This 'Cutaway Krag' was discussed on the Military Surplus Collector's Forum.

It was listed at some auction house with an estimated value of $4,000 to $8,000.

The auction description attributed cutaway Krag, #444098, as being on display at the U.S. Military Pavilion at 'The 1901 Pan American Exposition' at Buffalo, N.Y.

(This was the World's Fair at which President McKinley was assassinated).

I don't know if the U.S. Ordnance Dept. ever authorized the manufacture any Krag 'cutaways'.

It is a neat item and would make a great conversation piece, but, a Krag action manufactured in early 1903, certainly was not available for display in 1901!

The 1900 Stock Cartouche is a nice touch.

Every Man Cave needs one of these!

---

Hmmmm. The cutaway cartridge is a nice touch. Wonder why no rear sight was included.

Because there's no front sight??!!

Hey, there had to be some neat stuff to see in 1901.

---

Are colors and finish representative of a new unfired rifle? I wonder if the parts that were cut away were good ones or rejects? Would be quite the project to un-de-mill it, but then you would have a new unfired rifle!

Most of the metal parts on this 'cut-away' Krag look like they are an excellent 're-finish' to me. (Just my humble opinion. I have not seen such a U.S. Krag specimen before).

My experience with legitimate 'cut-aways' was involving Pre-WW1 British Arms. These were used to train Armorers. They were an interesting curiosity, but, did not bring as much money from collectors as a working firearm.

In the last ten years at gun shows, I have seen some well done 'cut-aways' that were done by 'hobbyists' and sold as such.

BTW - This Krag 'cut-away' did sell at auction for $2,100.

I am a bit skeptical of it and the '1901 Pan American Exposition' story certainly does not wash. (It is super cool).

BR,
Thinking about this some more, you or one of the regulars attached a list of all the parts of a Krag with each individual finish type noted. The receiver and loading gate were both case hardened finish if I remember correctly. The details on the cutouts are machined with very consistent chamfer sizes and vey good finishes. I am think the parts were pulled from production before heat treat allowing the machining to be done that smoothly. If this guess is correct then regular bluing would be an appropriate finish. As clean as the edges on the bolt cut outs are, I would expect it was not heat treated either. If I was doing this at SA I would have pulled almost good parts out of the discrepant parts pile and done the cut outs on soft parts.
An engraved plate showing who this thing was made for would have been appropriate, with none on the wooden base it looks like an almost delivered piece.

'FredC' - This U.S. Krag 'cut-away' is an enigma to me. I would like to know more about its origin. (Who, Where, When)?

I am not calling it fake. It just was not at the 1901 'Pan American Exposition'.

It is nicely done and finished. I think it is old, but, made in 1903 or later. The finish may be like the arsenal refinishes that were done before WW1.

I hope some KCA Members have knowledge and insights about such 'training/display cutaways'. (This is very interesting to me).

I know the British made instructional 'cut-aways' from rifles and pistols, (possibly from 'rejects' or obsolete models).

Attached is a picture of a Norwegian 'cut-away' from Hanevik's book. Also, a picture of a British Martini-Henry 'cut-away'.

---

It almost looks like it was not finished as a presentation piece. Only a couple areas look worn, but not enough to be a training demo model. It is a mystery, Charlie Brown.

If it did finally go for $2001.00 I think they over paid. Would have been nice if you could have gotten it for a couple of hundred to use to point out details on this forum.

If it were truly done by Springfield... presumably before heat treating... then why would it need to be serial numbered?  I'm just asking out of curiosity.  It seems to me that a cutaway demo model would not have a serial number.  Also, the bullet looks more bronze/copper jacketed than cupro-nickle, which appears almost dull silver in color.  I'd love to know what head-stamp is on that cartridge.

Interesting!

We had this discussion before whether receivers were numbered before heat treat. Not sure which side I was on then, but today I would be for numbering them before heat treat. Don't ask which side I will be on tomorrow.
Speaking of cutaways, the photo is one I did for a customer this week. New part and I wanted him to see in the cross section how close the relief for the Allen drive was to the dog portion of the screw. Material is ETD-150 used a lot  in the oil field. Cut the part in half before I deburred it, so even the burr was split on this one.

---

butlersrangers wrote on Apr 5^th, 2018 at 4:44pm:

Because there's no front sight??!! Hey, there had to be some neat stuff to see in 1901.

Ha Ha. Some kid must have messed with the stack of cannonballs for the closest canon in the picture.

I do not think for one second that the US Krag piece is even close to being old, period. There is NO age to it at all. A wonderful example of machining, and a tribute to someone's skill, to be sure, but NOT old.

Dick Hosmer may be quite correct, about it not being old.

Whoever 'made' it went to the trouble of putting a nice 'rust-blue' on some of the parts.

The barrel finish appears odd to me.

A lot of profit to be made turning a $250 'bubba sporter' into a $2,100 'cut-away'.

Inspiration may have been the Norwegian 'cut-away' pictured by Hanevik.

The finish on the receiver, loading-gate, and side-plate are not what would have been done in 1903, when the receiver was first made.

Upon further scrutiny, the 'cut-away' receiver shows the Proof "P" and index mark on the front edge of the receiver ring.

This would mean heat-treat and 'Proofing' were performed on this receiver.

I would conclude the "cut-away" machining was performed on regular heat-treated Krag parts.

Also Note: The forearm 'wood-line' is lower than would be seen on a normal stock. The 'P' and Index marks are usually concealed by the forearm.

---

The cut away gun is an odd duck. A couple of other things that I notice:
#1 no rifling in the barrel?
#2 The window in the boltsleeve is not regular in shape and has no chamfer on the edges.
#3 The magazine cut off seems to show some wear.
#4 Cut out to show the trigger sear shows large radiused edges, very professionally done.
#5 Window in the side cover has nice chamfered edges on the flats and radiused corners hard to do but not impossible without CNC.
#6 Edges of the loading gate and side plate are crisp and do not show excessive "bubba" polishing.
#7 No dings in anything, I have read about "stacking arms" and think that is where a lot of the dings come from that you see on any used Krag.
The thing looks too nice to be a demo model and not finished to be a presentation piece to say a SA official, governor or some other mucky muck.
I forgot about "pack annealing", that could have been done back in the day. It would have minimized the scale build up, then allowed light polishing to be done before the bluing. Open air annealing would have made a deep scale that would have necessitated a deep buffing that left surfaces not flat.
Today you could mill those windows with carbide cutters and have a nice finish on case hardened parts, but carbide was not even a gleam in a machinists eyes back then.