Help needed with Krag carbine

[ghostdevilguy]

I just bought a 1898 krag carbine, it has the "C" markings on the rear sight, and it's serial number 1215xx. The stock has the 1900 stamp on it, it had sling swivels and a 1907 on it that I took off. The barrel also appers to have the proper front sight, and is 22" long. I don't know a lot about these so I would like an expert to weigh in. Also, let me know if anymore pictures are needed

http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/ghostdevilguy/DSCF4035_zps694t7kgr.jpg (http://s296.photobucket.com/user/ghostdevilguy/media/DSCF4035_zps694t7kgr.jpg.html)
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/ghostdevilguy/DSCF4036_zpsezcjqgr0.jpg (http://s296.photobucket.com/user/ghostdevilguy/media/DSCF4036_zpsezcjqgr0.jpg.html)
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/ghostdevilguy/DSCF4037_zps8tnmfhec.jpg (http://s296.photobucket.com/user/ghostdevilguy/media/DSCF4037_zps8tnmfhec.jpg.html)
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/ghostdevilguy/DSCF4038_zpsgxclmo9j.jpg (http://s296.photobucket.com/user/ghostdevilguy/media/DSCF4038_zpsgxclmo9j.jpg.html)
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/ghostdevilguy/DSCF4039_zpsfc3sbyzi.jpg (http://s296.photobucket.com/user/ghostdevilguy/media/DSCF4039_zpsfc3sbyzi.jpg.html)
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/ghostdevilguy/DSCF4040_zpspptab8js.jpg (http://s296.photobucket.com/user/ghostdevilguy/media/DSCF4040_zpspptab8js.jpg.html)
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/ghostdevilguy/DSCF4062_zpsxkw8edfw.jpg (http://s296.photobucket.com/user/ghostdevilguy/media/DSCF4062_zpsxkw8edfw.jpg.html)
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/ghostdevilguy/DSCF4057_zpsnerpttgb.jpg (http://s296.photobucket.com/user/ghostdevilguy/media/DSCF4057_zpsnerpttgb.jpg.html)
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/ghostdevilguy/DSCF4051_zpsqgfs6wnc.jpg (http://s296.photobucket.com/user/ghostdevilguy/media/DSCF4051_zpsqgfs6wnc.jpg.html)
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/ghostdevilguy/DSCF4049_zpsaeliddky.jpg (http://s296.photobucket.com/user/ghostdevilguy/media/DSCF4049_zpsaeliddky.jpg.html)

[Dick Hosmer]

Very nice find - the number - without checking (and of course I can't, anyhow) is at least believable for one of the 5000 examples.

It has been re-sighted and re-stocked. The original configuration for the M1898 carbine was with the short 30" stock, with horned band and M96C rear sight.

Your rear sight, the M1898C, is a scarce one. Someone appears to have bent the bolt handle slightly - that should be fixed.

[ghostdevilguy]

A couple of more pictures, including some of where the holes from the swivels were, do you have any idea what this rifle is worth?


http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/ghostdevilguy/DSCF4050_zpshcaelnkr.jpg (http://s296.photobucket.com/user/ghostdevilguy/media/DSCF4050_zpshcaelnkr.jpg.html)
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/ghostdevilguy/DSCF4048_zpslwdkwvvt.jpg (http://s296.photobucket.com/user/ghostdevilguy/media/DSCF4048_zpslwdkwvvt.jpg.html)
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/ghostdevilguy/DSCF4049_zpsaeliddky.jpg (http://s296.photobucket.com/user/ghostdevilguy/media/DSCF4049_zpsaeliddky.jpg.html)
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/ghostdevilguy/DSCF4043_zpstnsbben9.jpg (http://s296.photobucket.com/user/ghostdevilguy/media/DSCF4043_zpstnsbben9.jpg.html)
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/ghostdevilguy/DSCF4066_zpsuj6vlzdu.jpg (http://s296.photobucket.com/user/ghostdevilguy/media/DSCF4066_zpsuj6vlzdu.jpg.html)
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/ghostdevilguy/use%20this%20for%20receiver_zpsqnbfvh8m.jpg (http://s296.photobucket.com/user/ghostdevilguy/media/use%20this%20for%20receiver_zpsqnbfvh8m.jpg.html)

[Dick Hosmer]

That's a bad question to ask after you bought it!

The answer is not easy. While not common,that model often doesn't bring a lot of money because it is extremely easy to fake, but nearly impossible to prove that it is real.

The rear sight alone is worth about $400 to someone who needed it - and the whole gun should probably bring something in excess of $1,000.

If you want to give the whole number, it can be checked against the few verified specimens, but even that means little because the 5000 guns were spread over a range of around 23,000 numbers - so - nearly 4 out of 5 in that span were NOT carbines.

[ghostdevilguy]

The good news is that I got it for less than $400, so I thought that even if it was a sporter it was a good deal, the whole number I will pm you. If this one is real, I want to put it the hands of a krag collector. I was thinking about asking $1000 + an l1a1 or other fal parts kit, does that seem fair?

[ghostdevilguy]

It seems you message box is full so I can't pm you

[Rick the Librarian]

I've got Dick's email - I'll do so.

