but nothing more.

Happy New Year to all!

[Kragrifle]

Sorry Dick if I suggested it was undetectable, which is isn't.

[Dick Hosmer]

Sorry Dick if I suggested it was undetectable, which is isn't.

Understood - didn't mean to get carried away! GRIN