Finally found my Krag

This was a VFW turn in that came through CMP in 2012.
My guess is it was refinished at some point. The bluing under the wood looks 100%, whereas the magazine door and side plate are more like 10%. The barrel is 80% or better. I think it was refinished as there are places that clearly used to have slight surface rust, like the side of the rear sight, that appear dark.
Stock is a little grimy by all the market are deep and noticeable and should clean up nice.

I have it fully disassembled right now except for the barrel. Every came apart easy - except the trigger pin needed a soak to get the dried caked grease off it. All the screws had what smelled to be motor oil on them and no trouble anywhere getting it apart. It was well preserved.

Bore is a bit rough, but hopefully it shoots. More pics coming from my borescope after a good scrub.

It didn't have a front sight blade, and no pin. But, whoever removed it thoughtfully plugged the holes with very tiny/short pins. weird.

I wanted a shooter - and already decided if I got a real sewer pipe I would put a new criterion barrel on it. This in mind long term, I'm leaning towards touching up the bluing around the visible parts of the action.

So, my first question as I clean this up is whether there is any way to tell if this was a parts gun loaned out to VFW, or if it's parts are original. The only notable marking, other than the 1902 stock, is under the bolt handle. Bolt is in the white except for the extractor claw which I read is how they were. I have no problems cleaning it up, bluing, and eventually putting a new barrel on. I want a shooter in good serviceable condition as it would have been in it's day, and I plan to shoot it often. If it's an intact original, I'll keep as is and sell to a collector that appreciates such things hanging on the wall or forgotten in the back of the safe.

Pics below. I'll update as I clean it up and reassemble. I also landed a 3.32million serial M1903 in a CMP stock with pristine bore...but that will be another thread when I get to it.
Attachment 110403Attachment 110404Attachment 110405Attachment 110406Attachment 110407

Nice looking rifle. An don't be supprized that bore doesn't shoot good.

Nice one. Don't be surprised if it gets lonely and need a companion. Very interesting rifles.

Here is a picture of the chamber...it's wet and soaking at the moment, but the shoulder is visible. Other posts have got me worried that it may have been reamed out. Pic shows a second step, instead of a nice smooth transition.
I have one of those Hornady depth gauges, and a tap to make a modified 30-40 case to use with it. But the mail is slow in getting my lot of brass to the door. I'll let you know when gets here.
The magazine door and cover plate are the only things that seem to have a lot less finish remaining. Any info on the markings on the underside of the bolt? Are they steel lot codes like on the 1903 bolts?
Attachment 110412
I'm very surprised by the simplicity of the parts assembly. All the complexity appears to be in the milling of the receiver inside and out.

Hello: nice looking Krag. I do not think you can date your rifle from the bolt markings. The "Krag collectors association" is a great web site with a lot of friendly, knowledgable folks who can help you out. Unfortunatly the site is under reconstruction. Hopefully it will be back up and running soon. There are some books on the Krag rifle. The Joe Poyer book is still in circulation. It is helpful and reasonably priced. As far as the chamber on your rifle I would have it checked. Some VFW rifles were rechambered to fire 30-06 blanks if I recall correctly.

Nice looking rifle, from what we can see. Sight blades can be had, maybe even from here if you place a WTB... I had one each over time...one rifle, one carbine and one school gun. The carbine had nothing left in the barrel but the other two were OK and shot fine. I still have dies but the guns are gone. Here's two of them...

'ssgross' - I agree with King Carp; your chamber appears 'augured out'. Some Veteran Organization Krags show this 'Alteration'. It was done either to deactivate a 'drill rifle' or adapt the Krag to some type of available blank (not a .30-40 blank).

If your chamber is so altered and you fire a .30-40 cartridge in it, the fired case will be shredded! (Photo attached).

Attachment 110418

If you find that your chamber has been altered, your Krag becomes a good candidate for re-barreling. Options are a decent 'used' barrel, (they show up on Ebay and GunBroker), or a CMP/Criterion barrel install.

Besides the chamber, your Krag looks rather nice. The U.S. Krag did not receive a homogeneous "blue" on its metal parts, that we see on a lot of more modern arms.

The Krag barrel, front nose-cap, and trigger-guard were 'rust blued'. (Springfield Armory called this 'browning').

The bolt-body was polished 'in the white'. The extractor was 'flame blue'.

Most of the other parts were case-hardened. The action, safety, bolt-sleeve, side-plate, butt-plate and magazine-gate had mottled case-colors, when new, but, in time turned silvery.

Some small parts and screws were 'blackened'.

Once you get familiar with the original finish of the U.S. Krag's parts and how the various metal finishes age, you will likely come to like it.

(p.s. - The hieroglyphics on the Krag bolt likely identify production runs or steel lots. The exact meaning seems lost in time).

The barrel looks like a good cleaning followed by shooting followed by cleaning will make it look good again.

The bore is irrelevant if the chamber is ruined.

Front sight blades and pin show up on Ebay. Reproproduction blade and pin can be purchased from S&S Firearms (Glendale, N.Y.).

Krags are super simple to change barrels on.
I had one Krag that the chamber was drilled out of to “deactivate” it.

I removed that barrel and put on another used one that indexed perfectly. I went cheap and after a couple years decided I didn’t like the bore. Bought another barrel and it too indexed perfectly.

They were made for such a short period of time and by true masters that part interchangeability is truly amazing.

'rcathey' - Was that your photo of the 'stressed' .30-40 cartridge-case, that I took the liberty of using? (Thanks, for posting it on the KCA site, long ago).

What kind of "barrel-vise" do you use? (With the "clocked" or "timed" threads, original U.S. Krag barrels seem to be easily switched or replaced).

