I just picked up my first Krag.  It seems to have been partially bubba'd and I'd like to restore it so original without breaking the bank. 

From what I can tell it's a 1900 (serial number 2816xx, cartouche is 1900, and it's a 22 inch barrel).  The front sight appears to be original to me (no band at least).  The rear sight has been replaced, there is no upper handguard.  The swivels have been replaced (no idea why), and there's part of a peep sight attached where the mag cutoff used to be. 

What I don't get is that it must have started life as a carbine being a model 1899, - 1900.  The 1900 cartouche is there, but I can't understand why the front of the stock at the barrel band doesn't seem correct.  The band has been pinned rather than the spring.  It also looks like it may have had the old cleaning rod channel that's been filled.  But I didn't think in 1900 they were still making those.  Can someone help figure this out? 

I know I want to change the rear site - so I need to know which is the correct one.  I'd also like to get the correct handguard.  (might go with a repro if I can't find a decent priced orig).   I also want to replace the peep site with the correct mag cutoff, and replace the swivels with the correct ones.   

Thanks!

---

More pictures

---

Even more pics

---

'Ora Serrata' - Welcome to the KCA Forum.

Your Krag has experienced a life as a civilian 'hunting rifle' and is a bit of a 'mixmaster'. (It is a combination of model 1899 carbine metal, put into a 'cut-down' model 1898 rifle stock, and with an altered model 1892 bolt-sleeve/safety for good measure).

Your model 1899 barreled-receiver, #281611, was originally part of a carbine built around September, 1900.

An odd vertical 'dovetail' has been machined on the right-side of your receiver for some unknown commercial 'peep-sight'.

Your barrel-band is a model 1899 carbine band. It is on backwards. The side stamped with a sideways "U" should be on the right-side of your Krag. (Carbine bands are retained by a flat spring inletted into the right-side of the forearm tip). Rifle bands 'clamp' with a sling-swivel screw and a cross-pin prevents forward movement.

Your bolt-sleeve with the 'ridges' is a model 1892 Krag part, that appears to have been altered for some type of 'peep' sight.

Your front-sight base is model 1899 carbine, but, the sight blade and pin are 'home-made'.

The 'no-drill' commercial sight-base that clamps in the magazine Cut-Off opening is for a Redfield 102K sight. It is a nice sight if you can find a top part.

Your barrel likely still has both of the original Krag rear-sight holes. An original Krag rear-sight base would probably hide the 'dovetail' that was added for the Marble's barrel sight.

It is a coincidence that your 'cut-down' rifle stock has a '1900 cartouche'. The 'plug' in the forearm fills a 'lightening channel' that was exposed, when the stock was shortened.

IMHO - Your Krag is a poor candidate for restoration, but, it should be fun to use pretty much as is.

The cut-off lever it uses is the 'short' one. They can be found for around $15. You will need a shorter original side-plate screw, if you take the Redfield base off.

(p.s. - I'd be happy to trade you a cut-off lever and side-plate screw for your Redfield parts).

---

'Ora Serrata' - Attached are pictures showing a complete Redfield 102-k sight, a photo showing the appearance of model 1898 & 1899 receiver and bolt-sleeve, and a photo showing Krag Magazine 'Cut-Off Levers. (You need the short bottom one).

---

Here's yet another great response - thoughtful, detailed, accurate - to a difficult inquiry. I hope everyone here appreciates the time, effort, and knowledge butlersrangers repeatedly puts into such replies.

Thank you Parashooter for the very kind words.

On further view of 'Ora Serratas' pictures, an area of the left receiver wall, (above the serial number), has been lowered and angled downward.

The Extractor has also been altered, by removing the 'hold open pin' and its 'hump'.

I doubt if the alterations to the receiver compromise its strength, but, they sure negate Restoration.

---

Wow!   Thank you so much for the fast and incredibly thoughtful and detailed response.  I really appreciate it!   

