My 1898 Krag - Is It A True Carbine?

[David Wile]

Hey Badger,

Yes sir. That is the only mark I thought might possible be a "C". As I started writing this response, I went and got my bigger magnifying head set and a brighter light. I think I can now say that the tiny little mark does look like a "C" even if it is very tiny as you circled on the picture. Is this the "C" to which Kragluver refers? If it is, would that not be more of an indication that the barreled action was originally made by Springfield Armory as a carbine? You know, I never would have noticed that mark, let alone guess that it was a "C", if it had not been mentioned by folks on this forum. Thanks to all.

Best wishes,
Dave Wile

[kragluver]

Yes, that's the mark I was talking about. I think its very possible you have an 1898 Carbine (again, only 5001 were made) although the s/n is not in the range of published Model 1898 carbine s/ns. I encourage you to post your pictures over on the Jouster Krag board. There are a couple of Krag experts over there who are very knowledgeable. You're right, Krag research does seem like genealogy. 5MF over at the jouster Krag forum strikes me as just one of those researchers

Oh yes, and the "12" is most likely a rack number.

[Badger]

. I encourage you to post your pictures over on the Jouster Krag board. There are a couple of Krag experts over there who are very knowledgeable.

Hi Dave/kragluver ...

Dave .. kragluver has a good idea, unfortunately since we've been informed that we're not welcome on the Culver's new site, I can't go over there and re-post these pics for you, as I did here.

However, perhaps kragluver can either do that and you can move over there to carry on ....... or for the sake of brevity and simplicity of the process, maybe he can "privately" send this link to those "experts" and request they have a look at this thread, to see if they can answer you here.

Regardless, I hope this thread has helped you gain new insight into your Krag ...

Thanks for sending the pics for us to look at ...

Regards,
Badger

[kragluver]

Done.

This is an interesting Krag. I'd love to know the "rest of the story" behind this rifle. It might have been put together from parts for state use, but it sure looks like a genuine carbine to me - just the S/N is out of range for the "accepted" range of Model 1898 carbines. Sure is pretty.

I was just over looking at the KCA website pics for both 1898 carbines and 1899 carbines. The 1898 carbine stock still had the saddle ring. The 1899 did not. I wonder if yours was re-stocked into an 1899 carbine stock at some point in its life.

[Badger]

This is an interesting Krag. I'd love to know the "rest of the story" behind this rifle. It might have been put together from parts for state use, but it sure looks like a genuine carbine to me - just the S/N is out of range for the "accepted" range of Model 1898 carbines. Sure is pretty.

I agree ...

Thanks for helping out ...

Regards,
Doug (Badger)

[kragluver]

Two more things to check. I didn't point them out at first since your stock seems to be a carbine stock with the band spring and all.

First, with the bolt closed, slide a dowel or cleaning rod down from the muzzle. Mark the rod at the end of the barrel. Measure from the mark to the end of the rod - a carbine barrel should measure exactly 22" from the bolt face. Second, look at the end of the forearm on your rifle. Make sure that there is no evidence of a filler piece in the end. If there is, then the stock was cut down from a rifle stock and the filler piece inserted to fill in the lightening channel. Again, I don't expect you'll find that filler piece as I think your stock is a carbine stock.

[David Wile]

Hey Badger and Kragluver,

I just stuck the flat end of a cleaning rod down the muzzle, opened the bolt a bit to make sure the rod was resting on the bolt face, closed the bolt, and then I used a fine tip felt pen to mark the cleaning rod at the point where it met the inside of the muzzle crown. I used a steel tape to measure the length, and it was less than 1/16 of an inch more than 22 inches. Considering my fine tip pen width, I would say that barrel is as close to 22 inches as one can measure. I also closely examined the end of the forestock, and I can assure you that the stock is all one piece with no filled in section at all. I have made a few stocks in my time, so I think I can say this with certainty.

Kragluver, you mention the serial number is out of range for the 1898 carbine which should have a saddle ring. Let me point out again that the serial number of my "Model 1898" Krag was supposed to be issued toward the end of the Model 1899 fiscal year, and it does have an 1899 stock cartouche. With this in mind, could this Krag really be an 1899 carbine that was produced with a Model 1898 carbine barreled action and an 1899 carbine stock that would not have the saddle ring? If this rifle with this serial number was made near the end of the 1899 fiscal year, it seems that it would make sense that it would have the 1899 stock that it does. I am pretty sure you can read the serial number in my picture, and I don't think I made a mistake on it.

From what you said about the sling swivels, they may have been part of the original issue or they may have been added later. If they were added later, someone did a might fine job of inleting the swivels.

When I bought this Krag about 40 years ago, there were perhaps a dozen or so of them available to make my choice. They were all carbines that had been used by the Pennsylvania State Police mounted unit in Harrisburg, PA. After reading what I have on this forum about how a carbine may or may not be a true carbine, I cannot now say the State Police rifles were all true carbines. I assumed they were all true carbines at the time. They all looked alike to me. I would guess they were different year models, some with saddle rings, others without, but they all looked like similar carbines at the time. I checked each one for action function and condition of the bores, but in the end, they all seemed to be in very good condition. I picked the one that had the nicest looking stock and condition of the metal. I have no way of knowing, but I doubt they were all put together from parts. I would suspect the US Army was getting rid of a bunch of carbines and offered them as a package to the State Police for their mounted units. The State Police may have had them for 40 or 50 years before they got rid of them.

This has been and continues to be a fascinating learning experience. I have a 1949 Long Branch No 4 Mk 1* .303 Brit rifle that is in very good condition, but I have never learned much about it. I did post its serial number on the "Long Branch Serial Number" thread for the general information that was requested, but I think I might find it interesting to learn more about it as I have been doing with my Krag.

Thanks to you all.

Best wishes,
Dave Wile

[andiarisaka]

The 1898 and 1902 carbine rear sights have a lower ramp than the rifle models. Comes in handy for picking them out at a distance, or amongst a pile of other things. You can see the difference between the height of the ramp and the top of the elevation leaf.

[kragluver]

A Model 1899 carbine would have been stamped "Model 1899". They are easy to pick out because of that.

The troublesome thing is that both Model 1898 rifles and Model 1898 carbines were simply stamped "Model 1898". The stock cartouche had nothing to do with the model number. Based on your serial number, an 1899 cartouche sounds correct. My rifle is 221225 (right behind yours) and it has an 1899 cartouche.

The sling swivels, if done by the US military, would have been added after manufacture - perhaps sometime around 1903 or after but who knows? They may have also been added by a gunsmith at a much later time (albeit, not bubba).

The barrel and front sight on my cut-down rifle also look VERY well done (as does yours) - so much so that I asked on a forum such as this one if they might have been done by an armory. Nope - just by a very skilled smith. My dad told me that my grandfather did the sporterizing work on my Krag, but I suspect he only did the stock. I never knew him to do metal work, but he was a very skilled woodworker and he made stocks.

I've referred your rifle to 5MF. It will be interesting to see what he says. He and Dick Hosmer (among others) know a lot more about Krag carbines than I do.

[kragluver]

In a discussion about your rifle over on Gunboards, I learned that the Model 1898 carbine sights were graduated to 2000 yards and not 2300 as I had asserted in an earlier post. Therefore, your rear sight does appear to be a carbine sight. "Krag" over on gunboards thought your rifle looked like a correct 1898 carbine from what he could tell.