1898 carbine #105621 (1898 rifle for comparison), I can't see any evidence of any original holes or filled in holes. These 2 holes are properly spaced apart so I can mount any of my Krag rear sights OK and the holes 'appear' (don't know for sure) to be tapped original M4x1mm because all the sight screws work OK too. So I can install a rear sight but obviously not a hand-guard. Both holes are shifted ~0.75" toward receiver. This piece has a 22" barrel with what appears to be correct front sight (not pictured).

---

Detail of barrel...of there were ever properly spaced holes drilled they would be ~0.75" to the left of each of these holes.

---

S/N

---

'gtbee80' - Welcome to the KCA Forum.

Your "carbine", #105621, is actually a U.S. Model 1896 Krag-Jorgensen rifle that has been shortened. It is easy to misread 1896 as 1898.

It is possible your Krag's barrel is a replacement and not an original Krag barrel. Or, it has been shortened 3/4" at the breech, re-threaded and re-chambered.

Either possibility might explain the incorrect sight hole placement.

Your barrel's taper does not appear to fit normally in the Stock's barrel-channel.

FWIW - Attached photos show correct Krag barrel breech and extractor-notch, Krag barrel proof "P", and index mark on action/barrel.

Compare your stripped Krag with my photos.

---

OK, thanks! I'll strip it down and look for all those things.

Whoever did whatever they did made sure to maintain the 22" overall barrel length as measure with the bolt closed & a cleaning rod down the muzzle. I have 2 such "carbines" (muzzles pictured, not perfectly lined up but both 22").

If there is anything to deduce from the front sight please do. The piece in question is at the top in the 2 barrel pix. The blade is aftermarket, installed by me (original was missing).

---

The lower pic's front sight mounting doesn't appear to be original.  Hard to tell what the barrel was made from, it doesn't quite appear to be Krag taper either.  You could get a blank repro handguard and cut your own sight slot, or mount a receiver sight and leave the blank handguard covering your holes.  Since you have that tall front blade, you might be able to get it on target.

I beg to differ with 'Madsenshooter'.

OP's lower Krag appears to have the correct muzzle crown and a Springfield Armory base attachment. (The top of the front-sight base does appear filed down or altered).

The upper Krag (right photo) appears to have an incorrect crown and a re-attached front-sight base. (Not S.A. work).

---

Thanks all and I think you're on to it. Attached are (not the best) pix.

1. The chamber area looks OK or the same as BR, please comment if I'm wrong or missing something.
2. I see no 'P' proof mark anywhere on the barrel...plus...I see lots of 'scars' on the barrel near the chamber as though in a vise or some sort of toothed grip...artifacts of the re-barreling (??).
3. The muzzle crown looks like another '98 Krag I have that was cut to 24.5" while my other two unaltered '96's have a more smooth & rounded muzzle crown that to my untrained eye looks genuine.
4. Agreed on the front sights observations.

Appreciate all the help!

---

'gtbee80' - It would be a good thing to have a chamber cast made on this Krag!

That does not appear to be a Krag barrel and there is an odd step machined into the rear face of the barrel.

It looks like the chamber can accept a thicker rim than the .30-40.

Since the .30-40 cartridge case head-spaces on the cartridge rim, this 'step' may introduce excessive head-space.

(Note step pointed out by 'arrow').

---

OK, thanks BR!

I took a quick look at the chamber of another one of my Krag"carbines" and a Krag rifle and the former had a similar but less pronounced artifact/annular ring/thing and the latter did not (matched your original picture). So that makes 2 of my pieces with this artifact/annular ring/thing.

I will tear the 2nd one down & post pix, may take me a day or so.

Interesting feed ramp work.  Someone's solution to the dreaded 7 0'clock nosedive, perhaps.  The toothmarks on the barrel are what my old pipevise would do, if I didn't use thick aluminum shims.

Sorry for the delay responding, had a death in the family but it was expected.

More on 105621, I don’t know the history, it was bought at a gun show (truly a “show special”, appropriately priced in hindsight) at the end of 2016 and am just now getting to it, but it does not chamber a round (bolt won’t close on a round) but bolt closes OK without a round. See pix, this round is pushed in by hand, looks like 1/32 is exposed past rim (tried several rounds, none fit in 105621 & all chamber smartly in other Krags). I swapped bolts around for completeness, same results. The rim of the round is well clear of all metal so the issue is in the chamber. At this point I’m taking BRangers suggestion of a cut-down & re-chambered barrel as gospel (originally a 30” and cut at both ends to result in 22”). The original index mark on the barrel is missing but what looks like an extension of the mark is scribed into the barrel (for use later after the original chamber was cut off & original index mark gone). So guessing this barrel needs to go, suppose best replacement option is CMP/Criterion but as always suggestions/guidance is appreciated. There are no blockages in the chamber, chamber walls are smooth & polished & “look OK”, whatever was done seems intentional yet the results are the results. Wondered if it was chambered for a different round but can’t think of one that is only slightly smaller than 30-40.