Since it's too far gone to restore I may look into completing the peep site again.   Not sure what direction I'll take with it but looking forward to shooting it for sure. 

If I decide to get the correct rear ladder site for it which variation is correct for the 1900 carbine?

Parashooter wrote on Jan 4^th, 2018 at 6:34am:

Here's yet another great response - thoughtful, detailed, accurate - to a difficult inquiry. I hope everyone here appreciates the time, effort, and knowledge butlersrangers repeatedly puts into such replies.

Absolutely and always!
Vic

Ora,

You've got an interesting rifle there.  While some purists look upon any altered rifle with disdain, I always wonder where and what the rifle saw in its travels from factory to finally ending up in our hands.  Each alteration was done for a reason, and while some may be better done than others, they are its history.  Personally, I would rather have ten "Shooters" rather than one "Safe Queen" to play with, but that is just me,,,,,.  Enjoy it for what it is,

butlersrangers,

As always, you do yourself and this forum the highest compliment.  Skol!

Thank you Hamish! 

Yes, I'm pretty much into shooting everything in my collection and have no problem with mixmasters as long as they're fun.  My first C&R was a sporterized Arisaka that I'm still fond of even though it's collector value is pretty low.  I mainly wanted to ad a Krag to the collection and I had been eyeing this one at a LGS for a while hoping I'd found a diamond in the rough.  Happy I added it to the collection and I certainly knew enough to talk them down to half of the inflated price they were asking for it.   




Hamish wrote on Jan 4^th, 2018 at 3:27pm:

Ora, You've got an interesting rifle there.  While some purists look upon any altered rifle with disdain, I always wonder where and what the rifle saw in its travels from factory to finally ending up in our hands.  Each alteration was done for a reason, and while some may be better done than others, they are its history.  Personally, I would rather have ten "Shooters" rather than one "Safe Queen" to play with, but that is just me,,,,,.  Enjoy it for what it is, butlersrangers, As always, you do yourself and this forum the highest compliment.  Skol!

'Ora' - You asked which Krag rear-sight would have originally been on your model 1899 carbine?

It is likely your carbine, #281611, was made late enough that it 'escaped' being issued with the 'three notch' model 1898 sight (carbine version).

Initially, it may have been issued with a model 1896 carbine sight. If so, later this was likely replaced with a model 1901 or model 1902 carbine sight. Rear sight updates are an amusing chapter in the U.S. Krag Story.

Be forewarned. 'Loose' Krag carbine sights are hard to find and routinely bring prices ranging from $200 to $600.

For your purposes, (on a 'shooter'), the much cheaper rifle versions of the model 1896, 1901, or 1902 sight will work. The 1901 and 1902 sights are adjustable for windage. Replica (30 tpi) sight screws are available from S&S Firearms, Glendale, N.Y., (catalog is viewable online).

BTW - Redfield made versions of the #102 Sight for a wide variety of Military and Commercial rifles. The correct 'Elevation & Windage Slide' for your #102-K base will have a small "k" stamped on the bottom of the crosspiece. (Other 102 'Slide' variations, likely will not 'center' properly on a Krag).

---

'Ora' - Good issue sight information can be viewed on main KCA Website. Mouse 'click' on the banner "visit KCA Website today", when it appears. Then click on the tab 'Photos'.

---

Thanks again for the sight info!   

Looks like I've at least got some options.   And good to know the Redfield peep is rifle specific.  I was eyeing some parts from other rifles thinking that piece would be universal as long as I had the base.  Now I know better.   

I am late to this particular discussion, but cannot let it pass without complimenting Chuck (butlersrangers) for his most comprehensive and extremely helpful posts. He is like me, but on STEROIDS - that intended as a very sincere compliment.

Thanks Dick, for years you've been a mentor to many and raised the bar real high!

(Now you've got me blushing).

p.s. - 'Ora' gave very good  pictures to work with!

What Dick said... AMEN