CO 2 stock making, what unit?

[cplnorton]

I picked up a Krag this morning that the buttstock is marked CO 2. I would imagine this is for a unit. Anyone know what it is for?

[cplnorton]

The sling also has Navy stAmped on it. I've never seen a Navy marked krag sling?

[CJCulpeper]

Do you have a picture of the sling?

[cplnorton]

Here is the sling.









Here is the markings on the buttstock. The 37 I'm sure is the rack number




And also something weird is the serial looks like one number was restruck or something? The first 7 looks restruck, probably at SA I would imagine?

[Dick Hosmer]

All interesting marks - sorry to say that, after 45 years of collecting, I cannot shed anything concrete on any of them. I agree that 37 is the rack number. The word "NAVY" on the sling (an inconsequential and easily removed part) seems a bit redundant. After all, if the arm were on a ship, it would be a navy arm, without being so indicated by the sling. Having USN stamped on the metal (as occurs on several other arms) seems to be a more reasonable method of denoting naval ownership. That said, it's a neat - and clearly old - sling, well worthy of further research. More mysteries!!

[cplnorton]

There were two of them. From what the seller said, two brothers owned them

Both had the exact same stock markings. His was rack number 50. Mine was 37. I picked up this one because of the sling and it had the 1897 cartouche on the stock. The other one for some reason someone just removed the cartouche. But both rifles appeared to be original and not rebuilds.

I wished I sort of had the money to buy them both. They probably had been together for a 100 years, and today they were seperated.

[Dick Hosmer]

That is sad. Did you get the sellers name, for possible later contact, or did they both sell? If the other sling did not have NAVY, that tends to rule against them both have been on the same ship. Was the other sling in identical condition except for the mark?

[cplnorton]

The other one didn't have a sling. That was also sort of the reason I grabbed this one. I did get the sellers name, but I went by his table a little later to ask if I could put down a deposit on it and dig up the money to buy the other one in a couple weeks.

But it was gone. The serial was within a couple hundred of this one too. They were identical in everyway. But this one had a sling and a cartouche. The other one only where the cartouche was, was sanded. For some reason.

It really did kill me to see them split up. I imagine it's pretty rare to find two that served together like that. Only 13 digits off in the rack number. His was 50 and mine 37.

[Dick Hosmer]

Well, you clearly made the right choice by buying the better gun - but it is still unfortunate. That said, put it behind you as soon as you can, and enjoy your new rifle!

[cplnorton]

Hey Dick, I know you are an expert on these. Anyway to tell if these Krags were used by the Marines? I looked up the serial in the SRS and didn't get anything close.

I know if there are any other book out there other than the SRS to tell where these went?

[Dick Hosmer]

Short of retracing SRS' steps through the National Archives, hoping to find something they missed, or just stumbling onto a trove of hidden records, I know of no other major source for serial numbers, with one possible exception. I have not yet seen Joe Farmer's brand-spanking-new book, but he did say, during his period of research that he had found "some" numbers which SRS, and Brophy, apparently missed. Hopefully, he has included them. Beyond that, I know of nothing on the horizon.

I'm sure there must have been some usage of Krags by the USMC, but if your number is not listed, it is unlikely you will ever know. In fact, since your "NAVY" sling is such an easily removable part, there is really no way to tell whether it is (or is not) original to the rifle.

[cplnorton]

Thank you sir. I'm going to clean that Krag up today and take some pics. I'm not an expert at all, but as far as I can tell it looks like an original 1896.