gunnut wrote on Apr 17^th, 2012 at 6:41pm:

To 5MadFarmers: Could you elaborate more on your comment that it has been "arsenal refinished"?

No acceptance cartouche yet a proof one, later rear sight (which pretty much implies front side blade also swapped), and softly sanded edges on grasping grooves = "Arsenal refinish."


Quote:

I believe I read somewhere that all available Krags were returned to arsenals and refurbished and stored in 1905.

Time doesn't work that way.  Different units received rifles at different times.  Let's hit that a different way.  Let's say Springfield can make 1,000,000 guns in a month.  That's enough to re-equip everybody in all the services having a rifle right?  Except the funding for Springfield to make guns isn't the funding for the service units to "buy" them.  The USMC didn't receive funds for M-1903s until some years after the date you quote.  I'm aware of active duty army units exchanging Krags for '03s in 1907.  So we have active army, militia, USMC, and the Navy.  Via the Hosmer Act of 1903 the Militia was to receive '03s but Congress must appropriate.  An authorization act isn't funding - it clears the deck for it.


Quote:

---What type of work did they do?

Rebrown as necessary, refinish stock, rebarrel if needed, etc.  The sights were swapped.


Quote:

---The sight change is obvious. Did they change or modify the handguard to accomodate it?

New hand guard and likely front sight blade.


Quote:

---Where and when do you think the work was done?

Benicia, Manila, RIA, and SA all had the capability.  "1902+"


Quote:

---Are there any other parts or variations that are not original to its summer 1898 manufacture date?

Without the gun and a screwdriver I'd not be able to tell.  Side plate is original.  Check the bayonet band for a split on the bottom.  Other parts wouldn't really matter.


Quote:

Thanks for your help.

No prob.