As for the receiver…there is no ‘P’ mark on the face of the receiver and the index mark on the face of the receiver is not there (but there is one on the side…see pix). If all that is supposed to be on the receiver face then I suppose some metal has been removed from the face as part of this hack to get everything to index marks to line up. Looks like the barrel should is 27/32” (see pix)…WHAT SHOULD THIS BE & IS IT “OK”? Also reflecting on MShooter’s comments of ‘feed ramp work’. Rounds do feed & eject OK, with & without magazine cut-off …so is this receiver still "OK"?

---

'gtbee80' - It does appear the front face of your Krag's receiver had a bit of metal removed.

That is probably not a problem in itself, because, that is not what controls the depth to which a Krag  barrel screws in.

Your receiver ring measurement of 27/32 inches = .84375"

FWIW - I measured the length of three different model 1898 Krag receiver rings with a vernier caliper. They ran .880", .881", and .885".

I estimate about 37/1,000" or a little over 1/32" of metal was taken off the front edge of your receiver.

The Real Problem???

My hunch is that someone removed 3/4" of the rear portion of your barrel and then failed to chamber it deeply enough for the .30-40 cartridge.

I believe a regular Krag barrel would still work on your action, because, the breech of the barrel actually stops and seats on an internal shoulder (and not the front edge of the receiver).

I discovered that the face of the receiver on US krags isn't square when I rebarrelled one with a larger diameter barrel that had a flange.  Receiver should still be ok, looks like most material came off the edge of the barrel.  I'd rent a 30-40 reamer and make use of it before rebarreling, if it has good rifling.  It's weird that a 30-40 doesn't fit, why modify the edge of the barrel if what you're trying to feed doesn't fit the chamber?  Maybe you have something in the chamber, a bit of old caseneck or something like that.

Thanks everyone for all the help.

I think I have this up to ‘shooter’ status, and will try it this weekend. Found an ‘affordable’ re-conditioned carbine barrel on e-bay (always an adventure…rear sight dimensions & front sight looked good, registration mark was intact, barrel crown looked OK, etc.) and as it turns out we have a local North Georgia gunsmith who works on service rifles. He knew his way around Krags, has Krag G/NG gauges and swapped the barrel the same day for $50. The end result is the barrel seated properly, rounds chamber & eject nicely, will see how it shoots.

Mr. Moss has an excellent reputation and is one of the few true smiths around here with all the right equipment & training for work like this, and he’s a young fellow.

  (You need to Login

---

Boy! You can't beat that kind of deal with a stick. Makes me wish I were in GA! Hope it shoots well for you.

gtbee80 wrote on Jun 7^th, 2017 at 8:15pm:

Thanks everyone for all the help. I think I have this up to ‘shooter’ status, and will try it this weekend. Found an ‘affordable’ re-conditioned carbine barrel on e-bay (always an adventure…rear sight dimensions & front sight looked good, registration mark was intact, barrel crown looked OK, etc.) and as it turns out we have a local North Georgia gunsmith who works on service rifles. He knew his way around Krags, has Krag G/NG gauges and swapped the barrel the same day for $50. The end result is the barrel seated properly, rounds chamber & eject nicely, will see how it shoots. Mr. Moss has an excellent reputation and is one of the few true smiths around here with all the right equipment & training for work like this, and he’s a young fellow.   (You need to Login

I have to ask, do Krag barrels interchange fairly often without having to do all the relocating of sights and extractor cuts? In the past I thought they were interchangeable or mostly so. gtbee80's experience makes me think this happens regularly.  If the armory went through some rather extreme pains on clocking the barrel threads they could have made the barrels mostly interchangeable.
The other possibility is gtbee80 just got lucky as it would have cost a lot more than $50.00 to recut the extractor move the sights around the barrel and resetting the head space.

IMHO & based on a limited number of samples - The Krag barrel-threads, location of extractor cut, rear sight holes, front sight base mounting, and 'Index Mark' were all very precisely 'Timed'.

I believe all the manufacturing work, proofing, and 'browning' was completed on a Krag barrel, before, it was screwed onto a Krag receiver, (stopping, when the index mark that was located on the front edge of the receiver, matched the index mark on the barrel).

This would be very Labor Intensive and not how a manufacturer would likely do it nowadays, but, a high degree of interchangeability was achieved.

---