Quote Originally Posted by gew98 View Post
Thanks for the input guys. I shared the data with my friend and convinced him it's a keeper.So now he want's to find a right proper 1896 model rear sight assembly. Anone have one do tell !. I know he'd swap and add $$ with his rear sight for it. Oh and some fellas wondered about the serial...it's three digit.
There is no such thing as a 3 digit 1896.

1892/1896. An 1892 altered to 1896 format. Those exist of course.

Can't just swap the rear sight if it's a model later than the 1896 - the handguard matches the sight base and the 1898/1901/1902 have a different size base. He'd have to swap handguard and sight.

Pictures? Serial? Depending on the serial I'm going to ask for some specific pictures.....

---------- Post added at 11:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:17 PM ----------
Quote Originally Posted by jon_norstog View Post
G98,

the whole issue of "correct" sights, wood, etc. has been batted around on this list and the Culvericon site The consenus seems to be, "if it came from the Arsenal, it's correct." Most Krags got modified in-service.
JN
That is completely correct. It's even worse than that - they played musical chairs with rear sights on guns before they were even issued. Wander through storage pulling and installing different ones. Large numbers of rifles were finished without sights and had them added later.

On the 1898 rifles, the later ones, the only one who knows what the "original" sight is would be Cleo. Assuming she still has her crystal ball.