New to the forum and could use your help with my 1898 Springfield.  I suspect the rifle was sporterized sometime ago to a carbine, but not being an expert I am not sure:

Carbine length barrel, full length stock no upper hand guard
Rear peep sight (directly over trigger guard)
Hinged door in butt stock (for cleaning kit?)
U.S. Model 1898 Springfield Armory 126804
Muzzle about 1/2" from front sight
1" Metal band around muzzle
No swivel attachments for slings
Two holes top of barrel half way between breach and first barrel band
No magazine cutoff

It looks original to me, but I am sure it isn't.  The lack of swivel attachments on a US rifle is a giveaway to me.  The only thing is it "looks" original.  I will try and get pix posted as soon as possible.  Thanks-Eric.

You're right, it's not a blushing virgin - and - there are some apparent conflicts (not the least of which is the "full-length stock w/o swivels") which will require picture(s) to resolve. Also, look for a splice in the wood under the lower barrel band.

No splice, it definetly is a one piece full length stock.  I will work on getting the pictures.  Any other thoughts?

Well, I'd assumed a military stock, given the comment about the trap buttplate, and, there were NO (as in zero) "full-length" 1898-type stocks made without a lower sling swivel mortise. The reason I asked about the splice was on the off chance that someone had "stretched" a carbine stock. Now, I don't know what to think.

Can you explain the lack of magazine cutoff?  There is no sign of ever having one.

Maybe we're dealing with a different idea of "full-length" here. The description otherwise pretty-much matches a DCM-style conversion. Carbine stock and band (no swivels), M1905 front sight (1" band around muzzle), plus aftermarket receiver sight replacing cutoff, minus handguard and issue rear sight.

Lacking photos, my question is "How far from the muzzle is the tip of the forearm and is there a band spring (spring retainer for the barrel band) present?"

At work so I can't measure right now, but i do know the middle band is not held in place by a spring.  It is held in place by the wood being larger in size to the rear and a pin in the front.  Everything very tight and perfect fitting.

I agree that it has some similarities to known DCM alterations, but still one real conflict.

Regardless of the wood overhang - or the distance from tip to muzzle - we appear to have a "problem" - i.e., a rifle-style forend (band-retention) treatment, with (apparently, unless I read it wrong) no butt swivel mortise. That animal does not exist in nature.

No clue as to "no cutoff"; it surely had one when it left SA, unless we are talking about a lunchbox special.

Also, do not ignore the possibility of a completely hand-made stock - I've actually seen such a beast, damndest thing you ever saw. Real head-scratcher at first.

My guess on the cutoff is that the receiver sight is attached by something that replaces it. Perhaps like this one -

  (You need to Login   (You need to Login

Maybe the rear swivel mortise on a cutdown rifle stock has been filled? Maybe a custom "Mannlicher" style re-stock job with no swivels? Lacking photos, we're dancing in the dark here.

esdepew, this is an image of a carbine "altered for knife bayonet" with what collectors would call a "full-length" stock (also with swivels, handguard, issue sights, and an upper band).

  (You need to Login   (You need to Login

You guys have been a ton of help and I think we are getting close to figuring this thing out.  I believe it began life as a full size rifle and was shortened to carbine length with the original stock used to make a mannlicher stock.  I am hoping to have the pix up later tonight.   Anybody seen one like this before?  If it helps I know the long time owner came from CA.

The rear sight is a Redfield "no drill".  The magazine cutoff is not installed anymore in order to accomodate the rear mount of the sight.  I just put on the same sight on my cut-down rifle/carbine.  HUGE improvement!