Hello to the forum: Can anyone tell me if this sight is original or if it is a reproduction? Also would it go on a 1898 carbine?
        Thanks,  kc

---

Other pic.

---

More.

---

King - on examination from your few pictures, this does appear to be an authentic 1896 rear carbine sight. These are often faked because they are worth north of $500. They are hard to find and very desirable because there are many 1896 carbines out there that do not have the authentic carbine rear sight. They often are found with a Krag 1896 rifle sight which is very similar but not marked with the "C"s for the carbine designation and they are only calibrated up to "18" for 1800 yards.

The "C"s on yours look correct but are a little hard to see. The fakes are usually pretty easy to spot for those of us familiar with the differences but can fool many unknowing early Krag collectors. That's why we're here to help!

The pictures below are close ups of one of my authentic 1896 Krag carbine rear sights on a carbine with the correct hand guard. Note how the front sight screw is proud of the base. It should be elevated above the base it screws into.

Yours would need to be examined a little closer just to make sure but it looks like a very good condition 1896 rear carbine Krag sight, appropriate for the 1896 carbine.

The 1898 Krag carbine could wear later carbine sights but usually not the 1896. It would fit on an 1898 Krag carbine, again with the correct hand guard and barrel band as in the pictures below.

Also notice how the "C" mark is hidden by the hand guard when the carbine sight is mounted. You only see the right side "C" when it is removed.

Thanks for sharing. Where did you get this sight?

---

Also, you would appreciate the good variety of pictures on this KCA forum under the heading of "Photos" on the home page that show different sights and hand guards as well as lots of other things Krag. We've got lots of ways to help out!

I have been helped by many on this forum when I started collecting and have made some good Krag collecting friends in the process.

Also, in the "Articles" section of this forum, there is a story of how I stumbled into my first 1896 Krag carbine sight entitled "Search for the '96 or A Tale of Two Carbines."

Hello: Thanks for the reply. The sight came on a krag represented as a 1898 carbine. From what I have learned on this site I was pretty sure it was not as represented. Even so the price was not bad and I purchased it. The action and barrel have been reblued. The stock at one time had swivels which holes have since been plugged.there is a cleaning rod, oiler and sight cover. I wanted a shooter and figured this was a good candidate.
       Thanks again, kc

We'd love to see pictures of the Krag you bought. Sounds like you got quite a nice package, even if it isn't all original. Krag 1898 carbines are somewhat rare by themselves. There were only 5002 of them made.

The front sight rifle cover, if that is what you got, sells for around $70 by itself. The carbine front sight cover is more valuable and has a "c" marked on it also.

If you get a chance, please post more pictures.

'King Carp' - I'm sorry to disagree with 'Whig' and report negatively on your rear-sight, but, I am sure it is a FAKE.

IMHO - The "C" on the base is the wrong font. The "20" on the leaf is also a different font than the other numbers and the spacing of the index line with the 20 looks wrong.

The #4 on the side of the base appears tilted and hand-stamped.

I believe your sight-leaf has the 'high hump' at the pivot screw. This is an early model 1896 sight feature. Too bad if someone doctored one of these hard to find sights.

Whoever made this is an 'advanced faker'. He altered the sight slide so it has the 'step-down' area bracketing the "V" notch, like a carbine slide.

It would be fun to examine this sight directly, next to a real McCoy!

Butler- you have looked at the sight better than I have to see that stuff. i have never seen a fake this good. I was only looking at a few details and said I really couldn't see everything well and it needed better examination.

If it is a fake, it is the best I've seen.

And, as always, we need to all look at things to see what others don't. I'd like to see better pictures.

The "C"s look right compared to mine which is what I often see faked. I didn't look at the slides well.

Do you think the ladder is faked also? Those numbers look good as does the "C" above the 19.

Interesting. I would like to see better pictures to compare.

Thanks for the advise. I  questioned the sight because of its excellent condition. That is why I asked for the "pros" to check it out. This rifle came from a collector who has passed away. The family and I agreed on price which is for a sporterized krag. We used this site and some auction sites to come up with a price. I will get some more pics of it tommoriw. As I said I wanted a rifle I could shoot and not care about ruining a collectable piece. I was planning on putting a Lyman or redfield peep sight on it. If a nice spotter stock shows up that would be fine too.
        Thanks again for the help, kc

Pic of krag

---

More

---

More

---

More

---

It likely is an early model 1896 rifle leaf. The "20" is bogus, both font and spacing. The "C" is not spaced correctly on the leaf.

The "C" on the base is wrong style of font.

My opinion.

Sorry about the poor quality pictures. 

Also sorry about the poor spelling. I think its past my bed time.

For comparison, here's one I sold a few years back ($600+). Some folks I respect judged it an authentic example of the early '96 carbine sight -

---

Another question I would have is that if this is a faked 1896 rear sight, did the seller know this and did you pay extra for the rear sight as an original?

If it is not authentic, you can ask for a refund and the seller should honor it. It's up to you depending on how you purchased it and the honesty of all involved.

If you were told or suspected it wasn't real, that's a different story.