FWIW - Maybe the OP's front-sight blade was left off as a warning "not to fire", because of an altered barrel/chamber?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by King carp

Some VFW rifles were rechambered to fire 30-06 blanks if I recall correctly.

---

Thank you. Very encouraging info. A properly sized 30-06 case does not fit all the way in, with 0.775 hanging out. Nor does a 303 case. I noticed at pacific tool their 30-40 headspace gauges are compatible with 303, so I looked up case dimensions. for The base of 303 is a tad larger than a 30-40, even though the OAL is very similar, and the case diameter just below the shoulder is slightly smaller on 303 also.
I'll know for certain once my Krag brass arrives. I've poured chamber castings before and won't hesitate to do it with this rifle if I'm not otherwise certain.

As to the date, the 417k serial block is 1902 according to U.S. Military Dates of Manufacture.

Front repro front sight pin was $3 at S&S, proper height blade (.413) was $11 at Numrich. all on the way.

I read somewhere else that these VFW drill rifles often had front blade removed because they were sharp and snagged clothing a lot when drilling. I can see the need - when I vacationed at Parris island if port arms wasn't held just perfectly you had a muzzle end of a barrel shoved into nose.

Thanks for all the feedback! More pics coming.

---------- Post added at 01:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:22 PM ----------

I marked a case where forward movement stopped, and my micrometer says .4555 - interwebs say a 30-40 base is .4573.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by butlersrangers

'rcathey' - Was that your photo of the 'stressed' .30-40 cartridge-case, that I took the liberty of using? (Thanks, for posting it on the KCA site, long ago).

What kind of "barrel-vise" do you use? (With the "clocked" or "timed" threads, original U.S. Krag barrels seem to be easily switched or replaced).

FWIW - Maybe the OP's front-sight blade was left off as a warning "not to fire", because of an altered barrel/chamber?

---

Mine was VERY obvious that it had been drilled out. They used a drill bit big enough to make a tiny knick in the receiver.

I made a vise pretty much exactly like this one. If you have the tools to do so, it’s about half the cost of buying one.
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1006552312

'ssgross' - That is a good sign if your chamber will not quite accept a .303 British cartridge-case.

I will be quite happy if my suspicions prove totally wrong. If the chamber is good, your bore likely will be a decent shooter.

You did a very good job photographing your bore and chamber. My results were nowhere as clear as yours. (I likely was 'fooled' by your photo and saw 'chatter marks' and what appear to be 'straight' chamber walls).

FWIW - OP's chamber (left) compared with a detached barrel's chamber (right):

Attachment 110442Attachment 110443

Thanks, I used my cell phone for that chamber pic. I couldn't get the rifling to show in the pic from the chamber end, but I could see it with my eyes. looks the same as the muzzle end.
I have pics from my borecam after cleaning with jb paste and kroil. I'm almost ashamed to show them. looks like a sewer line up close:) But looking down barrel with a nice bright light makes makes it look much more promising.
I was reading on here about how easy it is to twist the action when pulling a barrel, and the need for the proper wrench.
The wooden barrel vice at midway got me thinking...since the receiver ring is perfectly round, could an effective, perfect fitting action wrench be made the same way? cut a proper sized hole in a block of oak, same thickness as the collars length, and cut in half. tap the top metal bar stock for a length of pipe, or bolt/weld a handle to it (probably with a recess on in the wood blocks top side).
Wouldn't such an action wrench, with rosin in the hole in the wood, provide a perfect fit?
What are all of you using for Krag action wrenches?

Here’s my thread on rebarelling my Krag. There’s some good info in here including the action wrench I made.

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=62340&page=1

IMHO - If an 'action-wrench' is clamped tightly on the Krag receiver ring, it might cause the action-threads to bind more tightly with the barrel threads. This could make unscrewing the barrel more difficult.

The beauty of rcathey's action wrench is that it puts no pressure on the receiver-ring.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rcathey

Here’s my thread on rebarelling my Krag. There’s some good info in here including the action wrench I made.

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=62340&page=1

---

Thanks for the design rcathey. Looks like you used a mill? I'm unfortunately not set up to make one...unless you just ground away until you had it, probably not. It looks too good.
I guess it's a good thing you also make and sell em...or at least you did :)
https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=65133

Here are some pics of the rear sight. I completely disassembled it as it was stiff and gritty. Decided to touch up the bluing on the ladder. I don't mind my shooters looking their age, but prefer them to look like they were at least beat to hell in use, but carefully maintained in between beatings because ones life depended on it.

After reading all the Enfield posts on here when restored one last year I got in the habit of using NLGI No.2 grease everywhere that won't ever see the light of day, at least while I'm alive - like in between the base and top of the rear sight. It won't dry out over the years, and the site moves buttery smooth now.
Attachment 110444Attachment 110445Attachment 110446
Here is what it looked like before.
Attachment 110447Attachment 110448

It is your Krag, but, these are the colors that are normally seen on well preserved 1901 sights. Numbered face of leaf is usually in 'white'.

Attachment 110449

Those look very good indeed. Mine wasn't as well preserved as yours.
The ladder was especially poor with mottles of surface rust. I put some birchwood Casey rust remover on a piece of paper towel on an old board, and set the sight ladder, graduation side down. I did not do this to the sides and other parts - just burnished with steel wool before oxpho cream.
It had a real clean in the white look after srubbing with steel wool, the surface rust spots barely visible anymore except for some slight etching at the worst of them.
I cold blued it to make it easier to look at when shooting. It's easy enough to take off if I don't like it in the end.
Do the sides of your sights show the same in the white finish, or was it just the ladder face?

Just the 'numbered' face of the leaf is in the 'white' on a good condition 1901 sight.

