Benicia Arsenal/DCM Krag Carbines ...

[kragluver]

Glad to see you posting again 5MF. I always enjoyed the banter and discussion with you and Dick Hosmer on the old forum.

[kragluver]

I just looked in Mallory. In addition to the information already posted here taken from the Brophy book, Mallory states:

"The Benicia records that have been found list 11,245 rifles converted between fiscal years 1925 and 1930."

I believe the information 5MF has uncovered in the past couple years is beyond what you will find published in any of the published Krag books.

[sdkrag]

5MF- it is good to hear from you.

[Nick Adams]

"The Benicia records that have been found list 11,245 rifles converted between fiscal years 1925 and 1930."

So, in other words, there are/were BA records kept of 11,000+ 1898 rifles converted to "carbines" during a 5 year period and these records ...

... still exist?

... contain(ed) serial #s of those rifles that government armors converted?

Based on this and 5MF's earlier post, it seems there may be (or at one time may have been) a "paper trail" to relevant information that Brophy didn't have, couldn't access, ignored or missed.

"I believe the information 5MF has uncovered in the past couple years is beyond what you will find published in any of the published Krag books.

Probably. Thanks also to 5MF for his reply. Maybe he can tell me what kind of rear sight I have on my 22" barrelled Krag faux-carbine that makes it pretty accurate at 100yds (thus far, on 2 brief range outings)?

Thanks to all who took the time to reply. Just looking to learn what I can ...

[andiarisaka]

Doesn't seem likely that 20-30 years after the Krag was replaced that there would be 11,000 + carbine stocks in the supply system, or that they would tool up to make more just for this project. Thus, modified rifle stocks.

[Nick Adams]

Doesn't seem likely that 20-30 years after the Krag was replaced that there would be 11,000 + carbine stocks in the supply system, or that they would tool up to make more just for this project. Thus, modified rifle stocks.

Actually, I think the Arsenal "conversions" (Benicia or others) ran out of genuine 1899 carbine stocks well ahead of the NRA/DCM demand for such carbines.

Then what are they going to do? Tell NRA members: "Ooops, sorry, no more carbines for you guys. We're plum out of 1899 carbine stocks. Go see Bannerman." ?

No, of course not.

The "gommit" wants the private sector cash, plus it's well known they wanted to sell off no-longer-used Krags (1903s being ubiquitous at this point) in order to generate said cash, so they follow the DCM's directive, during its cozy relationship with the NRA (circa 1925-1940), and they start grabbing for rifle stocks to cut-down to carbine size (and expertly done too). That explains the crosspin in the front band of mine and the one that's identical at the gunbroker link I posted earlier.

There's clearly more to at least some of these modified "Arsenal" Krags in general - and the Benicia story in particular - than what's in Brophy's book.

[Parashooter]

Beware of assuming there weren't many carbine stocks lying around. When the "long" 1899 carbine stock was adopted, there were some 25,000 earlier carbines on hand, all of which were slated to get new stocks and sights. This would, of course, have required making about 25,000 extra 1899-style carbine stocks. As collectors know, many of the earlier carbines survived with their original short stocks - probably because the adoption of the M1903 made it relatively pointless to continue spending time and money updating obsolete carbines. This may well have left a very substantial pile of carbine stocks in storage.

As for government avarice - you might want to consider the price for normal rifles fell in 1926 (from $6.00) to $1.50 and those cut off to carbine length were $3.50, including a new '03 front sight assembly and a new carbine stock. This was significantly below either original cost or contemporary commercial surplus prices.

[Nick Adams]

Beware of assuming there weren't many carbine stocks lying around. When the "long" 1899 carbine stock was adopted, there were some 25,000 earlier carbines on hand, all of which were slated to get new stocks and sights. This would, of course, have required making about 25,000 extra 1899-style carbine stocks. As collectors know, many of the earlier carbines survived with their original short stocks - probably because the adoption of the M1903 made it relatively pointless to continue spending time and money updating obsolete carbines. This may well have left a very substantial pile of carbine stocks in storage.

As for government avarice - you might want to consider the price for normal rifles fell in 1926 (from $6.00) to $1.50 and those cut off to carbine length were $3.50, including a new '03 front sight assembly and a new carbine stock. This was significantly below either original cost or contemporary commercial surplus prices.

Okay, ... source for this ...?

[5MadFarmers]

Probably. Thanks also to 5MF for his reply. Maybe he can tell me what kind of rear sight I have on my 22" barrelled Krag faux-carbine that makes it pretty accurate at 100yds (thus far, on 2 brief range outings)?

Again, the rifles have a 30" barrel and the carbines have a 22" barrel. Given the different lengths, the muzzle velocity is different. Hence the rear sights are calibrated differently. That the carbines and rifles have different sights, and that they're calibrated differently, is well known. I have examples of almost all of them.

They weren't calibrating the guns for 100 yards though. I mentioned in the previous post that they had an exaggerated focus on marksmanship right? Reference the entire trapdoor/sandy hook tests....

Don't discount their ability to make stocks after the fact. Given the form and the Blanchard lathe it wouldn't be that hard. I'm not saying they made them that late - I am saying don't discount their ability to do so.

Fiscal year ending 1902. Note the "Spare parts" section for Springfield's report. 9,504 carbine sights. 17,955 hand guards for carbines also. Were those handguards and sights used in the modification of the 8,786 carbines that received new sights that year? Who knows. Probably. Still leaves over 8K spare carbine handguards....

(Side point, another nail for the "mine's original" holdouts. 8,786 carbines received new rear sights at SA that year. Those aren't the 20,000 they made that year either....)

The point is they had spare parts. Lots of them. They also had the ability to make them.

The following year (FY03) they list (again, spare parts):
4,126 carbine stocks
4,579 carbine sights
11,395 carbine handguards.

They were swimming in parts.

I stand by the assertion that I strongly doubt a Krag with a 22" barrel and a rifle rear sight would leave a government arsenal at that time. It goes against everything I've encountered in my studies of the time.

====

Side note: I don't have Benecia's records. Nor do I have access to them. I also don't really want access to them at this time. I don't just study Krags. I'm pretty buried in material and I need to process it before I make another run at Krags.

I'm not going to dig at the present time but I do have the inventory for Krags in inventory during WW1. They were almost out of carbines.

====

Other sidenote. Using my ThreadJacker 2000(c) I'll mention that I found the thread response from Chuck on cartouche dates (CY vs FY) to be very informative and persuasive.

Cheers.

[Parashooter]

Okay, ... source for this ...?

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.