I have a couple 1896 carbine sights that are in good condition but authentic. Condition isn't the key issue- it's the details that count. Post more pictures of it so we can see better.

Also, your front sight cover looks interesting. It may be a carbine front sight cover that should be marked with a "c" on one side. They are worth $150 or more (if not faked also!)

I learn something new all the time here!

The carbine was not represented as an original. The owner had died. The family knows little about his collection. I do not know if he did this or purchased it this way. I am guessing this is the way he got it.  I do not know what he paid for it.

Well, you have two original and authentic Krag 1896 carbine rear sights here to compare. As Butlers has pointed out, if the fonts or positioning of any of the details of the sight are not exactly the same as the two authentic ones shown, you can consider it a fake. People will buy it but it should not be misrepresented as authentic.

I would never buy something I knew is a fake to put on one of my carbines to make it "correct". Other people might but few who use this sight regularly.

Good luck. Thanks for sharing. It's always a good lesson to look at the details closely. (Including me!)

Pic. Of sight

---

Side of sight.

---

Sight hood.

---

The knurled knob on this sight I different than parashooters. This one is probably a fake.

No one has asked yet, but, if you don't mind our asking, what is the serial number.  The carbine looks interesting and, if it is in an appropriate number range, it is still quite valuable as an 1898 Carbine.  As Whig said, there are 1896 Carbines out there with rifle sights, they are nevertheless, real 1896 Carbines and worth more than the rifle versions.  The incorrect sight would be a deduction from the value, but hardly a disqualifier for the rest of the piece. Even with an inappropriate number, carbine parts are always worth something more and, unless the whole thing is a fake or a "put together" like the one I bought when I was a novice, the sum of the parts will come to a happy result.

I like the sight hood. It has the "c" mark on it (if this isn't faked also!) and looks complete from the one picture. These are desirable. I see them for sale infrequently for around $150-200.

The sight needs better lighting with close ups so we can learn more about it. I can't see the "c" or the 20 well in this picture.

If you can, please post pictures of the rest of the carbine. Thanks.

Serial no. 156484.  1898 date on receiver. I paid $350.00 for the rifle. That seemed to be the going rate for a sporter , shooter. It came with the sight hood, oiler and cleaning rod.  It has a clean bore. If it shoots well I will be happy with it. Do you think the stock is original ? It has a saddle ring and 1898 jsa stamp.
      Thanks, kc

There are some pics of the carbine on page 1.

I know it is a long shot but in the Joe Poyer book on page 239 footnote no. 5 mentions 1898 carbines observed in this serial no. Range. I did not buy this krag assuming it was a real 1898 carbine. I bought it as a shooter.

The stock looks very good - maybe refinished.  With better photos, we may be able to be more helpful.  In the meantime, I will be happy to say that if the stock is original and even is refinished carefully, it probably is worth the whole that you've invested so far. The rest of the parts (less the sight) are the icing on your cake.  I think you've done well, grasshopper.

The serial number is out of the range most of us think of as "correct", but the subject is always not certain.  In Mallory's book, 2nd Edition, he lists a few carbines beyond "the range" and, as I recall, one was even beyond 200,000.  Regardless, if all the parts are married, the stock's value is the same whether with a proper number or not.  It only needs to be "original" which brings us back to the subjective conversation. 

'King Karp":

Knurling on sight-knob is wrong.

Front-Sight hood/protector is correct.

Thanks to everyone for their help. Could someone with access to krag serial numbers check and see if 156484 shows up in the records.
        Thanks, kc

It is not listed in any of the 4 editions of the Springfield Research Service.

Upon taking this krag apart I found that it has a new after market barrel installed. I wondered why the rifling was so good! I guess that takes any collector value out of it. Well, I wanted a shooter I guess I have one. I will make a chamber cast and hopefully it will be  30-40 krag.  Here are some pics of the stock i was asked for. Was the hole under the oiler, cleaning rod hole made to lighten the stock or for extra storage?
       Thanks again everyone, kc
            

---

More

---

Stock

---

Pic

---

Swivel hole filled in.

---

More

---

Saddle ring and but plate

---

'King carp' - That is a very nice model 1898 carbine stock! The stock alone is probably worth what you paid for the whole 'carbine'.

IMHO - You have a very nice looking 'replica' carbine for shooting!

p.s. - The holes in the stock butt were to lighten the arm. An added benefit was convenient storage for rod sections and oiler.

'King carp' - I took the liberty of altering some of your sight pictures, as well as, 'Parashooter' and 'Wigs' pictures, inorder to contrast your sight with legitimate ones.

You can see the #20 is very different and not the correct size and spacing. The knob and slide-screw head are also wrong on Carp's sight.

---

Two more views that reveal Carp's sight to be Fake.

"C" on right side of base is too large and different style.

Range Numbers on left-side of Carp's base look to be individually stamped by hand. (4 & 6 are a bit cocked)

The 'style' or font of the numbers is wrong.

---

Those pictures make it much easier to compare. Good job, Butlers. Very fake! I wonder who's doing this crap!

Ya know...  I looked at the first two pictures of the slide numbers, and immediately thought fake!  In addition to the fact that the scaling and numbers are different, it just looked totally wonky!  Seeing the side views just seals it for me!  As Whig said, who created this fake?  Obviously, someone is trying to cash in on the scarcity of the actual 1896 Carbine sight!

