Dick, you are the one of us with the most time collecting and enjoying Krags. I would be interested to know your gut feelings on this issue.

I don't really think that this is an "ethics" issue. It is certainly debatable, as we are seeing here, but not from an ethics perspective. You are not trying to deceive any future collector by trying to return this carbine to a more original configuration, apart from what unknown history it may claim.

I think that there are very, very few Krags that are exactly as they were when they left Springfield Armory those many years ago. There have been arsenal upgrades, repairs and cleanings as well as far too many short-term owners, shooters and collectors who have had each Krag in his possession for some part of its life.

How many different changes have been made by all of these people since then? I value history and love to research and collect documentation as much as I'm able to for each of my Krags. But, those are few and far between. So, if I can improve a Krag with a more original part without being too obvious (patina, wrong part or incorrect variation, model type, etc) I don't feel like I am doing anyone who might own this in the future a dis-service. It is better. If there is a known history that I might be obviously altering, I leave it alone.

So, don't struggle too much with this. You're not ruining it and you're not deceiving anyone. Keeping it as is is perfectly fine but improving it as discussed is fine also. Not an ethical conundrum.

---