My first Krag, SRS check please, and a tale of woe.

[Hal O'Peridol]

Picked up a nice looking 1899 carbine at the local gun show. Very nice bore, serial number 854788. Boy those numbers are small.

Been looking for a real Krag carbine for a long time.i knew all the 1899s were carbines, and the rifle looked good in a quick once over.

Let my lust for the Krag overrule the thinking part of the brain.

Probable reblue, rear sight not a C marked base, leaf or notch. And the upper handguard is probably a re-pop.

Any way to tell if the handguard is a re-pop or sure?

Also, the leaf on the carbine is graduated out to 2000 yds, one side thinner than the other so probably off of a rifle?

Expensive lesson. Crap. Take magnifying glass to gunshow in the future.

[Kragrifle]

Photos?

[Hal O'Peridol]

Left my camera at my wife's house in Canada, will have to look for my backup cameras.

[butlersrangers]

'Hal' - Your serial number has to be 354788. An original hand-guard will often have a small '99' stamped underneath in the barrel channel behind the sight opening.

It sounds like you have a 1901 rifle rear-sight. The leaf on the carbine version goes to 2300 yards and does not require drift correction. (The inside edges of the sight leaf remain parallel to the outside edges). The left side of 1901 carbine-sight base goes to '5' (500 yards) and is marked with a "C". The 1901 rifle-sight base goes to '4'.

If it's any consolation, the 1901 carbine sight is the most common and least expensive of the Krag carbine rear-sights (around $200 for a good one). Replica hand-guards are often an accepted evil with Krags. When first issued, the 1899 carbines probably had the same hand-guard as the rifle. The 'humped' (sight guard) ones came latter, due to sight leafs getting broken in saddle-scabbards.

32950

[Dick Hosmer]

Photos would help clarify a number of points, particularly the handguard. Repros often look too "fresh", especially around the rivets, as well as the rivets themselves appearing not quite right.

There is no good reason why the rear sight should be wrong (which it is); so that brings into question the barrel, etc.

Are there sling swivels? How long is the stock? What holds the barrel band (at front) - a spring, or a little cross-pin?

[Hal O'Peridol]

Tried to take some pics on a cell phone, no go at this point. Got the magnifier out, SN is actually 354738. Handguard is indeed a reproduction. The "quality" of the spring bands leaves lots to be desired. There are no sling swivels front or rear. Band is held on by a spring. Once taking the rifle out of the stock, can see it is a real carbine stock. Has a faint cartouche on the left side and a fancy script P at the wrist. I won't be able to get the camera until late thursday, so good pics will unfortunately have to wait until then.

[Hal O'Peridol]

Pics are here:

http://enfielditis.net/Krag/carbine.JPG


http://enfielditis.net/Krag/sight.JPG

http://enfielditis.net/Krag/sighttop.JPG


http://enfielditis.net/Krag/leaf.JPG


http://enfielditis.net/Krag/p.jpg


http://enfielditis.net/Krag/front_sight.jpg


http://enfielditis.net/Krag/bandspring.JPG


http://enfielditis.net/Krag/stock.JPG


http://enfielditis.net/Krag/handguard.JPG


http://enfielditis.net/Krag/insidehandguard.JPG



Can't seem to get a good pic of the front sight.

Looks like Numrich has original 1901 carbine sight ladders and bases in stock, but no leafs. I'm sure the leafs are the pricey part.

[Dick Hosmer]

Pictures confirm previous written descriptions/comments.

It appears to be a perfectly standard and legitimate M1899 carbine with, for some unknown reason, a wrong sight and repro hand-guard. The headless cocking-piece might be a little "iffy" for that serial number range, but it has a certain flair to it, many people associate it with 1899 carbines, and it is much less often seen than the headed variety - therefore a small plus.

Do you have any recourse against seller, such as a bill of sale presenting it as a 100% genuine item? How much was the gun? Since it is a carbine and not some type of cut-off, restoration is certainly possible.

1901C sights are not really rare, so there is an excellent chance you will ultimately find one. Your sight, with a new slide, can be sold to cover at least half of the cost of the swap. Unfortunately, the hand-guard is a particularly poor job, with virtually no value at all, but, originals can still be had, and, if all else fails, so can a MUCH nicer repro. It all depends on how much you already have in the gun, but, it's always fun to search out the parts, too.

The best of luck to you.

[Hal O'Peridol]

Thanks for the reply Dick. Yes it was represented as an original piece, I bought it off of a walk in at the gunshow. So it is on me that I bought the story and not the gun.

Live and learn, sometimes the lessons can be a bit expensive. I paid 900 dollars for the carbine.

Fortunately it has an excellent bore. So it should be a good shooter. Will look around for a correct sight for the rifle, they do tend to show up on "that site" every now and then. I see S&S has handguards for sale, will probably pick one of those up, unless you know of a source with better product.

I usualy have great luck finding deals, my luck ran a bit short this time. I can always sell it at a loss, and use that money to build up a Constabulary carbine.

My Dad taught me too well to go and foist this off on someone else without mentioning the warts.

[Dick Hosmer]

If you do find something on the net, I'd be glad to vet it for you. Don't think I have any parts myself, that would help you. S&S is a good outfit, and there are others - yours looks almost as if it were hand-shaped.

[butlersrangers]

'Hal' - A minor point, but, the front sight blade looks too high. It appears to be a rifle blade.

IMHO - You should enjoy this carbine as it is and bond to it, while taking your time looking for a carbine rear sight and hand-guard. You may get lucky on more appropriate parts. Remember that the model 1899 carbines initially had the same hand-guards as the rifles. The rifle ones are easier to locate.

(I'm attaching comparison photos of sight blades).

3299932998

[bobgar]

How can you tell if the handguard is a repro? The finish on the wood seems to match the rest of the stock?

[butlersrangers]

The inside of the OP's hand-guard lacks the crisp lines and cuts of an original. It should be cleanly machined like the stock's barrel channel. (and not look like this photo).

33003

[Hal O'Peridol]

Checked the front sight, indeed wrong one. Thinking the rifle might have been a deer rifle at one time, would explain the odd part mix, or someone bought it as a project and restored it to "looks right".

Can someone check the SRS for SN# 354738 please? Thanks for all the information guys!

[Dick Hosmer]

How can you tell if the handguard is a repro? The finish on the wood seems to match the rest of the stock?

Lines are generally bad, hump looks nothing like an original, and, to my eye (with 45+ years of experience) the gloss and color are way off between the two pieces of wood.

Perhaps you may not truly appreciate the level of craftsmanship which was strived for (and, for the most part, achieved) in those days.