(I believe some Krag rifles, that were 'reconditioned' just before WW1, may have more of a homogeneous 'black-blue' appearance of the metal surfaces, but, the different component parts did not take this treatment evenly).

BTW - #0000 steel wool (or bronze wool) saturated with Hoppe's #9 solvent can remove surface rust from metal and leave blue and patina intact.

The edge of a copper penny or brass cartridge case, worked with a film of linseed oil, can be used to burnish and breakdown heavier rust deposits into a nice brown patina.
(Go slow, examine progress by wiping off the rusty slurry occasionally with paper-towel, and renew linseed oil. I do a final burnish with rottenstone in linseed oil and the edge of a popsicle stick. This can give a pleasant patina, but, will not remove rust pits).

Attachment 110456

Thanks for the pic of the side. My go to surface rust removal is 0000 steel wool and barricade or kroil.
I've spent all morning trying to reinstall the trigger. I only found one video that makes it look way to easy and his hands blocked the shot. Does anyone have any tricks to share?

EDIT: Belay that...I got it! I only spent half the time this morning locating the spring on the shop floor each time it flew out.
Trick. Clamp the barrel firmly in the bench vice (rubber pads on the vice), pointing out to the right with the trigger's pocket on the receiver pointing up. This allows one to use both hands to compress the spring and get it started. Hold it steady with the left hand and push straight back with the flat side of a screwdriver in your right hand while continuing to rotate with your left hand.

We have shown easier ways to re-install the Krag trigger on the Krag Collector's Forum. (Unfortunately, that site is currently down for 'updating').

I use the shank of a close fitting drill as a 'slave pin', (Oops, not PC)! I put the 'assist pin' through the manufacturing hole in the knuckle of the trigger. The drill shank also fits a small diameter manufacturing hole in the receiver recess for the trigger.

This 'assist-pin' lines up the trigger assembly for insertion.

I then put the trigger spring in its hole. I rotate the spring to take advantage of a slight bevel at the spring end.

I use a (1/2 open) 1903 Springfield tool wide screw-driver as a lever to compress the coil spring with one hand, while pushing the trigger-assembly into place with the other hand.

That Krag trigger-spring is STRONG!

Attachment 110461

She's all put back together. I'll get to the stock work next weekend. I want to scrub with mineral spirits and a blue kitchen scrubby to lift the layer of grime. Light wipe with alcohol to even out the finish, maybe a very light layer of stain to hit the couple deeper scratches that go below its existing finish, then linseed oil.
Here is the bore after one pass with JB paste and kroil - pick is more or less average for the whole length. Gonna be another week at least before I get to see how she shoots. But will certainly post back the results.
Attachment 110483

Brass finally came in the mail! I had plenty of Hornady 180gr SP's on hand and loaded up a bunch. I also drilled and tapped the back of a case for my Hornady OAL gauge to check max case base to ogive to make sure the chamber hadn't been drilled out. I saw a long freebore as expected, but the bullet stays in the case. I bubba-checked the headspace with a case and aluminum tape on the back - bolt closes with 1 piece of tape, but not 2 so headspace appears to be fine.
I then took the firing pin out of the bolt, and used my just loaded ammo to check feeding. Ejection is fine. Bolt picks up a round fine when the magazine cutoff is off, and skips when the cutoff is on all as expected. However, the lead tip of every round in the magazine hits the left rim of the chamber, and doesn't glide in unless I stick my finger in and re-direct.
I've read about the problem, and went to Cabela's hoping to find some 220gr round nose. It's like Armageddon has already happened in there - not a single box of ANY 30cal bullets, not a single box of primers of any kind, and the only powder on the shelf was some pyrodex.
Armegeddon aside, I'd sure like some ideas to make this rifle feed smoothly. I've read about sometimes switching out the cover on the left works, but would rather not. Can the spring be adjusted? The bolt catches on the right side of the case, pushing the nose hard against the left side of the receiver. Can the spring be adjusted to counter that?

I've had trouble feeding anything but the 220 rd nose. I used 150 gr pointed and 180 pointed...it was made for the long round nose. Even casting some would be better. It's a length and profile thing. Butlersrangers will have some more on this, also Jon Norstog... They've done WAY more.

Wow! Nice looking rifle! :thup::thup:

I don't think it's the spring (but would be happy if I'm wrong), my sidplate fits like a glove - ever so slight lip on the sidplate where it mates on the feed ramp in the receiver (e.g. side plate protrudes a thousandth or 2 into the reciever). If anything, that couple thous. would help it. I've seen the other posts on just the last round not feeding...but for me it's every round.
I finally found a place on the inter webs with 220 round nose bullets. They're in the mail. I'll shoot the 180 SPs I loaded over the weekend or early next week and post back whether or not case ruptured from a tampered-with chamber (I'm doubtful, but the mathematician in me says it'd be dishonest to say 100% confident without making a casting), and how she shoots.
I read a horror story on another forum when I was researching the feeding issue - guy says a local gunsmith used a file to cut a half-moon on the left of the chamber, then tacked an ugly weld onto the feed ramp to "push" the rounds right, and welded to on the cover plate.
EDIT: Just saw another thread here with "my krag will feed almost anything but is more accurate with 220 RN". Made me think that although my SP rounds poke the side of the chamber when I was playing with it on the workbench, when I cycled with a bit more force like one would when on the firing line, they slipped right in, albeit with a bit of friction. Pulling one out shows the soft lead tip deformed with large burr on the left side. Probably also why his doesn't shoot as well with SPs.

Lots of U.S. Krags are tolerant of cartridges with different bullet weights and profiles. Most Krags handle 180 grain hunting projectiles well.

Some Krags are just fussy.

Springfield Armory and U.S. arsenals just had to check to make sure that there was proper functioning with issue ammo and its 220 grain RN 'jacketed' bullet.

