First cousins and a book booboo

[5MadFarmers]

I plan a display of 1892 Krag rifles at the July Kansas City show. I would really enjoy people to show up and talk Krags all week end!

Magazine Rifles too no doubt.

You've seen the production report numbers.
You've seen the ranges as we see them.

You all should see at this point that they don't really line up.

Take the M-1896 rifles reported in FY95-96. Steal the receivers and other bits, the stocks didn't exist, and make carbines. At the other end take that number, which would be carbines, and make the rifles. The numbers line up.

When people get stuck on the ranges I think this makes it clear that those ranges are more delicate than one would assume. People like things nice and clean and solid. On these they are not. We even know why: "pressure to turn out guns as they were taking to long to make them." The M-1898 isn't a product improved M-1896, it's a simplified manufacture M-1896. No different from M-1903A3s. Did it work? In FY1898-1899 they turned out as many Krags as they did during all of FY1893-1894, FY1894-1895, and FY1895-1896. In three months of FY98-99. Easier to make and they finally had their act together.

Can you imagine the reaction to the rumble that a Mauser would be adopted? I have no doubt that they felt the "Kragish" bits of the M-1903 were a good improvement but I wonder how much it was: "the more similar the Mauser we make is to the existing Krag the less pain we're going to have."

Magazine Rifles. Of the Krags those are the ones I find the most interesting. They're not a model. They're random bits of rifle between two models.

[Kragrifle]

SN 20392
Lugged rear sight
1896 Cartouche
Thin wrist stock
Late, rounded head cleaning rod
Condition: New

[Kragrifle]

One added note:
Typical stepped off front sight blade, narrow blade channel

PS Springfield could add the hold open notch and did. Same process to drill and tap any hardened receiver. Can be spot annealed then rehardened.

[5MadFarmers]

One added note:
Typical stepped off front sight blade, narrow blade channel

Yes, that's the gun I was referencing as 20K. The one I referenced as 21K is mine. That is not an M-1892. That is a Magazine Rifle. The sight alone assures it. Look at it. Is it a bog standard M-1892 or bog standard M-1896? No to both. It's a Magazine Rifle.

PS Springfield could add the hold open notch and did. Same process to drill and tap any hardened receiver. Can be spot annealed then rehardened.

The U.S. could, and did, have the ability to isolate Uranium 235 in 1939. Just couldn't isolate over 100 pounds of it at that time.

There is no indication that Springfield could do it at the time and, if they could, could do so in useful amounts. There is an indication that they didn't have the ability to do so either at all or in quantity at that time.



In 1945 it became obvious that the U.S. could, and did, have the ability to isolate U235 in industrial quantities.

Springfield, when the M-1892s were to be altered, showed they could, and did have the ability to alter the receivers.

The cadets are M-1896 cadets. There is as much evidence for them being in the 8,000 range as the 18,000.

The overwhelming evidence is they're on "1895" marked receivers and were assembled in March of 1896. 24K range.

It'd take a pretty compelling case for it to be otherwise given what we see and it's never been presented.

I get that Mook really liked the 18K range. He was incorrect. So says me. I'm simply further along than Bill was. Just a statement of reality. Did more homework.

"The Cadet Rifle is the same as the Model 1896 Rifle, except as follows:-"

Parts list of what's different from standard M-1896:: Stock, upper band, lower band, butt plate, ramrod, butt swivel (omitted), and bayonet. That's it.

Page 27 of the 1898 manual for them. Wasn't hard to find. Wasn't hard to figure out the extractor isn't called out. Wasn't hard to determine that required an "1895" dated receiver. Wasn't hard to figure out they were assembled after the Magazine Rifles.

Wasn't hard at all. Just needed to do one's homework. Then understand it.