RtL

[ghostdevilguy]

Thanks

[Dick Hosmer]

Thanks

Rick gave me the number, but I cannot access my 1898C list just now. At under $400 you are OK - the sight is worth that. I'll get back to you as soon as I can, but the odds are not good and ONLY direct hits count. "Close" is always iffy, but with the 98C it is absolutely meaningless.

[Rick the Librarian]

I checked on my list (in the back of Frank Mallory's 2nd ed. Krag book) and did not get a hit.

[Kragrifle]

This carbine is a combination of an 1898 receiver, a model 1899 carbine stock originally on an 1900 produced gun, the 1898 carbine sight originally on a model 1899 carbine made in 1899,and likely all original parts on good guns, just not the same gun. Likely this is the product of someone trying to assemble a correct carbine, unfortunately with the wrong data. While this carbine was certainly not assembled at Springfield, this was a great buy for someone needing parts to finish off several projects. Bargain!

[ghostdevilguy]

I found two stamps on the stock under the action

http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/ghostdevilguy/DSCF4075_zpsulyntf3f.jpg (http://s296.photobucket.com/user/ghostdevilguy/media/DSCF4075_zpsulyntf3f.jpg.html)
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/ghostdevilguy/DSCF4074_zpsthln0y4s.jpg (http://s296.photobucket.com/user/ghostdevilguy/media/DSCF4074_zpsthln0y4s.jpg.html)

[madsenshooter]

Stock fitters marks, wow, the receiver ring on that one has sure got hot a time or two! Could be a real 98 carbine, could be a construction. What the others are looking for is mention in govt records of your particular serial # being issued as a carbine. That's about the only surefire proof. I know 5MF have some serial #s that Mallory missed, so don't sell that sight right away!

[ghostdevilguy]

I have no intention to part this rifle out, it wouldn't feel right

[5MadFarmers]

This carbine is a combination of an 1898 receiver, a model 1899 carbine stock originally on an 1900 produced gun, the 1898 carbine sight originally on a model 1899 carbine made in 1899,and likely all original parts on good guns, just not the same gun. Likely this is the product of someone trying to assemble a correct carbine, unfortunately with the wrong data. While this carbine was certainly not assembled at Springfield, this was a great buy for someone needing parts to finish off several projects. Bargain!

We're on something of the same page but slightly different. I suspect it wasn't "wrong data" but most of the rest stands.

For OP - nobody "knows" as nobody was there. So it's opinion. So the question is: "what is behind the opinion?" First, what's behind it and then to the gun.

The 1898 carbines were made in the summer (July-Sep) of 1898. They had M-1896 carbine sights.
The 1899 carbines (first block) were made in the summer of 1899. These had the 1898c sight (you have one).
The 1899 carbines (second block) were made in the summer of 1900. Back to 1896c sights (and this is significant).
The 1899 carbines (third block) were made in the summer of 1901. M-1901c sights.

See the problem? In 1900 they made a carbine with the 1896c sight as the 1898c sight had been withdrawn. You have a gun sporting the 1900 cartouche. The 1898c sight had already been withdrawn. Not only that but your stock served on a gun and then, after it was turned back in, it was removed from the original gun it was installed on. So unlikely that is a week or even a month right? Maybe a year? Maybe longer? The rear sight on your gun had been withdrawn before that stock was even stamped and that stock then served some time before turn in.

So I agree with Kragrifle that it's a mix. The 1898c sight is rare. Stocks and barrel bands do not grow on trees and neither do those barrels. So I'd go with "have apples, make applesauce" instead of incorrect data. When the guns and parts were sold to the surplus dealers they made guns from the bits and pieces. So a stock from barrel A, the receiver/barrel from barrel B, and the sight from barrel C.

I don't doubt it started as an M-1898c, we have no proof but I'd say it's likely, but it isn't the result of an armory rebuild. The sight/stock date are a mismatch in a fashion that I'd not expect.

Nice parts. Restore the stock. Swap that gimpy bolt out.

I was at an auction a month or two ago. 1898c stock, field replacement, took $450 off the top of my head. The stocks are rare. Very.

[ghostdevilguy]

Ok, so what you are saying is that, everything on this rifle is likely real carbine parts, but it was not assembled at an armory, becasue the dates of the parts makes for an odd combination.


I am not anywhere near to an expert on these guns, that's why I came here. So thanks for helping me get a better idea of what I have

[5MadFarmers]

I am not saying this is right, but I have read several things that have said that the 1898 carbines where later refitted with 1898c rear sights, and 1899 stocks.

While that's not impossible it's not relevant.


Now, I have no idea when the 1898c rear sight was withdrawn,

Before the 2nd block 1899s as they received 1896c sights. That's the key.


but there is a years gap between the 1st and 2rd blocks of the 1899 carbine ... if the 1898c rear sight was withdrawn sometime in 1900, there is a possibility for this rifle to have been rebuilt at an armory like this.

Not in that stock as that stock was put onto a gun, new, after the 1898c was withdrawn.