This is why we need good, clear, close up pictures to best evaluate these things. I pass on items on ebay and Gun Broker if there are poor pictures posted for the item. Chances are, in my experience, if the pictures are done poorly, someone is trying to misrepresent a bad item.

So, as Butlers showed, we must look with eagle eyes at everything and expect that it's fake until proven otherwise. It might help save some money and trouble!

I don't know who made the sight. The previous owner kept good records of his purchases. This carbine was bought in 1998. I do not know if he added the sight himself or it came with the carbine. These knock offs might have been around for quite awhile. Something to watch for in the future. Thanks for the side by side comparison.

I would also like to add that the previous owners collection was 95% civil war related. In this area he was an expert. I posted another krag awhile back I had gotten from his family. Members here gave it a clean bill of health. I do not believe he was doing this faking. He probably got fooled like myself and others. There is one more krag carbine left in his collection. I am saving up for it. I will try to post photos of it before I make the purchase. Hopefully with the forums help I can get an opinion on it.
       Thanks again, kc

It's entirely possible that he was in need of a sight and unknowingly purchased a faked sight from someone else.  Based on what you've told us, it's likely that you were not misled intentionally... however, they previous owner may have been duped... or just didn't know what to look for.

I had not thought of that. He may have added the sight after the fact. I am still learning and will be for the rest of my life. One question. Even if that sight was real would it belong on a 1898 carbine or should it have been different sight.
      Thanks, kc

Maybe there was never "Fakery" involved.

Somebody with knowledge and talent may have just wanted and made a credible 'Replica' copy of a model 1898 carbine.

We don't know. Intentions and the story have been lost, due to death. Possibly, everything was known and above board and no one was taken advantage of.

If 'King carp' feels like he made a bad mistake and was wronged, I'll give him $360 for his "Fake Carbine".  ;D

There are lessons here for all of us:

1. We can easily contaminate history.

When we 'part together', repair, and restore a nice Krag, (or other gun), for our pleasure, 'Shooting', and use, the story of 'what we did' will be lost. Our handiwork may become an enigma and a cause of confusion to others.

Our present intentions are good and known. However, if our 'project' Krag passes into the hands of the unscrupulous, someone possibly will get 'screwed' in the future.

2. The regulars on the KCA Forum are nice guys, encourage and learn from each other.
However, our sharing of insights and information can be viewed and exploited by scoundrels and poltroons to fake and cheat "more better".  8-)

We have to 'Dance' carefully.

'King carp' - A 'late type' of model 1896 carbine sight is what the model 1898 carbines were originally issued with.

A 'high hump' on the sight-leaf (at the pivot) is a feature of early model 1896 sights, (rifle and carbine). This feature was short lived (1895 - IIRC) and maybe it was a carry-over from the model 1892 sight-leaf(?).

IMHO - A 'high-hump' model 1896 carbine sight would not be correct on a model 1898 Krag carbine.

Note - Model 1896 sights display an evolution. There are several variations in number & scale placement, as well as, knob size.

(Poyer's book is a bit helpful on this stuff, but, I don't think he covered the 'high-hump' variation. 'Parashooters' photo is a wonderful example)!

1. & 2. A model 1898 carbine probably had this sight, when issued.

3. 'High-hump' sight off early carbine (1895). 4. model 1892 sight

---

I have seen forums before where very knowledgable collectors will withhold certain important facts regarding the authenticity determination for certain parts because they don't want to reveal that important determining factor to potential counterfeiters. This can be very frustrating for the honest ones of us who really want to know for honest reasons.  Most of these people will reveal information privately, though, which does help. As Butlers said, counterfeiters can read through many of our posts here and know exactly what we look at to determine faked parts. Their skills evidently improve with time and experience!

Many of us have also made repairs to our Krags to try to restore them, in a legit fashion, to a more functional or historically correct condition. When we do that, we try to never allow it to be advertised, sold or misrepresented as "authentic" or "original" but repaired. I have done that myself, with the help of many here,  and it makes the collecting of Krags all the more fun.

Thanks everyone for the advice. Also thanks for your offer of $360.00 for my krag. It would be one of the few times I could make money on a firearms purchase! But I think I will keep it as the shooter I wanted. I will try to pick up a used sporter stock and keep the original carbine stock on the side. You never know if a real 1898 barreled carbine action might show up. That is what makes this hobby fun.
      Thanks again, kc

Sometimes, the Krag item, that doesn't look right and appears bogus, proves to be correct and a rarity.
Studying a 'well done fake' is a good learning experience.
The exchange of observations, insights, and knowledge advances understanding - IMHO

I personally enjoy the 'Krag Puzzles' that show-up on the KCA Forum. It's a fun way to learn and a way to stay mentally sharp. A growing pool of vigilant and knowledgeable observers turns up more stuff and helps broaden understanding.

'Faking' has always been a human endeavor.
IMHO - The only good defenses are better knowledge (than the faker), healthy skepticism, trained eyes, and openness to continued study and learning.