[Kragrifle]

I have another rifle I need to find. It is a late number, around 23K. All the metal is unaltered, ie flat muzzle, no notch in receiver, 1892 style extractor, later firing pin (not rod). When I bought it someone had removed the filler piece from where the ram rod channel had been and supplied a correct front band, probably to make it look more "original". I have seen and briefly owned a similarly altered stock. Story is the two small wooden pins that hold the filler piece in place are not glued in. They could be driven out and the filler removed. Telltale sign is that the edges are unusually sharp along the ramrod channel and the wood at the rear band does not have the oval shape. I will locate that rifle. Could be one of the 3508 mentioned.
Still don't get your obsession with "magazine rifle". Uranium? I knew we had depleted uranium in Iraq, but during the Spanish American War? Hmmmm, don't know where this is going.

[5MadFarmers]

Still don't get your obsession with "magazine rifle".

People who do not understand what a Model is do not understand Krags. They're a handy trump card to use when dealing with people who do not understand Krags.

Your 203.. is not an M-1892. It's been called one for years. It's not.
Person who doesn't understand them: "but it's clearly an M-1892. Cleaning rod stock is obvious. It's obviously not an M-1896 you twit."
Me: "It has the M-1896 sight. Without the M-1892 sight, at that point in time, it's not an M-1892. M-1892s have standard M-1892 parts.
Person who doesn't understand them: "Installing an M-1896 sight didn't make them M-1896s."
Me: "It's not an M-1892 and it's not an M-1896. It's a Magazine Rifle. Their term for the transitional gun between the two models. If installing M-1896 parts on an M-1892 resulted in them remaining M-1892s they'd not have called them Magazine Rifles. That nomenclature wouldn't need to exist."

Game over.

Your rifle has been called an M-1892 for ages. By people who do not understand Krags. When one thinks that one can randomly install parts on guns one loses the reality that the guns are kept to their model for support. Then one is mystified that they made M-1892 parts in 1898. As a result of that it gets all linear. When it wasn't. Like a bullet fired from a barrel slightly off sight the trajectory gets further and further from where it should be.

Proof: an assertion that M-1896 sights were used from 19000 onward. Drivel. From 19000-24000 is 5,000 guns. Those would be, to one lacking knowledge on these, 5,000 M-1892s with M-1896 sights. "The M-1892 has the M-1892 sight and only the M-1892 sight at that point in time." Proof? Magazine Rifles. Number made in FY95-95? 2,750. 5000-2750=2250. M-1892s are in the 19000-24000 range as are 2750 Magazine Rifles.

An understanding of the trump card that is the Magazine Rifles is key to understanding the cadets.

M-1892s do not have the hold-open pin notch. They're standard M-1892s.
M-1896s have the notch unless otherwise noted. Proof? The "Magazine Rifles altered to M-1896 format with M-1892 extractors." Again, it's the Magazine rifles which provide the trump.

Mook, not even being aware of them, liked the cadets in the 18000 range. With an understanding of models, proven out by the Magazine Rifles, that trump is leveraged. Magazine rifles dictate the M-1896s have the notch.

Person who doesn't understand them: "The Cadets are in the 18,000 range."
Me: "Receivers weren't notched on the "1894" marked receivers. The Cadets are M-1896. Must have the notch.
Person who doesn't understand them: "Well, maybe they skipped the notch."
Me: "Magazine Rifles." Game over.
Person who doesn't understand them: "Well maybe they could add the notch in 1895."
Me: "Magazine Rifles." Game over. If they could notch them they'd have notched those Magazine Rifles and made bog standard M-1896.

The Magazine Rifles are key to dealing with those who do not understand Krags. They don't understand them because they really don't get models and the impact.

"But in the 1900s the sights started becoming flavor of the week!" Covered in the book. Sight battles in Ordnance. They dealt with it by giving the sights their own model designation. The hand guards as well as those started getting out of control due to sight bingo.

====

I'll leave the Cadets with four options. With everyone understanding Models, as proven by Magazine Rifles, you now can get the following:

Option 1. In late 1895 they took "1894" un-notched receivers and, using a method they had not shown the ability to do, notched 404 of them. "Um, boss why are we doing this when notched M-1896 receivers are in flight?" "To make M-1896 Cadets." "Um, if they're M-1896 they'll also need bolt sleeves, hand guards, and sights. All of which are in flight now." "So have the men hurry 404 of each so we can have the guns complete in March - when those parts will exist in quantity." "Crown barrels too?" "Certainly."

