Dick Hosmer wrote on Jul 29^th, 2012 at 3:31am:

(1) Please define "unaltered". Don't hang too much on the stock, since we know that most existing examples are reassemblies.

"As made."  Dick, 1898 carbines aren't terribly different from early 1873 carbines in this respect.  Can you (and I know for a fact you can) look at an 1873 carbine and detect the following three:
1)  As made
2)  Restored with generally correct parts
3)  Assembled from incorrect parts

The 1898 carbine are the same in that regard.  Except the correct parts are less well known so it makes the determination of #1 even easier as #2 isn't done as well on these.

(Queue arrogant assertion) Of the people knowing the right parts, I'm probably in the best shape to forge an 1898c.  Independent of that I'm comfortable I could identify a forgery I made.  That being the case....


Quote:

(2) How in hell do you establish "bookends" for 1898 Carbines? Much as I hate to say it, SRS (or another contemporary source - hopefully you have found some) is all there is, beyond personal examination of a given barreled action in a "believable" area - which is still a crap-shoot.

"Dogs."  Nobody goes to the junkyard and starts putting correct parts on the cars there.  Similarly nobody spends lots of time and effort on the dogs - it'd cost too much for the gain.  So study the dogs.  The 1898 carbines in 1899 format are more interesting than those in 1898c format as they're more honest. 


Quote:

I'm also on my "Olympic break" (yes, I'm a junkie) so will be keeping a low profile for a couple of weeks.

Enjoy the entertainment.