So I see this Krag at the funshow

and it has a very shiny stock and very bright blueing. Owner tells me it was refinished for the movie Rough Riders. Metal seems to be unused except for the abuse of refinishing. Wood has some patches to it, not military quality fixes from my experience but in places where it will not matter.

Paid $250 for it. What I want to know is how to check the bolt lug for a crack. Is this something an individual can do? Rifle looks to be a great shooter and steel wool is taking some shine off the wood refinish. Anything else to look for? Thanks in advance, John McP

jdm,
.
Clean the bolt up and take a good look at it. You could try a dye-type crack detector to be sure, or have it magnafluxed. The Krag is a strong, safe action, with the bolt rib and the bolt handle both acting as safety lugs. Even if you knock a locking lug off, the bolt rib will keep things together for you.

If the rifling is good, you got a good deal.

jn

Dip the bolt lug in a can of gasoline and then wipe dry. If gasoline weeps from the lug area after you wipe it off, it is cracked. I'd say even if you have a cracked lug, you got a decent deal for $250.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdmcomp

and it has a very shiny stock and very bright blueing. Owner tells me it was refinished for the movie Rough Riders. Metal seems to be unused except for the abuse of refinishing. Wood has some patches to it, not military quality fixes from my experience but in places where it will not matter.

Paid $250 for it. What I want to know is how to check the bolt lug for a crack. Is this something an individual can do? Rifle looks to be a great shooter and steel wool is taking some shine off the wood refinish. Anything else to look for? Thanks in advance, John McP

---

I have been collecting Krags for a long time and have only seen one bolt with a cracked lug, and this was not in a rifle. Despite the concern for the single lug, I have not seen a report of bolt failure. Krag loads are lighter than the 30'06 loads, but would not be concerned about bolt failure. I would, however, recommend you check the headspace before shooting. You only need a No-Go gauge since this is a rimmed cartridge and a case will usually function as the Go gauge.
Either way, you got a great deal. And by the way, Rough Riders is my favorite movie. Do not alter the rifle as I believe it has some inherent collector value. Be sure to get written history if the seller is reliable and can be located.
Mike

I've not ran across a cracked bolt yet, but I did run into a receiver that was cracked behind the locking recess. On looking closer I could see that only outside edge of the locking lug on the bolt was bearing, and the cracks radiated from there. Maybe someone overloaded it. The bolt that was in it was fine, the receiver was in the 13,000 serial # range, very crystalline and too hard to take a file.

Andy,

According to Julian Hatcher, it was the heat treating practices at SA that caused so much grief for the '03 rifles. These were the same practices used in making the Krag bolts and receivers. Apparently the heat treaters would "eyeball" the receivers for the heat treating procedure. hatcher discovered that "eyeball" temperatures were about 400 degrees hotter on a sunny day than they were on a cloudy one.

Well that's what I read in American Rifleman when I was a kid. Whatever the real reason for that condition, guys, be careful to check those guns out before you shoot them!

jn

Full length rifle???!! A shooter for $250!??

I have a Krag that was sporterized. The bolt closes on a Field gauge. I was getting an indication of case head separation (grooves inside case) with full length resizing. The advice given to me was to fire form the first loads with a light charge and a cast bullet in backwards to engrave the lands which maintains the rim against the bolt face. The case now headspaces on the shoulder and not the rim. After the fire forming I only neck size the brass preserving the new case length.

Wineman

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon_norstog

Andy,

According to Julian Hatcher, it was the heat treating practices at SA that caused so much grief for the '03 rifles. These were the same practices used in making the Krag bolts and receivers. Apparently the heat treaters would "eyeball" the receivers for the heat treating procedure. hatcher discovered that "eyeball" temperatures were about 400 degrees hotter on a sunny day than they were on a cloudy one.

Well that's what I read in American Rifleman when I was a kid. Whatever the real reason for that condition, guys, be careful to check those guns out before you shoot them!

jn

---

I would read Hatcher with a huge grain of salt. He's accepted, today, as being a straightforward source of information but he is anything but.

While the heat treating process was a problem it wasn't the only one. They sent some shattered receivers to the lab and discovered that bad steel lots were also responsible. Too much phosphorus and something else. I have the lab report - I'd have to dig it out.

Hatcher seriously under-represents the frequency of the problem. I have period pictures of shattered receivers he ignores - they're in the ordnance department report.

So the problem is more than just heat treating. The biggest problem, as I see it, is that they didn't track steel lots. They did with the Garands. Guess why?

The problem is also misunderstood. The receiver doesn't fail in the course of a normal cartridge behaving itself. It's when a cartridge case lets loose that the problem exhibits itself. The receivers were too brittle - no ductility. They're "strong enough" but too brittle. When they fail they fragment instead of distort.

Krags didn't seem to suffer so maybe it was different steel suppliers? I have no idea. I do know they had a problem with Krag bolt handles separating from the bolt. I even have a picture of one that did.

The ordnance department didn't discover the problem - a contract cartridge maker did. The ordnance department had huge egg on their face. Middle of a war and their rifles are dangerous to the user. They stopped production. It's the biggest reason the M-1917 became what it was. Hatcher was their apologist. At the same time they discovered they couldn't make a usable rifle they discovered that Frankford Arsenal couldn't make cartridges that go "boom." Increasing the production at FA wasn't done well and their primers all absorbed too much moisture. They told Congress they fixed the problem. A couple of days later a representative from Winchester appeared before the committee and he let on how it was fixed - FA just bought primers from Winchester.

Are early M-1903s unsafe to shoot? Pick your own position. I own later ones so I feel no need to shoot earlier ones. I have no problem shooting the Krag though.

Cheers.

5MF,

I never heard that about Hatcher. I asuumed that 'cause he was long gone, everything was sorted out between him and the truth. Well, that's why students major in history.

I'm willing to accept the idea that the steel might have been an issue. I know they saved the good stuff for high-dollar applications back then. A chemical-metallurgical explanation could be part of the reason that arsenal heat treating can not be done over. The other, at least in my xperiance is that cherry red steel (at least in a reducing atmosphere) tends to pick up a lot of carbon. That is a process you can not undo.

Well, it gives me something to think about.

jn