The inside of the Krag's left side-plate plays an important role in smooth and proper cartridge feed. (Occasionally the plate is loose and not properly seated or a model 1896 plate has been put on a model 1898 Krag).
The inside of the plate should be clean and free of dents and burrs. Rust, crud, or old hardened cosmoline can interfere with smooth feeding.

There is a 'lobe' toward the inside front of the plate. The case-shoulder meets this lobe and it influences the cartridge feed angle.

Krag owners experiencing feed problems have sometimes found the side-plate to be the culprit. (A spare plate is a cheap and easy test). Some owners have built-up (and re-shaped) the lobe with solder or epoxy to correct the feed-path for a desired load.

Most of my Krags are not 'cartridge sensitive' and tolerate 180 grain SP's and 168 grain 'spitzers'.

You may have to alter your Over-All Cartridge Length. Possibly your projectile is seated-out too far?
The projectile tip may be touching the barrel-breech, before the case-shoulder makes contact and gets directed by the lobe of the side-plate?

Hello SS! The Krag can be finicky about ammo alright. Ive had a few, some would feed anything, some would only feed RN bullets. As a hunter I stick with RN anyway as they expand better than most spitzers at Krag velocities. The hangup seems to be at the joint between the receiver and the side cover plate, where it's supposed to turn the bullet toward the chamber. You should see what my hunting rifle does to "ballistic tips."

I think you could get in there with a dremel or a die grinder and just fair up that joint. The metal on the side cover is case hardened and will take some work. Be careful not to cut deep into the receiver, which is a lot softer.

Good luck!

JN

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by butlersrangers

You may have to alter your Over-All Cartridge Length. Possibly your projectile is seated-out too far?
The projectile tip may be touching the barrel-breech, before the case-shoulder makes contact and gets directed by the lobe of the side-plate?

---

I thought so too. The 180 SP's have a cannelure, and I have seated until the cannelure is completely covered up. I usually seat until I just barely still see the top of the cannelure. I didn't crimp, and I think I can go just a tad further in. I'll seat some 150 SPs too and see how that feeds. I also think I'm gonna take you up on the idea of putting the ladder back in the white.
I'll shoot it on Monday - was going to go to Quantico today to get it on paper, but rain in the forecast means yard gets mowed first. Then, I think its about time lots of pictures and a range report! Those 220 RN's are in the mail mon. or tues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon_norstog

I think you could get in there with a dremel or a die grinder and just fair up that joint. The metal on the side cover is case hardened and will take some work. Be careful not to cut deep into the receiver, which is a lot softer.

---

Jon - are you saying the feed angle at the joint needs to be lessened? If I hear you right - removing some material from where the side-plate and receiver mate would make the feed slot closer to parallel with the receiver (of course I don't mean grind it parallel, just grind or file in that direction) should change the point at which the case gets it's first "bump" over to the right? Wouldn't removing material from that area move the round time more towards the lip of the chamber, instead of further to the right? In my rifle, the hangup is the nose of the round hitting the flat to the left of the chamber, not snagging on the joint where the sideplate mates with the receiver.

Another question for the group...was the original ammo jacketed? I found this picture labeled as Winchester 30 US Army from 1895. If authentic, it looks like jacketed with a soft lead nose.
Attachment 110996

So much for trusting memory, I studied the feed of various .30-40 loads in a model 1896 and a model 1898 Krag, today. I studied the interior of a couple of loose side-plates.

The inside of the Krag side-plate has a 'ridge' and it is farther back than I described.
This 'ridge' appears to act on the taper of the cartridge-case body and does not touch the case shoulder.

With the initial movement of the Bolt, the top cartridge rim is just contacted by the bolt-face.

The initial movement moves the cartridge forward and the cartridge tip 'dips' downward. With further movement the bullet tip makes contact with curved surfaces of the side-plate and receiver that form a ramp, directing the bullet nose toward the chamber. It is very important that the seam between the side-plate and receiver be smooth. Round-nose bullets have an advantage riding over the seam.

While the cartridge is moving forward, the ridge on the side-plate and edges of the receiver opening to the magazine continue to act on the cartridge and may influence the angle it takes toward the chamber mouth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ssgross

Jon - are you saying the feed angle at the joint needs to be lessened? If I hear you right - removing some material from where the side-plate and receiver mate would make the feed slot closer to parallel with the receiver (of course I don't mean grind it parallel, just grind or file in that direction) ...
Attachment 110996

---

I was thinking of the case where the bullet nose is snagging on the joint between the side plate and receiver. Not taking out a lot of material, just smoothing that joint. If the round isn't getting pointed into the chamber that is something different - maybe a new used sideplate would do the job. I've never had THAT particular problem.

Good luck!

jn

The U.S. Krag and 1903 Springfield were "Magazine Rifles" designed to be used as 'single-loaders', with the contents of the magazine held in reserve.
Both rifles had a magazine cut-off switch and a bolt 'hold-open device, to assist single-loading.

On command, the magazine contents could be utilized. The 1903 Springfield had the added virtue of rapid reloading of the magazine with 'Chargers', (a.k.a. Stripper-Clips).

Back in the early 1900's, when the Krag was utilized in International Palma Matches, (fired in three stages, of 800, 900, and 1,000 yards), projectiles with superior ballistics were used. These cartridges, with improved projectiles, might not function through the magazine. This was not a problem. Match-Cartridges could be single loaded directly into the chamber during slow-fire.

Hunting and Rapid-Fire Matches require smooth feeding of all five cartridges in the magazine.
Bullet profile and over-all cartridge length play a role in making things run smoothly.