Option 2. In late 1895 they took "1894" un-notched receivers and, using a method they had not shown the ability to do, notched 404 of them. Without the right bolt sleeves, hand guards, rear sights, and barrels, they kept the receivers in a baggy until the other parts popped out in March of 1896 and then assembled them.

Option 3. Somebody saw an altered M-1892 rifle in a altered M-1896 cadet stock and noted the serial number. "The Cadets (notice lack of model) are around 18,000 in serial!

Option 4. The M-1896 Cadet Rifles were assembled after the Magazine Rifles when the M-1896 parts were rolling off the line. March 1896. Receivers are notched "M-1896" and thus dated "1895." Thus no lower than 23797 as that is an "1894" marked receive.

If you picked option 4, Magazine Rifles helped you understand Krags to the level that you now understand the M-1896 Cadet Rifles better than Bill Mook did.

Cheers.

[5MadFarmers]

I'm going to add this as it shouldn't be lost. I spent time talking to Bill Mook. I rather liked the guy. It would have been nice if the time-lines would have lined up better so I could be getting those calls. I'd post more. If I had started this earlier, say a decade, it wouldn't have helped. I wouldn't have had the resources (money or time) or access to the level I did.

That said the information to crack the cadets was easily available to me without much effort. Hindsight is always 20/20.

Do not let it be thought that I don't respect the work those who went before me did. I do greatly. In fairness to me I really didn't build on their work though as I wanted to do the puzzles on my own. Left me with less to unlearn. I haven't poked at Mallory's book overly much. Brophy's either really. I'm sitting on a ton of information on the M-1903s and the other gunk from that era and I'm astonished at the level of his M-1903 book. The dude was good. Very good.

Perhaps I'm the exception to the rule for Mr. Hosmer's "buy the book" advice.

"Ok, but I won't read it."
"You'll make dumb purchases."
"I can afford it. They'll be educational. Figuring out why something is wrong is useful too."

I call them my "school guns." Not the "school guns" that Crozier went on about, the ones that I learned from.

I guess I'm the next generation. Better funded. Better research access. Sadly, as you're seeing, there won't be many of us. Muscle cars aren't popular with the kids. Four door super "rice burners" are. Ford Focus RS acknowledges that. Black guns are the analog in this market. Collect Vietnam stuff. It's going to heat up.

M16 parts kits. "Is that a Colt manufactured A1 hand guard?" So it goes.

[Kragrifle]

��

[madsenshooter]

option 4 seems best to me. Mook may have got his 18,000 serial range from a specimen I saw a pic of, in a WWI unit museum that the Army has taken over. There was, in the museum, a specimen in the 18,000 range that appeared to be in Cadet form, though the pic wasn't very good, it may have been a 92. I didn't see any swivels though. Sadly, that rifle disappeared before the Army took over the museum, along with some other choice firearms specimens. "I've worked here 30yrs and now they want to let me go! Not without a few bonuses!"

[Kragrifle]

Rambling! Show me the data and the rifle.

[Kragrifle]

And then, in as few words as possible, state your case!

[Kragrifle]

And then come to the Kansas City show and we can discuss all this over a display of 1892 Krag rifles.

[Fred]

And then come to the Kansas City show and we can discuss all this over a display of 1892 Krag rifles.

I set up there every year with my buddy Chips (George) Hensel. He retired from the Army as a Sgt. Major.
Do you guys know each other?

[5MadFarmers]

Rambling! Show me the data and the rifle.

Show you the data? Which, to me, is: "I've not done my homework. Pass yours over."

And then, in as few words as possible, state your case!

Given you've not done your homework, what qualifies you to judge? Conversely, I've clearly done mine....

And then come to the Kansas City show and we can discuss all this over a display of 1892 Krag rifles.

If looking at M-1892s helps I can just open the safes. Takes much less gas.

[Kragrifle]

Hi Fred
No but hope to meet him.