Just showing her off!!

---

Looks good!

Nice complete looking set-up.

Thanks..just acquired a blue cartridge belt and action cover.  Very nice shooter too.  Fun to reload for..  Now, if I could only see that rear sight notch.....

---

i'll trade you! i can see the rear notch, just not the front blade.  nice looking rig you have there.

Anxiously awaiting a Redfield peep from Numrich that's supposed to fit in the cutoff...hope it works.

Very pretty!!!   I need to find a correct sling for my 1898 Rifle...   Very jealous here!   ;)

Thanks,  my sling isn't original :-[, but I did see one on one of Gunboard's Forums.  Good luck!

s&s has the repro slings. i'd love to have an original but the price scares me.

Well...got the Redfield 'Krag" peep sight from Numrich today and it ain't even close .... Back to the drawing board.

173rdAbn:  Does your Redfield sight look anything like the attached picture?  Chuck

---

No sir, not at all.  I tried to look it up for a reference, but couldn't find it.  It has no adjustment knobs, only screws.  No provision for attaching other than d/t, and that ain't gonna happen.

173rdAbn:  I would send the drill and tap sight back to Numrich for a refund if not as advertised.  Check eBay (krag) and gunbroker (krag);  'no drill' Redfield and Pacific sights show up often.  Both require that the cutoff lever be removed.  The Pacific seems to require that the stock be notched to lower the slide to its lowest positions.  I have seen pictures of a Pacific sight re-assembled with the peep underneath the horizontal part of the slide.  This may eliminate the need to remove any wood.  (I think the peep disk had a 'flat' filed on it to clear the bolt).  The Redfield 'no drill' sights cause a roughness in the cartridge feed, since they do not fill the hole occupied by the cut-off shaft.  Later Redfield instructions recommended inserting a cut-off shaft with the lever sawn off.  A piece of plastic, nylon, brass or steel rod, shaped like an original cut-off shaft, should work just as well.  The "non-micrometer" versions of the Pacific and Redfield sights allow easier bolt removal.  The 'lock screw' can be loosened and the slide quickly raised to clear the bolt for removal.  There is a vertical set-screw that allows an easy return to the sighted-in position.  The micrometer versions of both makes require alot of turns of the Vertical Knob to free the slide from the base, for bolt removal.  Chuck

Thanks for the information..I'll keep it for reference when I end up with the right one. 
John Butler

Concur with what the previous poster stated. I watched Gunbroker for about 6 months before a Redfield finally showed up. They really are NICE sights. Mine is the target sight. My only complaint is that you have to dismount the sight every time to remove the bolt. I've heard before that Redfield bought out the Pacific sight company and then started selling their version of the Pacific - hence the sights are very similar.

kragluver:  Yes, the downside of the micrometer versions of both the Redfield (#70K) and the Pacific (K2) sights is that there is no quick release to remove the slide from its base.  It is very tedious to rotate the vertical adjustment knob until its threads are fully clear of the base or the slide is at least high enough to remove the rifle bolt.  By the way, the Redfield and Pacific sights are entirely different. The "Western  Gunsight Company" was started by Redfield in 1909.  In the late 1920's Redfield renamed his company due to objections from the Western Cartridge Company.  Western and Redfield sights are identical.  This is probably what you were thinking about;  not a company purchase but a name change.

Good Grief!....OK, so which would be the preferred sight..Redfield or Pacific?  Or is there a preferred one?  Seems no matter which one is chosen, the most problematic area is bolt removal.  Frankly, bolt removal for me is about once per year, if that.  The Pacific looks infinity simpler for adjustment, but consider installation, removal (if ever), and stamina, who's the winner?? 

There are two versions of the Pacific sight—a target model and a hunting model. Neither require any wood removal, only the removal of the cut-off. The target version is a little bulkier and is adjusted via knobs. The hunting version has the exact same "frame" but is adjusted to zero via screws. The hunting sight is thus just a stripped-down model.

I've a Pacific rear sight on a 24" barreled Krag with a 1905 type front sight as used on a 1903 Springfield. It's about the same height as most Krag front sights so it seems that inverting the peep would be an unusual modification. Maybe the guy that did that modification is the same fellow that keeps reinstalling original barrel mounted Krag rear sights backwards.

For that sight try leeshop@starband.net. He has such stuff. He is mostly a Winchester guy, but has much good stuff.

I like the Pacific K1 sight.  It is compact and light.  When you remove the 'coin-slotted' side lock screw, the slide can be pulled off the base (to clear the way for bolt removal).  The slide is easily returned to its sighted in position.  The elevation set-screw shaft is smooth and not threaded into the sight base.  The K2 target version is a hassle to remove from its base, since it threads into the base.  Both Pacific sights, (as manufactured), require notching the stock to have a full range of adjustment.  I would not use these sights on an unspoiled Krag stock.  The way the Pacific sights fill the magazine cut-off opening is a definite plus.

---

A sporterized 1899 carbine with Pacific K1 sight.  Note the notch cut into the stock.

---

Same 1899 Krag put on "un-notched" stock.  Note the Pacific K1 base touches the wood and the slide can not be fully lowered.

---

My favorite "no-drill" Krag peep sight is the Redfield 102-K.  It requires no removal of wood.  Loosening the coin-slotted side lock screw, allows the slide to be pulled up enough to allow bolt removal for cleaning.  The elevation set screw allows slide to be returned to sighted in position (if the set screw was utilized properly).  The Redfields do require a cut-off shaped shaft to fill the magazine cut-off hole for smooth magazine feeding.  The Redfield 70K micrometer versions look nice, but it is probably quicker to remove the sight from the action, than the slide from its base.

---

Redfield 70-K with 'hunter knobs'.

---

Well, looks like a Redfield is going to top her.  VERY spendy, but I guess they ain't gonna get any cheaper.

Found out she's a "duffle cut" - had a separation at the range last weekend. 

Now what?? :-/

173rdAbn:  By 'separation', I am assuming your forestock separated from the rest of the stock at the barrel band, due to a hidden cut.  I would try using a short length of 1/4 inch threaded rod (cut off from a steel or brass machine screw or bolt).  I would drill holes, that line up, into the ends of the separated forearm and main stock.  Once I was sure everything lines up and can slide back together, I would put epoxy glue on the threaded rod and mating wood surfaces, and slide everything back together.  I would take the precaution of putting a film of vaseline on the barrel where it might contact the glue joint.  I would use some masking or duct tape as a temporary "barrel band", while the epoxy is setting.  Once the epoxy has hardened, clean off the vaseline, tape, and excess epoxy.  Put everything back together and you should be good to go.

Duct tape will remove finish!!!  Don't ask how I know.

Wow!  Good to know Dick.  I guess masking tape would be "Ok" or some wraps of shoe-lace or waxed string.  I just would hate for someone to permanently glue their barrel band to the stock while the epoxy was setting-up.  Chuck

YO Dick,
OK I'm gonna ask....How DO you know. ;D

Well, I was doing some photography for my first book and had to substitute a similar but incorrect cleaning rod for the picture. To make matters worse, the rod was an inch too long, so it couldn't actually be in the groove. I taped it (out of camera view, and thoroughly) so it wouldn't move, and lined up the shot, very carefully. All went well - you cannot tell the rod is not in place - until I went to remove the tape.
Oops!!  I've smeared all manner of "stuff" on the raw "bands" and while the color is almost right, the gloss level isn't, yet. I'm still working on it.

Good man Dick...I would have gone to my grave with that.  From now on I'm using the blue painters tape.  Or a mixture of clamps and vaseline...either way a gamble at best.  thanks for the story.!!