The bullet tips help position the cartridges in the Krag magazine. When the rifle is 'fired', inertia causes forward movement of cartridges in the magazine.
Cartridges near the maximum length, allowed by the magazine, keep things positioned correctly.

I have loaded Krag rounds with 110 grain RN bullets, intended for the M1 Carbine. This makes a fun, but very short, 'plinking' round.
When five of these rounds are put in the magazine, the first couple might feed from the magazine.
With continued firing, the remaining cartridges will move too far forward. A cartridge rim or the case -body will ultimately wedge in the magazine opening and jam the bolt.

The jam can be cleared by retracting the bolt, opening the magazine-gate, and pushing all remaining cartridges to the rear, before re-closing the gate.

It is wise to test a Krag's feed reliability with the ammo that is going to be used for Hunting or Rapid-Fire Matches by filling the magazine and monitoring feed function at range sessions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon_norstog

As a hunter I stick with RN anyway

---

Jon - or anyone else - do you have a favored load for 220RN? I've got a good starting point of the original army load by inferring across the few manuals I have.

A friend, who fires at vintage matches at Camp Perry, uses 220 grain projectiles and 40 grains of IMR-4350. He gets good accuracy and a good correlation with his sight graduations.

I have not yet used 220 grain projectiles in my Krag. I don't go Hunting these days.
For Range Blasting, I have stayed with 165 grain, 168 grain Match Kings, and 180 RN projectiles.
I've dabbled with some 155 grain cast bullets and 110 grain jacketed RN for cheap practice.

I have a box of 220 grain Sierra 'Pro-Hunter' RN projectiles that I am going to try with 40 grains of WW-760.

BTW- The box of Winchester ammo, that was pictured from "1895", is Hunting ammo, not military. It was likely available for the Model 1895 Winchester, lever-gun.

The early Krag military rounds were 'jacketed' 220 grain RN projectiles.
The cartridge was a 'work in progress' with a lot of trial and error in getting a suitable propellant, and in developing non-mercuric priming, and improving bullet & jacket material.

Early cartridge cases were 'tin-plated' to improve storage longevity and counter-act effects of mercuric priming on brass.

Attached: Photo of very similar 1898 (top with cartridges) and 1896 side-plates. The tin-plated cartridge is 'Frankford Arsenal 1898' and the commercial cartridge is 'Remington-Peters'.
A picture showing the difference in side-plates: The "tenon" (orange line) on 1898 measures about .152" and the tenon on model 1896 (yellow line) measures approximately .132".
A selection of cartridges and reloads that will feed through most of my Krags.

Attachment 111001Attachment 111002Attachment 111003

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by butlersrangers

The "tenon" (orange line) on 1898 measures about .152" and the tenon on model 1896 (yellow line) measures approximately .132".

---

Now I see...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ssgross

Jon - or anyone else - do you have a favored load for 220RN? I've got a good starting point of the original army load by inferring across the few manuals I have.

---

I like 41.5 H4350 (NOT IMR 4350) behind the Hornady 200 RN and 40 4895 with the 180 RN. Both are good, solid loads that will bring down an elk. The 180 RN load chronos pretty close to the factory 180s. Neither load will blow up your gun.

I had a Remington-Lee with two locking lugs on its nickel steel bolt head and two safety lugs. I would use .308 loads in that (not max loads, but pretty stiff ones). I didn't hunt with it because it had a safety on the cocking piece. It would be OK on a stand, but no way could you get off a shot at an elk in cover before it disappeared. Unless you were wiling to carry the rifle with the safety off.

jn

I remember something now from far back about feed issues, I had a rifle back in the '80's that fed perfectly using 150 FMJ and gave no problems...the school gun I had more recently was fussy and needed the longer profile and round nose preferably. I guess then I experienced exactly what Jon and Butlersrangers have stated. Some are fussy but they don't need something special just to function. I had one of each. No so many Krags around here...

Bullets came in the mail yesterday...super fast and deserving of a shout out to https://www.bluecollarreloading.com in NC. First time I ordered from them, or even heard of them. Prices are low end of the spectrum, and shipping was flat rate. Downside is they don't ship powder/primers.
She feeds beautiful and smooth with the 220 RN. 35.5gr of IMR4064 should get me somewhere between 1900-2000FPS. My Lyman manual says this is well below max. My Hornady manual starts at 29.3 @ 1600 FPS. I'll start there and work up to 35.5 and see what happens.
Thanks, butlesrangers. I'll be measuring the tenon to make sure it has the right one. The seller sent the CMP certificate with it, and said it was a VFW turn in. CMP's website says these are all mixed-masters so there is a chance it has the wrong side plate on it.

We can't get factory 220 RN now, used to be able to get Hornady I think. No requirement in Canada I guess. I was told about a man that hot swaged his own RN FMJ but never got to talk to him about it.

The "carrier/follower assembly" for the model 1896 Krag is different than the one for the model 1898 Krag, (which I think has two variations). A mismatch in these parts could cause problems.

FWIW - I took some pictures (Saturday) of the early movement of a cartridge as the Krag Bolt "picks it up" at the magazine-opening.

Attached: Three shots of a FA cartridge made in 1898 and three of a reload with a 168 grain Sierra MK. (Both rounds feed in this model 1898 action).

Attachment 111010Attachment 111011Attachment 111012Attachment 111013Attachment 111014Attachment 111015

Can't edit the post. It was a Hornady 220 grain RN, not 200 and I found that recently I have been using 42 gr. of H 4350, weighing each charge.

My deer load is a 150 gr RN and 44 H380, which is in the same league as the 30-30

"Jon" - Could you comment more about the "Remington-Lee you use to hunt with".

I am assuming it was in .30-40 and with the forward 'locking-lugs' you felt the action strong enough for near .308 loads?

