i've had this for awhile and not familar with the rear sight . it has 3 notches at the rear of the sight. there is a  cartouche mkg on the stock  opposite the bolt handle dated 1898 . any info would be appreciated...   thx  Bob

Hi, Rap.

You haven't given much info about your Krag or any pictures but I am attaching a couple pictures from the KCA website that show different Krag sights. Yours might be the Model 1898 sight or a variation of such with the three notches in the rear. We would love to see pictures of your Krag and the sight to be sure we are giving the best info.

The pictures show two variations of the Krag sight with three notches. (The middle one in the top picture.)

Welcome to KCA and please feel free to ask any questions. The more you show us, the more we can help!

---

Whig ,      thanks for the info/photos of the rear sights. mine looks like the one in the middle.  i'll try to get a couple photos up. the cartouche is 1898 . the rifle isn't in new cond but looks to be 75-80 %. ............  Bob

Great. Looking forward to the pictures.

KCA has a wealth of information in pictures and older posts for you to read through and enjoy.

'rap1610' - Welcome to the KCA Forum.

Your Krag, #152416, was first assembled around December, 1898.

Most Krags, during their service, were probably rebuilt at least one time. This process led to rifles being taken apart, parts were inspected and refinished at Springfield Armory or arsenals, and re-assembled in a likely new combination of parts.

The stock 'acceptance cartouche': "J.S.A. - 1898", stands for Joseph Sumner Adams, (assistant foreman - S.A. assembly room), and rifle acceptance into service in 1898.

The '1898 dated' stock may be original to your Krag or a lucky coincidence.

The sight and hand-guard first issued with your model 1898 rifle was likely the model 1896 type. This would have normally been updated with a later type of sight.

I'm not sure which '3-notch' sight you have. (Whig posted two pictures and both show different 3-notch sights 'in the middle').

If you have the model 1898, sight with square corners on the eye-piece and a 'low base', this is not correct. (This sight was installed on rifles made from August, 1899 to March, 1900). This sight was discontinued and in most cases removed from rifles because it was obsolete.

The top part of most 1898 sights were altered by rounding the corners of the eye-piece (by grinding) and machining serrations on the left side of the leaf. These altered tops were put on new bases to become a variation of the model 1902 sight.
These 'remanufactured' 1902 sights were used to 'update' Krags during rebuilding.

Like 'Whig' said, pictures will get more accurate information. An inexpensive book, like Joe Poyer's, "The American Krag Rifle and Carbine", (at around $25), will increase your knowledge and enjoyment.

sorry been away for a few days   ...re my rifle not hav'n a correct sight would it be possible that the rear 96 sight was replaced when the 3 notch sight came into prod then never replaced after that ?    .............Bob

Very good possibility...Bob  Notice also the difference in the heights of the ramps, 1898 vs 1902.  Occasionally, you'll run into a rifle that has a 1902 ramp with the 1898 leaf, but not often.

Bob - I am reluctant to say never. But, that scenario is probably unlikely.

The model 1898 sight was rather short lived. It was designed for a 'hotter' .30-40 cartridge, that propelled the 220 grain projectile at 2,200 fps.

After a brief period, it was found that Krag Bolt-Lugs were cracking. There was a return to the 2,000 fps round. The 'hotter' ammo was scraped and the model 1898 rear-sight became surplus.

Because, Springfield reused the top part of the 1898 sight, complete model 1898 sights are a bit hard to find.
The bottom bases used to be real common. Dealers, like Bannerman's and Stokes Kirk, bought up surplus parts and assembled sale-able guns.

This makes for a lot of head scratching with Krags.

  You mean a 98 issued with a 96 sight, upgraded to 98 and never put back?  Seems plausible.  Or do you mean a 98 leaf in an 02 base?  I got lots of mixmasters, but mostly 98 ramps with 02 leafs.

my ques re the 98 3 notch sight was based on my collecting m1's and those who say this rifle is just as it came out of the arsenal. my time in the mech inf when we (squad members ) after a drill would be in a group cleaning our weapons. you hung onto your bolt and bbl'd receiver but all the other small parts minus trigger housings dumped in the solvent bucket cleaned then put back on the weapon. ( one or two anal ones didn't want to mix with the unwashed ).  after a weekend humping the thing just wanted it done ...........Bob   ;)

FWIW: During WW-1, Krag rifles were widely used as training rifles. Some Krags were 'called back' from settings, like military schools.

Some of these rifles had broken or damaged parts. Rear-sights and sight-knobs were especially vulnerable.

IMHO - To make these rifles, (and Krags that were stored in reserve), useful, they were probably inspected and repaired By Someone - Somewhere.

I am not aware of anyone or of a reference that totally addresses this subject.

I am not talking, strictly, about the well structured and organized process of 'refurbishing' (IRAN - inspect and repair as needed), that was done at Springfield Armory, arsenals, and depots, pre-1914.

It is my suspicion that during WW-1 some expedient repairs may have been done at training camps using even obsolete parts.

.... and I could be totally wrong.

(Seemingly - The model 1898 rifle and carbine sights and the model 1898 sight-bases should have been totally obsolete. The 'ramp-curvature' of these bases was wrong for the trajectory of issue ammo.

