So there was this gun.

[5MadFarmers]

Which made me ask myself: what else would I expect to find?



Hmmm.

[Dick Hosmer]

All right, WHERE did you come up with THAT? Or at least the pictures of that - which I HOPE we all know what it at least APPEARS to be. If so, you appear to have been correct about the numbers, not that you ever doubted it, I'm sure. Is it real, or one of your mock-ups?

[5MadFarmers]

It's better work than SA's redo for the museum don't you think? At least I used the right parts. Right down to the striker. I kind of like it. Did you notice the lugged rear sight? Correct cleaning rod? The bolt is pure 100% perfection. The cleaning rod channel is perfectly shaped as SA did the work. I think it's kind of cute.

I did learn something from that exercise though. They used the "cadet" band for the M-1899s but it's not the same. Shape of the stock changed. The M-1899 as made won't fit. Mine fits. Like it was made for it.

The best part is that it's all aged. Nothing shiny and new.

A fine rifle indeed.

I wouldn't call it "fake" though as it doesn't exist. It's a figment of my imagination. I've been told that I have a vivid imagination and am quite creative. Viola - the M-1896 Cadet Rifle.

[jon_norstog]

5MF,

that's a nice piece of work. I hope you put a note under the buttplate ...

jn

[5MadFarmers]

No note for that one as it's back to where it came from. The source gun was too interesting to me to leave it that way. Nothing was harmed in that exercise.

I do have the parts to make three though. I'm thinking if I do one I might as well do three. Setup and work isn't greater. The stocks will be new. The metal bits will be correct except for the cleaning rods. Those I can make now. I have a little milling machine. Not something I'm going to worry about in the near future - that's retirement fun.

I wouldn't worry about marking them overly much. None are real. Zero. Nada. I'm aware Brophy felt some may have survived. Not a prayer. The were quite thorough. Thus the reworks. If they originals had still existed there would not have been reworks.

I just needed a copyright clear picture for the book. So I baked one up.

[psteinmayer]

That's quite a sweet piece of cake 5MF... Nice baking! Too bad we all can't share a slice of it!

[CJCulpeper]

5MF

That is some kind of fantastic work. Great Picture. Please reserve a couple of signed copies of the book for me when it come out. I have money!

Culpeper

[Kragrifle]

Is there a cartouche on the stock? As to the serial number, I am sure you have an opinion. Brophy's book talks about numbers in the 24K range. However, most others I have spoken with over the years believe it is around 18K. I have a rifle that has been converted with an 1896 date (though smudged) and a number around 18K (can't remember exact number). The four made later are around 35K. Neat rifle.

[madsenshooter]

I believe that the 17-18000 range rifles sometimes found in modified cadet stocks were 92 rifles in for rebuild at the time the cadets were being rebuilt into service rifles. I have no way of knowing that for sure, just a hunch. Being remade into service rifles sometimes included being placed into thicker wristed stocks rather than waiting around for the woodshop to get done with the cadet stocks. They were being hastily modified into service rifles so that payment of royalties could be made, cadets didn't require payment of royalties. They already knew circa 1900 that a new rifle was coming, "Let's get this project over with and paid for". I also think that all 400 of the cadet rifles had an 1895 marked receiver. No proof for any of this, just a feeling. Speaking of royalties, I wonder how much Krag and Jorgenson got in the end for the nigh half a million rifles made here.

[Dick Hosmer]

I'll probably regret this, but, having been round and round with my publisher over photo quality, I'd warn you that what you presented above is nowhere NEAR what you need for publication. Needs a LOT more light, and, unless you want to do a LOT of Photoshopping (you don't) a no-texture background.

The only reason I bring it up is that I infer that you MAY (???) have already disassembled the gun, and are thus "done" with the photos - I say that based on the assumption that if you HAD taken the "book ones", that you would have used THEM instead of what you posted. If I am off track, I sincerely apologize, but thought I might save you some effort.

[5MadFarmers]

The cadets had 1896 cartouches. Of that there is no doubt as the one Gunderson had retained enough of it to be clear in his pictures.

Bob noticed that gun. Somebody either bought it or Gunderson realized the significance. Either way it disappeared. I snagged the photos before he removed them. I've never been a claim jumper - Bob noticed it first and had the right of passing from what I believe for myself. So it's in a location unknown but I have the bright glossy of it.

I'm aware of the opinions on the serials the cadets "should have." That's from one vector. I don't travel that vector. I hit it from an entirely new vector. Which, IMHO, is much clearer on what those guns were. You'll see that. The confusion should be removed.

Everybody is expecting Mallory Version 2 or Brophy Version 2. That it decidedly will not be. I really like their books but I also like the new Ford Mustang. I don't own one. That's simply a path I'm not going to travel. So, like it or hate it, it will not be Brophy/Mallory Version 2.

Bill could be entertaining. "I wonder where it was made." His other was "it has nice pictures." That gun was made in Massachusetts. The format you see was assembled in Wisconsin. In addition to not being Brophy/Mallory Version 2 the book will not be dismissed as having nice pictures. It won't. Will it suffer over that? Frankly that doesn't concern me overly much. That might bug some people but it doesn't bug me.