Was your Remington-Lee a factory sporter or a cut-down military configuration.

I have seen a number of cut-down model 1899 Remington-Lee rifles, that were from the Michigan National Guard contract. The stocks are often split at the side of the wrist, behind the action.

Many thanks for the very detailed information butlerangers and Jon. I will take a look at poyer along with your info to see if I can confirm that my feed parts are correct.
I loaded 180 SP with 34.2 gr of IMR 4064 to get on paper and get some fouling shots through. My 10th edition Hornady manual reports ~2000 FPS. After playing with the windage at 25 yds, this rifle put 5 shots in overlapping holes!
This same load was all over the place at 100 yds.
I then switched to 220 RN, and shot multiple 5 shot groups at 100 yds with each of the loads
29.3gr IMR4064 (~1600 FPS)
31.0 (~1700 FPS)
32.7 (~1800 FPS)
34.4 (~1900 FPS) - max load in Hornady manual.
The original army load is reported at 2000 FPS, and my Lyman 50th gives a max load with IMR4064 at 39.5gr, ~2120 and 39,000 CUP. So my max load in this string was loaded to
36.5 IMR4064, hopefully at ~2000FPS or a little under.
I find on average the Lyman start and max loads for same projectile and powder to be much hotter than any other manual I've looked at. Most of their data though was collected from a universal receiver and a test barrel.
32.7gr IMR4064 was a clear winner
29.3gr and 31.0gr were about 50% worse, and 34.4/36.5 opened up, with the latter spraying the page. My setup was a front tripod rest and a rear bag off a bench at my local indoor range, which has 100yd lanes.
Attachment 111087Attachment 111088
Some of the flyers were my fault - getting used to the drag on the trigger - it's smooth, but a lot of drag before it breaks - and the sights. In the first group above, I called the 5th shot when the trigger broke much earlier than I expected. I got into a nice rhythm letting the rifle settle up with a bottom hold during the long take-up.
The open sight, set all the way down, was way high - off the page on every load but the 29.3gr. I was bottom hold, with the front sight post level with the top of the rear sight. Perhaps I needed to just let the front sight "peek" in the bottom of the notch.
The peep sight is harder to use than the 1903. I could see my aiming black with a bright point from the orange dot clear as day, until I tried to look at it through the peep and all I would see was the white page. I found that leaving my other eye half open made the black and the orange dot show clear through the peep, and my groups.
I took the day off and spent half the day shooting ~150 rounds. I finished the day using up all the 180SP's getting a feel for how the rifle would behave in my hands in a vintage match course of fire. I found that shooting offhand with the peep sight impossible, and the long drag on the trigger makes it more difficult than it should be with the open sight. It feels very similar to other front-heavy long barreled rifles, perhaps closest comparison would be a Mosin 91/30. My Mosin has a very early clean trigger and shooting offhand with the open sight is easy peasy to get in a rhythm.
I did work on the Krag's trigger. It was very gritty after I first cleaned it. I then used a fine brass wire wheel on my dremmel to clean it, and all the grit went away leaving a nice long, smooth pull.
My final steps on this one is to investigate my parts are correct (side plate, follower arm, etc.) using the very generous information you all have given me - perhaps get a new trigger or sear to play with stoning and improving that, and finish cleaning out the grime from the stock.
I did find on Sun. night when getting my gear together that the bolt stuck a bit on opening. So I cleaned the lugs in the receiver really well, which didn't do much cause I already had done a good job. Some of the patina on the bolt housing was rough, so I used my fine brass wheel on very low speed to clean it...I left the patina on the bolt handle and knob. After a very light coat of RIG, it moves like an egg fried in bacon grease - choose your own favorite analogy - and looks beautiful sliding in the action. I'll say thanks one more time with some pictures after I clean up the stock and other miscellany.
EDIT: I removed third target picture since I mis-wrote the powder type in the label. It was 30.0gr IMR4064, but I wrote IMR4895 on the target.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ssgross

it moves like an egg fried in bacon grease

---

And that would be about right...they do that.

Unless it's a writing error, it would look like "31.0 grains of IMR-4895" was your 'clear winner' in the targets posted.

good catch! The writing on the target was indeed supposed to say IMR4064, which is what is says in my shooter's notebook. Thankfully I toss the targets after I record the results. I removed the picture with erroneous caption in case anyone comes across it and doesn't read on (not that it would be a dangerous load - but would throw one's own experiments off).
I've debated myself on which I like better. I toss out shots I know to be fliers when I call them, and I was only shooting groups of 5, so that if I botched a group getting used to the sights I still had more rounds to get good data. The other 5 shot groups for 32.7gr IMR4064 looks just as good, and slightly better than that 31gr. target. It just looks good because it's a clean page with no other holes. The other holes in the other pics were me walking rounds on paper. Those 220gr bullets had a huge variance, to the point that 31gr was on the page, and leaving the sights alone put 32.7 gr off the page. I had to bring the target back to 50yds to get a round on paper and adjust (hence the other holes). In any event, I'd be happy tossing a coin between those 2 loads.

one of the issues I had shooting was guesstimating my sight adjustments. The velocities reported in the reloading manuals I used are good enough for printing holes in paper at 100yds, but without a reference on the original sight graduations those calculations were a bit worthless. So here is what I discovered sipping coffee this morning, taking another day off to go shooting.
Fr. Frog has a nice article here
The Krag Rifle
That includes some info on estimates for the original ballistics of the 30-40 Army round. Using his reported BC, and the 0.975 front sight height of my rifle, which has a rear 1901 sight, I get the following table from shooterscalculator.com
ShootersCalculator.com | 1898 Krag 1901 rear sight
Range Elevation Vel[x+y]
(yd) (MOA) (ft/s)
0 0.00 2000
100 -0.01 1768
200 4.87 1558
300 11.08 1372
400 18.61 1217
- Sound Barrier (1128 fps) -
500 27.61 1101
600 38.18 1018
This gives an estimate for the MOA between the rear sight graduations on the leaf. Of course, I would better like to do some math with the sight radius and actual distance on the graduations, but that would involve getting up from my recliner to retrieve pencil and paper, and kicking the sleeping dog out from under the foot rest - both of which I'm not willing to do on such a peaceful morning as this.
I really wish I owned one of those PJ O'Hare sight micrometers.