On the other hand - When Krag ammo started being available as "Palma Match Ammo" and with 180 grain Spitzer bullets, all sight models were probably obsolete in their calibrations).

FWIW - A picture of three bases L-R: model 1902 rifle, model 1898 rifle, and model 1902 carbine. (I didn't have a model 1898 carbine base to put in the picture).

The second picture is an unofficial sight, (I made), using an 1898 base and 1902 top. It is on a cut-down Krag.
Joe DeChristopher made such utility sights for years using surplus parts: he clearly sold them as such.

BTW - Lots of legitimate model 1902 Krag sights were repaired using a peculiar slotted  'locking-screw knob' originally made for the 'Rod-Bayonet' 1903 Springfield.

There is a lot of interchangeability of parts between model 1898, 1902, and early 1903 sights

---

Here are the photos you asked for!...Bob

---

I love the look of the rear of the M1898 sight with the unaltered three notches. My favorite (al-be-it essentially useless) Krag rear sight!

Great Krag rifle, by the way. Thanks for sharing.

Nice pictures, Bob.

A couple of observations:

Your stock was likely inspected and refurbished at Springfield Armory. The clear Script "P" proof is your stock's 'second one'. There is also the faint presence of an earlier Script "P".
The same is true of the inspection or stocker's initials behind the trigger-guard. (Showing clear initials and earlier faint ones).

I can't tell for sure (I would have to see the spring type), but, I think your rear-sight is on a model 1902 base.

Your model 1898 'three-notch' eye-piece is on a leaf that has side serrations.

A model 1898 leaf should be smooth, without serrations.
Springfield Armory would not have put this sight combination together.

FWIW - attachments show - model 1898 rifle sight (note absence of serrations on left edge of leaf).

Also, sketches of Krag 1898 base and Krag 1902 base.

---

Here are some pictures of the sight...Bob

---

Bob: IMHO you have a sight that someone has put together from parts. This would not have been done by a U.S. Armory or Arsenal.

Likely it was done by a private dealer or gun hobbyist.

Your base & spring, leaf, 'locking-knob' and slide are all for the model 1902 sight.
Just the 3-notch eye-piece is for the model 1898 sight.

You have a non-official "mixmaster" sight, that only someone with surplus parts would assemble.

How can I differentiate between a 1898 and 1902 slide...they both look the same to me???

Probably answering my own question but would it be because one is made for the use of serrations and another is not?

Local Boy- You are not wrong, but ...

(The Short Answer): The '1898 Slide' does not have a small hole on its left edge. The '1902 Slide' has a small hole on the left edge.

(Longer Answer):
Hidden from view, there is a 'spring-loaded plunger', inside the 'Slide', of 1898 and 1902 sights.
The plunger is on the left side, opposite the 'Slide-Screw' (which is on the right side).
When the Slide-Screw is "loose", the plunger maintains a bit of friction on the left side of the leaf, to keep the slide lightly in place. Once the Slide is adjusted for elevation, the Side-Screw is tightened to lock things in place.

On model 1898 sights the Leaf is smooth sided. So, the 'head' of the spring-loaded plunger is flat, (like a tack head). The plunger body, that fits inside the coiled-spring is short. These tiny parts fit into a 'blind' hole on the inside of the Slide.

On model 1902 sights the left side of the Leaf has serrations. The 'head' of the spring-loaded plunger has a raised 'dome' at its center. This  dome fits into a shallow groove that runs the length of the serrations. The plunger body that fits inside the coiled-spring is long. The plunger requires an outside hole to allow movement, provide guidance and vent debris, old grease, and dirt.
This "hole" is actually through a separate piece or bushing (apparently press fitted into the slide), called the "slide-shoe".
The inside surface of the Slide-Shoe has serrations, that lock into the serrations of the Leaf, when the slide-screw is tightened.

Aren't you glad you asked?

I am sure everyone is tired of reading my crap. (I am a visual learner).

Some images:

#1 - model 1898 sight (top) contrasted with model 1902. 

#2 - model 1902 slide - (note faint circle around hole, showing margins of 'shoe' insert. On some slides it looks like a football shape). 

#3 - model 1902 sight taken apart - ('shoe' is not removable).

---

Actually, I'm glad I asked Chuck!

Thank you for taking the time to share your knowledge.  I've learned a lot.

I also appreciated you providing visual aids as I'm a visual learner myself.

BTW: Excellent pics rap1610!

p.s. Here's a mixed bag from my stash that I didn't realize I even had...guess I loose SIGHT of things from time to time.

---

Well 'Local Boy' you have a 'mix-master' that has a model 1902 'top' installed on a model 1898 carbine rear-sight base.

Springfield Armory did not put those parts together.

But, that is a good sight to hold on to, in the hopes of finding a model 1898 carbine 'top', someday.

I have a fake "carbine- top" that I keep for an example.

(The three 'notches' are off-set, slightly to the right of the center-line. This was done only on the rifle eye-piece, to correct for bullet drift.
A real carbine eye-piece does not have the notches off-set, to the right).

p.s. The "C", (size and placement), is also a bit 'off' and disrupts the metal.

---

Here is a real M1898C sight.

---