I have had this Krag rifle for a while and wanted to take some pictures of it and share it with the KCA group to get some feedback. Always enjoy sharing Krag adventures and getting feedback analysis to learn more.

This was purchased from an auction about two years ago. I love M1896 rifles especially with a nice cartouche. There are not many M1896 Krags with great stocks and cartouches out there. I also like great bores but that feature was not described on the auction listing. Bore descriptions are generally not reliable when described by someone else unless they examine the bore with a borescope. That was one of my best investments years ago. Being able to directly see what the bore is for condition and cleaning purposes is real important with collecting any firearms.

So, this Krag, as you can see, has the 1896 cartouche, an 1894 dated receiver, and a stock that has the (thin) filled ram rod channel. The bolt body is a M1892 body but the rest of the bolt demonstrates M1896 changes with the hold open pin that matches the hold open notch on the receiver.

The M1892 rifle has obviously been updated to a Model 1896. There is a complete cut out in the butt stock for the oiler and cleaning rods.

Look at that 1896 cartouche. Have you ever seen a better one? And the stock looks unused other than a few blemishes. The grasping grooves and scallop bolt handle cut are sharp enough to cut cheese!

The bore, surprisingly, looks essentially unshot. There is no pitting or discernible wear even on close-up exam with the bore scope.

The question, though, is why does the receiver show wear to almost original "white" condition? The bolt, receiver and side plate all look like the patina matches. The magazine appears to have been re-blued. The butt plate is worn also. The barrel bands, rear sight, barrel and trigger guard show a little wear but not bad.

So, what do you think? This does look to be a put together Krag rifle but it is an interesting item.

Thanks for any feedback!

---

More pictures:

---

More pictures:

---

More pictures:

---

A mighty pretty updated Krag with lots of model 1892 parts! I'm surprised it still has an 'unslotted' front band.

I see it has the squared of cleaning rod filler versus the rounded on the 1892 stock. Curious if it has a double proof "P" nest to the trigger guard.

Looks like it also kept the M1892 hand guard.

Knute- just checked- only one clear script "P" proof. Rifle is redone but stock is original.

Joe Farmer has evaluated this and said the stock looks like an original Magazine rifle stock put on an altered M1896 rifle. He said the original 1896 cartouche was stamped January-March 1896 on only a very few thin wristed stocks but, since the rifle patina doesn't match the pristine stock, the re-done rifle was taken out at some point and put into this stock. He has no idea why.

If you are signed up for Joe's website, he discusses this Krag in one of his forum postings.

Hi Whig,

Case hardened metal has a tendency to fade after awhile and unlike many case hardened firearms that have all the pretty colors...I've noticed that Krags don't seem to have them...just various mottled grays fading to solid gray/light gray over time. 

That's true and I've seen a lot of the pretty mottling of Krag case hardened receivers. This does show a good bit of wear and there is no mottling- just "white" metal. The mottling is rather unique to Krags, in many ways, isn't it?

This Krag M1898 carbine shows the receiver in original blue and the mottling of the case hardened side plate. One way you can tell original bluing on a rifle is that the stamping of the receiver shows that the letters and numbers are not blued at the bottom of their stampings. If this were re-blued, the bluing could be seen into the deepest parts of the numbers and letters originally stamped in the metal. You can also see the numerous handling marks in the bluing obtained over 100+ years of being knocked around since originally blued.

The mottling is quite unique in examining Krag parts like this.

---

Whig - Maybe I'm missing something, but, during the periods of 'updating' or 'converting' U.S. model 1894 Krags to an 1896 configuration, they would have been taken apart.

The actions required some 'local annealing' for the machining of the 'slot' for the 'hold-open pin'.

The stocks required machining and fitting of the wood that fills the "Cleaning Rod Slot", likely changes in the Butt-Trap area, and at least partial refinishing of the forearm.

One would expect parts were processed and put back together randomly, making rifles that were new combinations of parts.

Your action manufactured in 1894 coupled with a stock from a Krag manufactured early in 1896 is not surprising.

More problematic, is the contrast in the condition of your metal, when compared to your wood.
This may indicate they were not all that fussy with the appearance of these 'near obsolete' arms at S.A. or someone simply switched stocks sometime after the "Springfield Armory model 1896 update".

BTW - (There must have been some reserve stocks available for replacing broken stocks in the field).

A stock switch could have been done by a National Guard or WW1 Armorer, a collector, or .... ???

p.s. - I didn't do it .... and it is still a beautiful Krag!