Hello all. I inherited one of my grandfather's Krags about 25 years ago. My grandfather was a competitor in the National Matches from about 1901 to 1913. He was a Militia officer prior to the National Guard Act. At one time his photo was displayed on the Florida National Guard's website.

My sister has his rifle with iron sights which I suspect was the one he shot with in the National Matches. I have his carbine serial# 27696. The date on the receiver is 1895. The stock cartouche however is 1897. It appears to be a correct saddle ring stock with no evidence it was ever equipped with sling swivels. The only modification he made to it was the addition of a peep sight. It even has a brass muzzle cover which may be original to the gun. Anyone have any information on the mismatch of the receiver date and the stock cartouche?

We will need pictures! It was not listed in SRS, but it is very close to some 1ST US Vol Cavalry carbines. The stock would be suspect if it has a 1897 cartouche without a saddle ring ( or the inletting ).

I guess I wasn't clear. The stock has the saddle ring but there is no evidence of sling swivels having ever been there. I' ll shoot some pictures later today. The number is also 2 digits from a Rough Riders gun.

Hello and welcome. If I'm reading your description correct,you are stating as to it not having sling swivels which would be correct, but you don't mention the carbine swivel. Does it have the sling bar/ring on the left hand side? The Krag 1896 Carbine could be marked 1895, 1896 or Model 1896. The early stocks with the thin wrist were very easily broken. So a replacement is not uncommon at all as long as all other requirements are in place. Photos or other descriptions are needed. Congrats, John P.S. looks like you got back while I was composing.

A carbine barrel will not properly accept the (standard) Krag brass muzzle cover. By any chance has the front of the barrel - ahead of the sight base - been turned down to rifle muzzle diameter?

The muzzle does not appear to have been turned down. I need to get new batteries for my calipers so I can't give you the diameter at this time. I am waiting for my DSLR batteries to recharge so I can post some photos. Thanks for your input.

JOHN42768 wrote on Feb 17^th, 2014 at 9:35pm:

Hello and welcome. If I'm reading your description correct,you are stating as to it not having sling swivels which would be correct, but you don't mention the carbine swivel. Does it have the sling bar/ring on the left hand side? The Krag 1896 Carbine could be marked 1895, 1896 or Model 1896. The early stocks with the thin wrist were very easily broken. So a replacement is not uncommon at all as long as all other requirements are in place. Photos or other descriptions are needed. Congrats, John P.S. looks like you got back while I was composing.

The carbine swivel and ring are present. Additionally the stock appears to be tiger striped at least from the forearm to about half way up the shoulder stock. Don't know if this is a common variant. I also found there is also a second cartouche just behind the trigger guard. As soon as my batteries recharge I'll post photos.

I found some photos I'd forgotten I'd taken. More to come when the battery is charged.

---

A few early National Match pieces and photos. If you look carefully at the undated photo you will see a Krag receiver. That gun is resting on my grandfather's shoulder.

---

Neat medals and pics!  Which one is your grandfather?

Those National Match Medals and photos are awesome.  That Rifle brass muzzle cap/front sight protector must have been stretched (reformed) to fit.  The rear 'peep' sight is a 'no-drill' Pacific and fortunately caused no permanent alteration to the carbine.  You should obtain a correct cut-off just to have one.  A picture of the muzzle with the cover off, would be nice to see.  (photo of Pacific sights attached).

---

Florida Native:  Welcome to the KCA and thanks for sharing some wonderful things.  What was your Grandfather's name?  I've cropped a detail from one of your pictures.  Is he the one on the right with the shooting medal?  (I would guess the picture is 1902-07).

---

Seagirt, New Jersey, early 1900s.

---

You are correct he's the one on the right in that photo. His name is Fred G. Yerkes. I have relatively strong circumstantial evidence he may have been involved in running guns to Cuba. I was going through a box of old photos while my father was still living and discovered an albumen of the Commodore tied up at what appeared to be docks in Jacksonville. I found three more photos which turned out to be the Dauntless, the Three Friends and one of William Randolph Heart's steam yacht Vamoose. My family was in the hardware distributing business and owned large warehouses built over the St. Johns River. To thicken the plot my great grandfather was the founding partner of Yerkes & Plumb which later after he sold his portion became Fayette Plumb company. Plumb axes and hammers are still made. My great grandfather Jonathan Yerkes was a member of the same Masonic lodge in Pennsylvania where the plots to run guns to Cuba were hatched. Henry Disston another hardware manufacturer was also a member of the same lodge. Both retired and moved to Florida. Henry Disston was a known supporter of Filibustering the term used for running guns to Cuba. Who knows?   

I"m posting additional photos of my grandfather's Medals and will post a few more photos of the Krag later today. BTW the muzzle cap does not appear to have been stretched or if it was there are no stress marks on the metal.

---

More Medals.

---

That should be all of them.

---

Photos of the sights, muzzle and cap and figuring in stock.

---

'Florida Native':  Usually when I see a Krag stock with 'tiger stripe', it proves to be Italian Walnut.  The U.S. did buy some Italian blanks in 1899-1900, due to a shortage of seasoned stock wood.  This is not the case with your carbine.  The 1897 'cartouche' predates the U.S. purchase of Italian stocks.  I think the unusual 'tiger striped' American Walnut stock may explain the apparent mismatch of an 1895 dated receiver and 1897 dated stock.  "Somebody liked an attractive & unusual stock and put it on their carbine".  (My hunch).
  I see nothing altered with your carbine's muzzle.  It does appear someone substituted a much higher than usual front sight blade.
  Dick Hosmer is quite right in pointing out that the brass muzzle cap is a Rifle item and will not fit on a correct Carbine.  If it is Springfield made, someone skillfully altered it to fit.  I measured the muzzle of a Krag Carbine today and it averaged .645".  I measured two Krag Rifle muzzles and they averaged .615 to .617".  I measured the inside diameter of one of my Rifle muzzle caps and it averaged .623".  Thanks for the additional pictures and fascinating history on your ancestors!

---