Its the stock date. It it was "1899" it'd be possible. "1900" and "1901" were stamped on new guns after the 1898c sight was already withdrawn. The salient point is the stock that gun is in was put onto a new 1899 carbine in the summer of 1900 after the 1898c sight was withdrawn. Then, when that 1899 carbine was returned, that 1899 carbine was disassembled and the stock eventually was put on the gun you have now.

Is that clearer? The stock date is the key. It's second block. It's a stock that was put onto a new gun in 1900 as field replacement stocks didn't get those stamps. The armory, when rebuilding guns, wouldn't have put that sight on a gun after the 1898c was withdrawn - it'd get the 1896c or (if late enough) 1901 or 1902. So the 1896c, 1901c, and 1902c are the only possible sights we'd expect to see on a gun sitting in a stock stamped "1900." In a stock stamped "1899" or without a stamp the 1896c, 1898c, 1901c, and 1902c are all possible. For the same reason a gun sitting in a stock stamped "1901" wouldn't be expected to have that sight either.

It's the stock date.

[ghostdevilguy]

Got it, that makes sense. Thanks for clearing that up

[5MadFarmers]

I'll add a few other observations.

If somebody was trying to fake a gun they'd not likely put after-market sling swivels, or any swivels, on it. Tends to indicate surplus barrel assembly.

The barrels on the 1898c and first block 1899s are different from the 2nd and 3rd block 1899s. I'd wager it's the earlier one.

It's unlikely, but not impossible, that a surplus dealer would grab a carbine barrel and randomly screw it into a receiver which happens to sit in the 1898c range. Odds are very low. Just on frequency distribution.

There is no way to know for sure but it's likely that is what's left of an 1898c. Receiver and barrel anyway. As I mentioned in the book, it's not a value positive proposition to convert an 1899c into an 1898c in the 1899 stock. Therefore it's not something that somebody would go out of the way to do. Converting an 1898c back to an 1898c is value positive. Turning an 1899c into the 1898c altered to 1899c is a value negative.

For $400 you did very well. I'd not bother changing anything - just fix the bolt and plug the stock holes. Then leave it be.

[ghostdevilguy]

I am probably going to sell this rifle, ammo is a little too pricey for me, and I don't reload yet. I also don't like having a gun I rarely shoot. So I am trying to figure out a fair value for this one.

Also, the sling swivels look like they have been with the rifle for a long time, so I think that adds to it's credibility. The sling is a 1907 pattern sling with no marks on it, it looks old, but I don't know.

http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/ghostdevilguy/DSCF4076_zpsigy66tu4.jpg (http://s296.photobucket.com/user/ghostdevilguy/media/DSCF4076_zpsigy66tu4.jpg.html)
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/ghostdevilguy/DSCF4077_zpsgmmh4nnu.jpg (http://s296.photobucket.com/user/ghostdevilguy/media/DSCF4077_zpsgmmh4nnu.jpg.html)
http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm176/ghostdevilguy/DSCF4078_zpsnifdefpd.jpg (http://s296.photobucket.com/user/ghostdevilguy/media/DSCF4078_zpsnifdefpd.jpg.html)

[ghostdevilguy]

Also, is this rifle considered an antique? I know that krags below a certain number are considered antique but I don't know what that number is.

[Ramair]

Ghost, 1898 and earlier. Rob

[ghostdevilguy]

Ghost, 1898 and earlier. Rob

Thanks

[madsenshooter]

I see lots of those swivels, I have a set on one of my cutdowns that was likely done in the 1950's, as it has some diamond patterns of slightly lighter wood inletted into the Italian walnut stock. The swivels may be from some surplus dealer or home gunsmith supply. The sporterized stock my swivels are on was once an 1899 stock that had been inletted for an 1896 action.

[Dick Hosmer]

Also, is this rifle considered an antique? I know that krags below a certain number are considered antique but I don't know what that number is.

152670 - Krags below that are safe enough for Girl Scouts, and no threat to anyone's life or limb - higher, they are fiendish weapons of mass destruction - the thinking behind that? Your tax dollars at work.

[ghostdevilguy]

152670 - Krags below that are safe enough for Girl Scouts, and no threat to anyone's life or limb - higher, they are fiendish weapons of mass destruction - the thinking behind that? Your tax dollars at work.

Thanks

[ghostdevilguy]

I see lots of those swivels, I have a set on one of my cutdowns that was likely done in the 1950's, as it has some diamond patterns of slightly lighter wood inletted into the Italian walnut stock. The swivels may be from some surplus dealer or home gunsmith supply. The sporterized stock my swivels are on was once an 1899 stock that had been inletted for an 1896 action.

I was pretty sure the swivels were added on later, thanks for confirming. When I sell the rifle they will not go with it, I am going to throw them in my parts bin where they will stay until I have a use for them. The sling that was on this rifle is an older 1907 pattern sling that I am thinking about putting on my Garand.

[jon_norstog]

GD, you have a very interesting carbine there. My own thought is, "it is what it is." If you are not going to shoot it or keep it around, get a replacement bolt, put the swivels back on and sell it as is. It's gotta be worth the sum of its parts at least.

It's rare enough I probably would not use it as a hunting rifle. Or maybe I would.

Good luck.

jn