Kraig Carbine question.
I picked up what was supposed to be an orginal Kraig Carbine. 22" barrel, U on all the parts. Correct sights. Correct stock. 1901 cartouch on the stock. 1898 on the reciever. No sadle ring. Seems to be correct but the problem is that the serial # falls in the range of the 1898 rifles, not carbines. I'm thinking it was converted to a carbine at some point. Can any Krag Carbine experts enlighten me? I plan to call the seller tomorrow.
0
-
What does the front sight look like? 0 -
Your Krag (not Kraig) should have a Model 1899 receiver as shown below. You may have a "real" carbine but not as it left the Springfield Arsenal. It could be one assembled by Bannerman & Sons from the thousands of surplus parts they purchased from the government after introduction of the Model 1903. 
0 -
quote:Originally posted by Hawk Carse
What does the front sight look like?
Good question, Hawk. Genuine carbine front sights looked like Picture #1; banded front sights (Pic #2) are cut-down rifles.0 -
Front sight is #1 and correct for the carbine. Reciever is marked 1898, not 1899. Talked to seller today. He had taken it apart to clean when he got it and it apeared to have never been apart. He also checked with some other collectors and concensus is was that it is a correct carbine. Stock cartouche date is in the right range. All parts are properly marked. Sellers opinoin was that the person who assembled it in the factory just grabed a rifle receiver and sent it on its way. Apparently there are others out there like this one. Seller offered to take it back and give me a full refund if I'm not satisfied. Still thinking about it. Finish on the whole gun is consistant. No differnt than any assembly line. They were not worried about everything matching. Only it it worked properly and looked right. Any other thoughts? 0 -
Flayderman notes, that there were 5,000 1898 Krag carbines. Unfortunately they had saddle rings, And the stocks were dated 1898.
Because of these descriptiveness. Wouldn't be paying top dollar for it. Doesn't appear to be a original 1898 carbine.
EDIT #1,
According to my references. A original 1898 Krag carbine, would be worth $3500/$4500? One that isn't original, with mismatched parts. Not even close. No matter, if its Bannerman, or U.S. military. Even so any Krag carbine in original condition. That hasn't been dicked with, is pretty pricy nowadays.0 -
quote:Originally posted by rufe-snow
Flayderman notes, that there were 5,000 1898 Krag carbines. Unfortunately they had saddle rings, And the stocks were dated 1898.
Because of these descriptiveness. Wouldn't be paying top dollar for it. Doesn't appear to be a original 1898 carbine.
Yep, not a "true" '98 carbine. It's either an 1898 with an 1899 stock or an 1899 with an 1898 receiver. Most likely the former.0 -
1899 with 1898 reciever makes some sense. Questio is since all the parts other than the reciever are correct why would somone switch recievers after the fact? All the parts have similar finish. Its not unusual for gun manufacturs to use parts avaliable to build guns even if they were not "correct". They were building guns, not building for future collectors like us. Winchester did it for sure and as a Stevens collector I know they built a lot of uncataloged stuff. Leaning towards returning it because I'm not sure if it can really be documemted. 0 -
While a nice slick action, its also weak. I never really enjoyed shooting a Krag, a single locking lug never inspired confidence. A lot of bubba's learned gunsmithing on cheap surplus military firearms. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by slumlord44
1899 with 1898 reciever makes some sense. Questio is since all the parts other than the reciever are correct why would somone switch recievers after the fact? All the parts have similar finish. Its not unusual for gun manufacturs to use parts avaliable to build guns even if they were not "correct". They were building guns, not building for future collectors like us. Winchester did it for sure and as a Stevens collector I know they built a lot of uncataloged stuff. Leaning towards returning it because I'm not sure if it can really be documemted.
IMHO, it would be best to return it. Unless the seller, is cutting you a screaming BIL deal. Big buck collectors want, things absolutely correct. This definitely isn't. With the 1901 date and missing saddle ring.0 -
The later ones didn't have saddle rings. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by slumlord44
The later ones didn't have saddle rings.
That might be true but Model 1898's weren't made in 1901.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
11 comments