Dick, I'm not dismissing the value of nice pictures. I'm value engineering the book. It's a choice I made early on. In fact I made that choice right out of the gate. I walked away from color also. I'm going to walk away from many things. It simply won't be the book anyone expects. I'm ok with that. It'll be Farmer Version 1. There will be no Farmer Version 2. After the book is out the door I'm culling the Krags down to what I'm keeping and moving back to the CW carbines. I'll be liquidating the excess guns which were necessary for the book. I don't need the money - I need the room.

You may like it or you may hate it. It will not be dismissed over the pictures.

[madsenshooter]

But color is so cheap in the digital age! When it comes time to print, check with Courier Corporation. I'm no longer there to watch for typos or monitor quality for you, but they have gone to digital presses since I left. Never take credit for solving a major problem that makes middle managers look like dummies, they'll get you sooner or later. I've never seen Brophy or Mallory, but I'm certain your work will be an improvement on Poyer's.

[Dick Hosmer]

I will - as you know - purchase a copy of whatever you produce (you are self-publishing, right?) but, after all of the magnificent effort you have put into researching the text, with the chance to truly do great things, it would be a needless shame to put out such low-grade pics. The full-length shot, once reduced and processed for printing, will likely show up as no more than a silhouette with annoying backscatter. The band spring, a crucial point, will likely be invisible (it almost is now).

But, my conscience is now clear - you have been made aware. I cannot, and will not attempt to, do more.

[madsenshooter]

Hmm, I do see something in 5's pic that might help tell if the 17-18K Krags were cadets or not. Note the side plate, 1896 style, not 1892. My 22018, made in late 1895 has the 1896 style sideplate. I'm sure the 17-18K rifles still had 92 sideplates. Gunderson's 17724 appears to have had the original 92 plate, though I can't see it well enough to say for certain. Still it proves nothing as the plates could have been changed over the years. However, I would think that if they had pulled rifles that were made as early as mid-1895 out of storage to use to make cadets, the sideplates would have been updated, as it was already ordered that yet to be issued 1892 rifles were to be updated to 96 standards. Which sideplate does yours have Kragrifle?

[5MadFarmers]

Dick, you are a dinosaur. Takes one to know one right? I too am a dinosaur. I don't have a cell phone. I don't have an iPod or iPad. Given my career field that really cracks people up. One of the reasons those CoO and DRM books are available is dead tree is truly dead.

Google started scanning libraries. Out went the books. Today it's "Kindle" and such. Electronic books. Print media is a dead duck. The thing is that books are going the way of music. Albums? It's $.99 a song. Which they very well know you'll lose after a while and need to buy again as you don't retain a non-soluble edition. Google is an 800lb monkey.

Publishers sold their souls. Google rounds up books and digitizes them. Then sells them in electronic format. What if you don't want that? Tough. Publishers were sold down the river over that. They sold themselves.

I started a web site once. I was going to take it places. Web sites are modular. Errata sheet? No need. Update the page. Then I decided I didn't like the model. There are better ways.

Tie them all together. If I wanted nice pictures and dynamic content I'd do a web site behind a pay wall.
If I wanted the book to exist electronically I'd get a publisher to print it. Then Google could nab it on their terms.

It'll be the last of the dead tree. Nice pictures won't matter as the customer base is all old and blind. So says me wearing cheaters right now. I'll retain copyright and won't release it for electronic publishing. No publishing organization can sell me down the river.

Want more vectors? I have X amount of room. I have Y amount of time to ensure that room is available. The living room is stuffed with guns. I'd use the spare master bedroom but that's where they're coming from. I'd use the other spare bedroom but it's stuffed with boxes of gunk. The family room is my cave and stuffed with safes and stacks. It's incredibly hard to take photographs in the bathroom. So I've taken over the living room for the amount of time it takes. The wife is too tolerant.

I have access to a professional photographer. Am I supposed to haul it all over to his place? Some other place? Have him come here? If I want him to come here it'll be a full living room for months. Not going to happen.

Frankly I'm pushing this thing out the door as fast as it will go. That'll make it somewhat haphazard. I could wait until I retire but then we're dealing with different dynamics. Maybe I'll just walk away from it all at that point and focus on building a restaurant. So it's now or never for this one.

The other ones are different. Different information. Different presentation. Those I won't rush. This one I want done and gone.

So I decide to turn it into an exercise in speed. Wrote the text part, 200 pages, in about two weeks. Pictures are taking longer. Some will be dark and some will be light. Depends on if it's rainy or a workday. Need sun. Thus weekend pictures are light with the rest not so much.

If I did it the way you're thinking it'd be two volumes. Hard cover and in color. I'd get Chris to take the photos. It'd be slick. It'd be expensive. It'd take me a couple of years.

It'll be cheap and fast. The one concession to myself is it will have a hard cover. Thus it won't be dismissed as "it has nice pictures" as "it had solid covers" is available.

It won't be what you expect. Be prepared.