Benicia Arsenal/DCM Krag Carbines ...

[Nick Adams]

You can find the production figures for the 1896 and 1898 carbines in the standard references (Flayderman, Brophy, etc.). DCM prices are listed in Brophy, which also reproduces some period advertising showing Bannerman and Kirk prices.

Folks here are trying to tell you that it's not currently possible to either prove or disprove that a cut-down rifle like the one you describe is a "DCM carbine" - unless you have the DCM papers. Even if anyone bothered keeping serial records for obsolete arms leaving government ownership (unlikely at those prices and a decade before the Federal Firearms Act), it's highly improbable they were preserved 90 years. Basically, nobody thought is was even slightly important at the time - or ever would be.

Okay, thanks Parashooter.

And I am enjoying this Krag. So different from my other rifles. I still intend to post some pics for the group once the weather here clears. It's been raining off and on for 3 days.

[sdkrag]

I have both original and reproduction Bannerman catalogs and they still listed the Krags and various accutrements into the 40's. Old Bannerman left some stuff in just for reference for collectors and military buffs. I have also seen the prices listed in old American Rifleman magazines. That is why it is so hard to prove the provenance, thousands were sold and converted to "carbine" length duiring the 30's. I knew an old gunsmith in ND that would buy a handfull of Krags at $1.50 apiece with a "barrell' of surplus ammunition. He and a friend would go to the town dump and shoot rats until the ammo was gone and throw the rifle away. I tried to buy Krag parts from him 35 years ago to little avail. He'd burned the stocks in his wood stove and used the shot out barrells for re-rod in the floor of his shop. Now 03 and mauser parts were another story. The long and short of it was there were as many or more "NRA" carbines built in gunsmith shops as ever came out of an arsenal. The only way value on a good example will be inhanced is to have the original paperwork. Shoot it and enjoy it is what I do.

[Dave]

5Mad---lets have some serial numbers on those (sling or NRA's?) done at SA and RI. I believe whenever you see a rifle reciever in a carbine configuration it is suspect, unless you have documentation with serial number. Call it what you will but you cannot prove it.

[5MadFarmers]

5Mad---lets have some serial numbers on those (sling or NRA's?) done at SA and RI. I believe whenever you see a rifle reciever in a carbine configuration it is suspect, unless you have documentation with serial number. Call it what you will but you cannot prove it.

You misunderstand. I don't have the serial numbers - I have reports of sling swivels being added to carbines at Rock Island and Springfield Armory. As with most of those reports they don't "list serial numbers." What they do do is list quantities.

With the reports, yes I can in fact prove it. It's very hard to argue with a report from Springfield that specifically claims they added swivels to X carbines in the previous FY.

Cheers.

[steved409]

Dang, I'm glad you're back 5MF!

[Dave]

Its always amassing how people come on a forum , ask a question, and when they do not get the answer the want to hear they argue and come up with counter arguements. Reminds me of my wife!

[Nick Adams]

Its always amassing how people come on a forum , ask a question, and when they do not get the answer the want to hear they argue and come up with counter arguements. Reminds me of my wife!

If you're referring to me, I didn't give any "counter arguments."

I just asked for sources of accurate Krag information regarding the subject of this thread, and how one might refine the search further, if possible. I thought the various responses were helpful. Thanks.

[5MadFarmers]

If everybody agreed on everything it'd be pretty boring.

If everybody knew everything about this stuff it'd be pretty boring.

Everybody has their areas of interest and can learn great amounts from others with knowledge in areas they're not specializing in.

It's all good.

Biggest bolt of "oh really?" information I've had on the Krag forums is still that "1896 barrels are longer than 1892 barrels" thing Madsen brought along some time ago. I still shake my head at the ramifications of that. That's probably something I wouldn't have noticed in a million years. Which makes that 1 of 1 million tidbits I'd not have noticed.

Like Hosmer's observation that high-hump 1896 ladders are simply the using up of 1892 blanks. Strangely obvious but I'd never have noticed.

Again, it's all good.

Cheers.

[Nick Adams]

Not sure how good these are, but here's a few pics of my Krag carbine, as promised earlier (I added the sling, obviously).

A couple of profiles:



Receiver & serial # - 217394. This traces to a model 1898 rifle, w/ born-on date of July 1899.


JSA/1899 cartouche ...


Proofing imprint behind trigger guard - number "78" above it...


Weird "K 10" impressed (roughly) on top rear of the stock, near top of buttplate:


Front sight ... except for the blade's shape & height, the rest is identical to the one on my 1903 rifle.


Rear 1901 (rifle) sight. No "C" on this anywhere.


Hope these pics add some specifics to the earlier discussion on what my Krag is - or isn't: a BA/DCM, Stokes or Bannerman-built "carbine."

Again, FWIW, if you check out the gun auction link w/ the 22 pics of a carbine for sale that I posted earlier in this thread, you'll see it's virtually identical to mine. The owner of that one was also uncertain of whether it was a DCM or Bannerman build.

[Parashooter]

If you get a chance to examine an original arsenal '03 front sight, you'll see that it's really not like the one on your Krag in terms of workmanship. The arsenals normally matched the barrel finish and didn't leave deep scratches all over the band and movable base.