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!

Because there's no front sight??!!

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

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).

'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'.

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!

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


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

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.

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.