Photos of my Krags

[cowtownscout]

Here are two group photos (front and back) of the Krags (and Winchester 1895s) I currently have in my care along with the slings, bayonets and scabbards. If this works I will be posting group photos of other arms in the appropriate forums.
Scout

Top to Bottom:

1) Model 1892 Krag Rifle, Springfield, made 1894-1895 (1894), 30-40 Army cal., knife bayonet (total production of the model 1892 was 24,562. Most of the model 1892 rifles were converted to the model 1896 which included removing the full length ram rod)
2) Model 1895 Winchester Lee Navy, made 1896-1998 (1897), 6 mm cal., straight pull bolt action, knife bayonet (Navy contract for initial order was for 10,000 in 1896 and then another 5,000 in 1898 and Navy changed to Krags in 1899 and the Marines changed to Krags in 1900)
3) Winchester model 1895 carbine, made 1915, .30-40 Army cal, lever action, no bayonet
4) Winchester model 1895 Musket, made 1898, .30-40 Army cal, lever action, knife bayonet in layaway
5) SF model 1896 Krag rifle, made 1897, .30-40 Army cal, bolt action, knife bayonet
6) SF model 1896 Krag carbine, made 1897, .30-40 Army cal, bolt action, knife bayonet
7) SF model 1898 Krag rifle, made 1901, .30-40 Army cal, bolt action, knife bayonet
8) SF model 1899 Krag carbine, made 1901, .30-40 Army cal, bolt action, no bayonet
9) SF model 1898 Krag Gallery rifle, made 1906, .22 LR cal, bolt action, no bayonet

[kj47]

Very nice collection.

[CJCulpeper]

Nice looking collection. It almost matches the number and blend of my '95s and Krags.

[sdkrag]

Hard to see in the picture, but is your 92 unaltered? Do you mind telling the serial number? I picked up #11338 in May. I've actually owned 3 unaltered 92's over the years. One was 11236. Shot my latest one Sunday.

[cowtownscout]

Hard to see in the picture, but is your 92 unaltered? Do you mind telling the serial number? I picked up #11338 in May. I've actually owned 3 unaltered 92's over the years. One was 11236. Shot my latest one Sunday.

I just looked at my spread sheet and the serial number is 6008. I believe it is unaltered and the bayonet I have with it is dated 1894 and is blue not bright which makes it an early one. Will take some photos of this rifle and bayonet and post them, but it may be this weekend before I can get that done.

[free1954]

very nice sir.

[Fred]

Neat firearms

[Dick Hosmer]

Nice display! I should do something like that before I reduce the collection - which is coming soon.

[cowtownscout]

As requested I've taken a bunch of photos of the 1892 rifle made in 1894 and bayonet also made in 1894 so here you go. This bayonet is blued which is not seen often as they were changed in April 1895 to bright. Here are the first 4 photos of the bayonet and scabbard.

44301443024430344304

[cowtownscout]

Here are 5 more photos of the bayonet and scabbard

[cowtownscout]

This is the start of the photos for the 1892 rifle made in 1894. Starting with the left side.

[cowtownscout]

Here is the right side.

[cowtownscout]

One more from the right and one from the top since I'm limited to posting 5 at a time

[cowtownscout]

5 more from the top

[cowtownscout]

5 from the bottom

[cowtownscout]

Misc detail photos, first of two groups

[cowtownscout]

Second group of misc detail photos. This is the last of the photos of the 1892 rifle and 1894 bayonet.

Hope you enjoy them.

[Dick Hosmer]

Does the scabbard have the trapezoidal mouthpiece?

[cowtownscout]

Does the scabbard have the trapezoidal mouthpiece?

No Sir, unfortunately it does not. i acquired the scabbard separately from the 1894 bayonet. It would be great if I had one of the early ones with the trapezoidal mouthpiece.

[Dick Hosmer]

I believe the cleaning rod is incorrect as well, but you are in good company - VERY few of the surviving '92s in collections have their original rod. Not saying they are ALL bad, but (according to the late and greatly missed Bill Mook) proper rods are few and far between.

[sdkrag]

Very very nice rifle. Bill told me once that if I could find an original cleaning rod it would be worth $1000. He figured they were cut up for punches.

[Kragrifle]

Just a note. There were two different style early scabbards without the limiting pin. The more common style has the non parallel opening for the blade. Far less common is the parallel side opening without the pin. I had one in my 1892 Krag display at Kansas City.

[sdkrag]

You are talking about the throat of the scabbard and the limiting pin on the swivel? Reference pictures in Brophy, Mallory or Poyer?

[Kragrifle]

Neither has the limiting pin, both being early scabbards. Mallory mentions the parallel sided opening but has no photos. I will try to post photos later.

[Kragrifle]

4444244443444444444544446

[Kragrifle]

44447

- - - Updated - - -

44448

[Kragrifle]

These scabbards illustrate the evolution of the early Krag scabbards. The far left example is the earliest with non parallel throat, no limiting pin and sharp edged hook . The middle scabbard, made only for a very short time now has the parallel throat but still has no pin and the sharp edged hook. The scabbard in the right is the third model, now with the limiting pin and smooth edged hook.

[jacksimonton]

Excellent collection.