1896 Krag rifle

[JimG]

I am wanting to know what you all think about this Krag. Any thoughts as to does it look correct. Pictures are not the greatest, but they are a first for me.4070740708407094071040711

[JimG]

More pics.407124071340714

[Dick Hosmer]

Nothing wrong there - very nice-looking rifle!

[JimG]

Thanks Dick. Any idea on the value of this rifle?

[Fred]

Nice clean Krag

[Dick Hosmer]

Thanks Dick. Any idea on the value of this rifle?

Probably between $1000 and $1500 to the right person. A comparable 1898 would, since there are so many more of them, bring less.

[JimG]

Thank you Sir. I think I will hang onto it for that. I haven't seen many this nice and unmolested.

[Kragrifle]

In today's market Dick may be a little high.

[m1903rifle]

The "crispiest" M1896 that I have ever seen. I agree with Dick.

[Dick Hosmer]

In today's market Dick may be a little high.

Agreed, hence "the right person" qualifier, AND the fact that it is not an 1898. Not the greatest photos, and, like many, the rifle is depicted "dry". Wipe that down with an oily rag and you've got a stunner - there are a few dings but very little wear. Definitely a keeper.

[JimG]

Thanks guys. I am going to clean it up this weekend. I'll try to get some pictures of the bore. The bore is dang near perfect. I haven't figured out how to get really good pictures. Still working on it though. I was curious about the 1898 cartouche. I am assuming it is right for this rifle. My research says it was made in 1897. Any thoughts?

[Kragrifle]

I'm with Dick as well. I have a lot invested in Krags. Never saw one I didn't love!

[Kragrifle]

Remember the cartouche follows the fiscal year. If all parts of the rifle match to fit and finish I wouldn't worry too much about the date, but this early a number may fit better with an 1897 date. Remember, Krags, unlike trapdoors tended to follow dates and serial numbers pretty closely.

[Dick Hosmer]

Remember the cartouche follows the fiscal year. If all parts of the rifle match to fit and finish I wouldn't worry too much about the date, but this early a number may fit better with an 1897 date. Remember, Krags, unlike trapdoors tended to follow dates and serial numbers pretty closely.

The receivers were stored in trays on rolling carts and were pulled as needed at random but with a natural/physical bias towards FILO (first in, last out) so an "1897" one could easily have not received final inspection until 1898. Now, two years "off" could well be suspect, and of course the cartouche should never be a year earlier than the estimated receiver date!

[madsenshooter]

Speaking of that 1897 date. A fellow on facebook recently showed off a model 92 that had an 1897 cartouche. I don't know how that came to be unless some officer wanted his rifle to be like the one he was using at West Point.

[Dick Hosmer]

Speaking of that 1897 date. A fellow on facebook recently showed off a model 92 that had an 1897 cartouche. I don't know how that came to be unless some officer wanted his rifle to be like the one he was using at West Point.

Would be interesting to know more about that. I suppose it is possible that a 92/96 conversion could have gotten cartouched in that manner during the process, but a completely proper 1892 stock with original rod channel, thin wrist, flat butt, etc., etc. would make one wonder.

I have what Joe Farmer's research suggests that the world should recognize as a "Magazine Rifle" (an undated unicorn between the 1892 and the 1896) bearing number 20197, and having a [JSA/1896] "transitional" stock (exactly like an 1892 except that the butt is curved and has a thick plate with no trap).

FWIW, I would not participate with ANYTHING involving guns on Facebook.

[5MadFarmers]

Remember the cartouche follows the fiscal year.

Let's test that theory. Fiscal cut-off of mid-year at that time as I recall it was but I could check that. Regardless.

If FY93-94 was considered "fiscal year 1893" then there would be early M-1892s with "1893" cartouches. None.
If FY98-99 was considered "fiscal year 1899" then there wouldn't be any M-1898s with "1898" cartouches. There are.

Fiscal year is typically called by the "future year" and that would, by that rule, exclude 1898 cartouches on M-1898 rifles. They have them. M-1898s started coming off the line in July of 1898 (FY1899) but have 1898 stamps.

It's calendar based.


Speaking of that 1897 date. A fellow on facebook recently showed off a model 92 that had an 1897 cartouche. I don't know how that came to be unless some officer wanted his rifle to be like the one he was using at West Point.

For the simple cost of a nickel I can figure out a plausible reason for that, excluding the officer thing but it's close.

In addition to the military, other "executive branch" departments purchased arms from the army. Prisons as a simple example. Let's say the "Department of the Interior" had purchased 5 chests of rifles in 1895. Then, in 1897, one was stolen and they wanted to replace it. "We want the same model for parts compatibility." Parts matching was very important for specifically that reason.

That leaves the question of stock. If it was "new" then it would be thick wrist. They could, and did, make those. Thick wrist with channel. If it was thin it'd have to be a sanded original or a spare they finally had a chance to burn up.

So not impossible really.

In fact I'm of the considered opinion that the "unaltered" M-1892s were, by and large, not under army control and that is why they missed the updates. Officer's guns, other departments, etc., Those missed the 1896 alterations.

[Fred]

I have what Joe Farmer's research suggests that the world should recognize as a "Magazine Rifle" (an undated unicorn between the 1892 and the 1896) bearing number 20197, and having a [JSA/1896] "transitional" stock (exactly like an 1892 except that the butt is curved and has a thick plate with no trap).

I once owned an unaltered 1892 (rod in channel, thin wrist stock, 1895 cartouche) that had a Straight and Thick butt plate that also had a trap door with a hole underneath but No holes drilled in the bottom for rods.

[Kragrifle]

Would love to see that rifle. Of all the 1892's out there those in the 20K serial number to end of production range are the hardest to find and likely the most interesting.

[5MadFarmers]

Would love to see that rifle. Of all the 1892's out there those in the 20K serial number to end of production range are the hardest to find and likely the most interesting.

All 1815 of them. That's the maximum possible. It appears to be even less for obvious reasons.


I once owned an unaltered 1892 (rod in channel, thin wrist stock, 1895 cartouche) that had a Straight and Thick butt plate that also had a trap door with a hole underneath but No holes drilled in the bottom for rods.

That would have been an interesting rifle to review.

[Mark Daiute]

The 1892 with the 1897 cartouche referred to above was an 1896 in aspects save the cleaning rod.40738407394074040741

I took it to be fakery and will be happy to be proven wrong

[Mark Daiute]

deleted double post

[Fred]

All 1815 of them. That's the maximum possible. It appears to be even less for obvious reasons.



That would have been an interesting rifle to review.

Bill Mook handled it and looked it over long ago. He thought it was the first one of that type he'd seen.
A lawyer who's also a Krag and 1903 collector owns it now.

[Dick Hosmer]

The 1892 with the 1897 cartouche referred to above was an 1896 in aspects save the cleaning rod.40738407394074040741

I took it to be fakery and will be happy to be proven wrong

Pictures provided don't show the crucial areas (upper band from front, muzzle, lower end of rod groove with band pulled forward, etc.) Clearly it is a thin wrist stock, but with a 96 bolt, though apparently the receiver has not been notched- at least it seems to have a flat extractor.

[Mark Daiute]

Dick, I thought the I could see a hold open pin on the extractor as well as a notch in the receiver.

Regards,

Mark

[Dick Hosmer]

You're absolutely right, what looks like a carpet nub at first glance, actually IS the pin lug. My bad.

[Kragrifle]

I have a rifle with unaltered metal in a converted stock. Doug Rainbow had a similar rifle so they exist. If you put that metal in an 1897 dated stock I guess you could create that rifle (except for the rod cuts in the butt)?

[1911Ron]

Good looking rifle!