Here are some empties. The ones on top are WW factory 180 gr. loads. They chronoed between 2300 and 2400 fps. You can see some primer flattening there.

Below are some empty elk loads. They were 43.5 gr of AA 4350 behind a 200 Hornady RN. Primers were CCI and Remington. They chrono-ed around or below 2,000 fps. I've gone up to 42 H4350, but where we hunt 65 yards is a long shot.

I'm not convinced about the accuracy of my brother's cheap Chrono, but it detects a 10-20 fps variability in my black powder loads.


Attachment 111122

jn

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by butlersrangers

"Jon" - Could you comment more about the "Remington-Lee you use to hunt with".

I am assuming it was in .30-40 and with the forward 'locking-lugs' you felt the action strong enough for near .308 loads?

Was your Remington-Lee a factory sporter or a cut-down military configuration.

I have seen a number of cut-down model 1899 Remington-Lee rifles, that were from the Michigan National Guard contract. The stocks are often split at the side of the wrist, behind the action.

---

Butler, this gun was definitely a cut-down military rifle. I bought it at Ron Petersen's shop on Central in Albuquerque. There was something wrong with the chamber - someone had got in there with a drill to "improve" the round, maybe. I badgered Ron into satisfying his guarantee and he sent it off the the Bedeaux Arquebusiers to make it right. They turned the barrel and cut a new, tight chamber, got the heads[pace perfect and blued it. It turned out to be a beautiful gun, much lighter than the Krag, and one that came to the shoulder very easily. I liked the detachable magazine, too, made the gun easy to unload, no chasing your shells in the snow and mud. Would have been a great hunting rifle if Lee had designed in a safety you could work with the gun at your shoulder.

I "lent" the rifle and a couple boxes of ammo to a kid, son of a lady friend, and told him he could use it as long as he wants. I advised him to take a stand so he could pull back the striker when he saw an animal. He still has the gun. His mom has a .308 which is what he will probably use for elk.

Attachment 111123Attachment 111124

The 30-40 and the .308 have almost identical case capacities which is why I tried the .308 loads. I never used max loads and paid attention to signs of pressure. I decided if I want to shoot a .308, just buy one, there's plenty of them out there.

jn

Jon - That is a nice looking Remington- Lee 'Hunting' rifle that you own.

Did someone improvise a recoil-lug & Stock 'cross-bolt' to protect the wood from splitting?

The numbers and survival rate of 'smokeless' Remington-Lee rifles is small. From observation, I find the design to have a fair number of vulnerable parts and weaknesses.

The Remington design never got the development and improvement that perfected arms made at National Armories, like the Lee-Enfield and Krag.

I am in the process of restoring a Michigan National Guard model 1899 Remington-Lee rifle with a rather nice stock, that is free of cracks and splits - (2nd picture).

The first attached photo is another 'cut-down' rifle with typical stock damage.

Attachment 111127Attachment 111128

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by butlersrangers

Jon - That is a nice looking Remington- Lee 'Hunting' rifle that you own.

Did someone improvise a recoil-lug & Stock 'cross-bolt' to protect the wood from splitting?

The numbers and survival rate of 'smokeless' Remington-Lee rifles is small. From observation, I find the design to have a fair number of vulnerable parts and weaknesses.

The Remington design never got the development and improvement that perfected arms made at National Armories, like the Lee-Enfield and Krag.

I am in the process of restoring a Michigan National Guard model 1899 Remington-Lee rifle with a rather nice stock, that is free of cracks and splits - (2nd picture).

The first attached photo is another 'cut-down' rifle with typical stock damage.

Attachment 111127Attachment 111128

---

There was no cross-bolt or recoil lug. The gun was probably fired very little. It had no serial number, just a 3-digit number stamped in the wood of the stock. Maybe it was part of an order that fell through.

Among design flaws, besides the unwieldy safety I would include the tiny little extractor which didn't always hold the shell rim so the ejector could do its work. When that happens the spent shell sits there and prevents you from loading a follow-up shot.

jn

finally got around to cleaning up the stock on this. Actually, I had a Winchester 1917 with stock in worse shape than this one to practice on. My main complaint was that 100+ years of grime had developed into it's own varnish...you know the feel...awkwardly slick, deep-dark-blackish brown, no wood grain to be seen. My objective is to preserve all the dings and service life, but look and feel like a rifle in service, carefully maintained by a soldier or marine whose life depends on it, and not like an antique only brought out for show and tell. I thought I would share my process.
1) Rub down liberally with acetone and a scrubby. Use steel wool for extra grime places. The goal is to lift the grime without sanding. As long as you are not too vigorous, the original sanding was rough enough that the steel wool or green (I used blue cause it's what I had) will not noticeably knock it down.
2) Realize that you didn't anticipate reddish sludge dripping all over the new white work-from-home crocks you just put on, and put your old boots on and and old towel on the floor and workbench. Lots of sludge. Work the acetone until you see the wood grain come back. Now you have wood, with a surface of dry powdered sludge on the surface because the acetone dries so fast.
3) Use paper towels (very absorbant) and more acetone. this will get the sludge and residue off. change the paper towel frequently until it doesn't pick up anymore grime.
4) heat gun on any spots with deeply penetrated oil/grime (e.g. around the wrist, cheek, finger grooves, and scrub some more after it comes to the surface. repeat.
5) now you have a nice, clean, evenly "pink" and very dry wood. rub your hand over it and feel how the grain was supposed to feel 118 years ago! All the oxidized fatty acids from the original raw linseed oil are still in the wood. We only took off the very surface.
6) Coat liberally with linseed oil again. I use 50% mineral spirits and 50% raw linseed oil from the health food section. Watch the original color come right back! The best part, is any "newer" scratches and dings now look original, the acetone dissolved the oxidized pigment and evened it out into these.
7) hang for an hour, then wipe off any and all excess oil - make sure you get it all. Hang it up in a warm place over night, wipe off any and all residue in the morning. Keep wiping down with a dry cloth until there is no "waxy" residue feel.
8) reassemble and enjoy. I like to use a thin coat of white lithium grease (nlgi-2) under any wood-metal contact where the sun is likely to never shine again for another 100+ years - under the sling swivel and butt plate for instance. You can find this suggestion by the armorers over in the enfield forum.

