My 1898 Krag - Is It A True Carbine?

[daveM96]

I believe Mallory stated in his book that approximately 375 or so, 1899 carbines were sent to Ft Riley, KS for sling swivel attachment.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[daveM96]

Correction to my previous (and first) post...
Mallory's book (pg 92) states that 372 1899 carbines were modified at Ft Leavenworth, not Ft Riley. The modification was made on engineers carbines and included installation of a butt stock swivel as well as replacement of the carbine front band with a rifle lower band with sling swivel. This is depicted nicely in Fig D-6 in Poyers book (Appendix D). In addition, a special sling was developed for these carbines.

David

[David Wile]

Hey folks,

In response to Andiarisaka, I have carefully looked at the photos on the Krag Collectors Asssociation site, and I am pretty certain the rear sight on my Krag matches the 1902 rear sight shown there. The 1898 and the 1902 are similar, and somehow the 1901 sight is completely different, but my rear sight matches the 1902 rear sight pictured there. The 1898 sight has the "C" marks on it, and the elevation knob has a flat side on it. The 1902 looks much like the 1898, but has no "C" marks, and the the elevation knob has a straight screwdriver type slot on its side. My sight matches the 1902 sight shown.

To Kragluver: again I point out my receiver is clearly marked Model 1898 with a serial number of 216299 while yours is 221225. According to the serial number information given for Springfield Armory, my Model 1898 was one of 103,778 rifles made during Fiscal Year 1899 year which was between 1 July 1898 and 30 June 1899. My serial number falls within the last 3,000 or so of the 103,778 made in Fiscal Year 1899, so it would seem likely that it was made sometime in May or June of 1899. Your Krag with serial number 221225 was made during Fiscal Year 1900 when 70,652 Krags were made, and it would fall in the first 2,000 rifles made in the 1900 Fiscal Year. Like you said, our numbers are only a few thousand rifles apart, but mine would have been made in Fiscal Year 1899, and yours in Fiscal Year 1900. Both rifles have stocks with the 1899 cartouche, but from what you have said, yours was an 1899 rifle stock, and mine is obviously an 1899 carbine stock. Since both rifles were probably made just months apart in the summer of 1899, it seems quite natural that stocks with 1899 cartouches would have been put on both rifles even though one was marked Model 1898 and the other was marked Model 1899.

In a later post you mentioned that someone named "Krag" over on gunboards thought my Krag looked like a correct 1898 carbine. Can you tell me what "gunboards" is? I have checked with the Culvers and the Krag Collectors forums, but I do not know what "gunboards" is. You are also correct about my rear sight being graduated to 2000 rather than 2300 yards. That is also what the 1898 and the 1902 rear sights show on the Krag Collectors pictures I mentioned above.

Thanks to Dave for the information on the installation of sling swivels. I am not sure where my rifle would fit in with this, however. Both of my swivels are inleted into the wood of the stock, about two inches in front of the butt plate and about one and a quarter inches behind the barrel band. That does not seem to be in keeping with Dave's information about a sling swivel on the rifle band.

Trying to figure this out is rather difficult. I know for sure my receiver is marked with Model 1898 US Springfield Armory and the serial number 216299, and that serial number indicates the receiver was likely made in May or June of 1899.

The barrel clearly looks like a carbine barrel with the correct front sight and length. The rear sight, however, appears to be a 1902 carbine sight.

The stock is obviously an 1899 carbine stock - it is not a shortened rifle stock. The barrel band is also correct for the carbine stock. It is held in place with the spring holder rather than being pinned. The upper handguard also is correct for the carbine and for a carbine rear sight.

I have no satisfactory explanation for the sling swivels except to note they were expertly inletted into the stock.

It was suggested this was a Model 1898 rifle that had the carbine parts added to it. If that is the case, then someone replaced the original rifle barrel with a carbine barrel, replaced the original stock with a carbine stock, but then put a 1902 carbine rear sight on it rather than an 1898 carbine rear sight. This seems rather strange especially when it along with a dozen or so others were in the care, custody, control, and use of the Pennsylvania State Police for many years. If anyone changed this Krag from an original rifle to a carbine, I would think it was done by US Armory personnel. This rifle is in very good condition as a carbine, and it has been in this same condition long before anyone had any financial reason to convert a rifle to a carbine for collector value. Also, if someone wanted to fake this Krag from a rifle to a carbine, why not also put an 1898 sight instead of a 1902 rear sight on it?

To me, if this Krag was converted from a rifle, it surely was most likely done by an armory. I would still appreciate any further information anyone can add to shed light on this rifle.

Best wishes,
Dave Wile