Earliest know US krag jorgensen located

[kragnut]

[Dick Hosmer]

Admittedly an eyecatcher for a couple of seconds, but that has to be a broken die, or some other anomaly, perhaps even an eBay job, as the whole stamp appears to be a tad too wide for its' height. In addition to being "SWP" and not "JSA" of course, the SA "8"s in a genuine/properly impressed cartouche for 1889, both have the upper eyebrow. Seen/handled too many of 'em.

[Rick B]

There is allot wrong with it and even the top of the "8" have the tail going in the wrong direction. They messed up when transferring it to the Newly made stamp. Rick B

[Dick Hosmer]

The appearance of the tail direction can apparently vary with the application of the stamp vs. the grain of the wood, I've seen ones which looked like they were open to the right, and some which looked like they were open to the left - the point I was making in quick comment was that BOTH of the eights have eyebrows, or tails, on a genuine SA stamp - plus the obvious fact that there are no JSA stamps with two eights.

Perhaps the OP could provide the source of the pic?

[raymeketa]

I have seen cartouches where the tail on the 8 pointed to the left so that is not necessarily incorrect. But, as Dick said, both 8s should have tails and, most important of all, J.S.Adams was not charged with inspection duties until 1894.

Many years ago, newspapers and print shops used linotype machines and it was easy to make fake stamps for both wood and leather items. Fortunately, the fakers usually slipped up on small details that us "experts" could spot quickly. This could be one of them.

Ray

[Dan Shapiro]

Isn't that Georgie Patton's rifle from San Juan Hill?

[Dick Hosmer]

Found the pic source, strictly by accident whilst browsing Gunbroker this afternoon. Pretty nice-looking rifle.

I also dug out my own nicest Krag, since I happened to recall that it has a minty 1899 cartouche. The eyebrow of the eight points to the right. I also magnified the posted image to the point where I can see a hairline of the descending stroke of the 1st "9". That doesn't make everything right, but, all in all makes it look considerably better, and returns us to where I now think we started - a tongue-in-cheek presentation about 5 months and ten days premature.

[Kragrifle]

Where did you see that rifle? I would like to look at the rest of the photos.

[Dick Hosmer]

Here you go (took me a couple of passes through the list even though my browser leaves tracks).

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/Vie...Item=374840055

[Fred]

It appears to me to be an 1899 stamp. It's OK as far as I'm concerned.

[psteinmayer]

I tried to blow it up a little, and I agree... 1899. I think there's a little grain or nick in the stock on that third digit which is making it appear to be an 8, but I think it's a 9. Actually, not a bad looking Krag. Current bid is $360. I would throw a bid of $400 if I had the extra cash to spend, but sadly, I'm currently saving for a spring trip.

[5MadFarmers]

I'm currently saving for a spring trip.

So place a broom through the railings of the stairway and walk into it like you didn't know it was there. Then with the trip done you can buy the gun.

Rear sight wong. Wong wong wong.

[psteinmayer]

So place a broom through the railings of the stairway and walk into it like you didn't know it was there. Then with the trip done you can buy the gun.

Now That's pretty funny... Don't think my wife would agree though, since the trip is to Florida to spend Christmas with her mother! Personally, I'd rather have the Krag (and the month of constant nagging that would follow my failure to take her to Florida)!

[ebeeby]

Yes, an "optical delusion"

[Dick Hosmer]

Rear sight wong. Wong wong wong.

In what way (other than not being the one that was originally applied)?