I know enough organic chemistry to know that bleach and oven cleaner (lye) or dishwasher methods (also lye) that other tout may turn out nice short term, but breaks down cell structure and ruins the wood - it won't last another 100 years, not to mention residue left behind will leach out and ruin the metal.
I have tried many other acceptable methods on other rifles...murphy soap, straight mineral spririts, alcohol. These are fine, but require too much scrubbing for my liking. Not that I'm not afraid of a little elbow grease, but the more required the more likely it will turn out uneven...all those nooks and crannies never get the same elbow grease in the same way as other areas, and faint cartouches and stamps can't take it. Acetone dissolves the grime quick and easy, deep into the wood with only gentle scrubbing, and leaves no residue behind (after you wipe off the dried residue that was down in the wood to begin with). The only elbow grease needed is to break up the surface grime and work it in, not so much and not so prolonged as the other methods.

Before:
Attachment 113224Attachment 113225Attachment 113226
After cleaning:
Attachment 113227Attachment 113228Attachment 113229
Wow...there was some faint tiger stripes under all that grime!
I'll post final re-oiling pics tonight once I'm done with it.

Final pics...
Attachment 113236Attachment 113237Attachment 113238
What? There was wood on the grip all this time?
Tried to make the lighting the same for accurate comparison. Final color will mellow in the coming weeks as the raw linseed oil does its happy thing.
I'm happy!
I know there is plenty of disagreement on how to treat these...some think all that grime and sludge is part of its service history and leave it as is. I don't have anything that is not a parts rifle in my collection - if I did I'd likely leave it as is, and set it in the back of the safe or in a case to collect value. Don't think I'd every spend my money on something just to look at though. I collect to get as close as possible to history...I want to know as best I am able what it felt like carrying these rifles up San Juan hill or on patrol in the Philippines. All of its dings and wounds along the way are still there, and my kids and I learned a lot on the way to making it serviceable again.
Thanks for all your help along the way milsurps team!

Looks good now, I used to shoot mine too.

I love shooting it. My son (11) loves shooting it because the recoil is so mild. his favorite to shoot before was a Mosin - I don't know why, probably because they are the most beat up looking things in the safe and he has inherited my heart for neglected history.
Sad...another rifle finished. I don't think there is anything more to do to it. I am impressed by how it shot considering where it came from.
Although, the mag. cutoff looks peacock blue. I could blue it properly, and clean up the extractor and re blue / polish it as it may have been, lightly polish the chamber get rid of the surface staining from all the years of wall hanging at VFW. I lied...always something to do.

I must say you have maintained it very well.

Respect.

A question was brought up about how the "patina" may have been stripped away from the wood. Not wanting to hijack that thread, I think this is a good opportunity for an experiment - the color, finish, and feel of the wood is all still there. Advantages of acetone is that it does not penetrate very deeply as it evaporates sooooo fast. Posts 8 and 10 here for reference https://www.milsurps.com/showthread....803#post489803
As I go over the rifle in my hands now, I see that the lighting in the final pics makes the result look lighter than reality. The pics were taken immediately after wiping off the raw linseed oil. I mentioned it should only get better as RLO does its thing over the next few weeks. For the experiment, I'll take a few more pics, and in different lighting too, for discussion and consideration.

Just came across this while internetting on a different project with a table.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfcUwMWxJ2U

That was the same way I've been doing mine over the years.

Yeah. If the "patina" is the underlying oxidized colors, then it is certainly all still there. I need to take some followup pictures. My small shop (in the basement utility room) looks like a tornado hit it. This is what happens when a rifle or 2 projects get co-mingled with a house emergency projects, like needing a new water heater.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ssgross

needing a new water heater.

---

Perfect timing, with all of this other too.

it's always something. The worst is that there is a record player that is on all the time, playing the same song in the background. They lyrics go something like "...but honey don't you want to hire somebody to do that?"

Then you wonder why you know how to do all this stuff. Wish it was all knowledge when we bought a house...

luckily I had a very grumpy grandfather who let me pal around in his cabinet shop with him - second career after retiring from farming. He taught me to never "learn by doing" alone as it's a sure way to f*(^ things up. Read everything I could get my hands on first, come up with plan, and be ready to toss it out and make a new one as the work comes along.
Of course kids want instant hands on gratification! I enjoyed the planning and research just as much as I do touching the thing.
Water heater gave me courage to tackle tying in the sprinklers I did a couple summers ago to the main supply this summer - but the city enforcer tells me I need a contractors license to pull a permit - sounds like a racket.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ssgross

I need a contractors license to pull a permit - sounds like a racket.

---

It is. More cost...