No, it is not. That stock shows a great deal of thought, and lot of high-quality work, but to espouse the theory that it began life at SA is wishful thinking. The tip cut is not right, and sloppy to boot. The rod is absolutely not right, and I have some doubts (at least from the pictures/angles shown so far) as to the virginity of the upper band. Ditto the sideplate, and, am I the only one who thinks the edges of the barrel crown are not QUITE sharp enough? I'd measure the barrel length REAL carefully - only a few thousandths need to come off to 'almost' flatten a standard crown.

Not "trashing" either, honestly, but "not right" is "not right". I only hope Whig did not pay top collector dollar.

A couple things regarding above. I think the ramrod is a new production with the head apparently welded on. The metal is very smooth with a new bluing finish. It does not appear to be a remake of an old ramrod of any type.

The barrel is exactly 30 inches, measured correctly, exactly the same as my other 1894. The muzzle is not flattened- is was made this way a long time ago. The patina is consistent with many of my other Krags and fairly even with the rest of the metal parts on this rifle.

The side plate, as you can see, is authentic and marked with the rifle's serial number as is my other 1894 side plate. The magazine cover is also with the same serial number matching the receiver. The bolt is the same on both rifles.

So, most of the metal is authentic and correct. I am not sure about the ramrod channel in the front barrel band. The top of that barrel band that fits the top of the barrel is also very clean and sharp but the barrel band itself sure looks original to a Krag if it isn't an original 1894 ramrod band.

The stock is new. I would just like to know who made it. As I said, it is not perfect but it is very nicely done. I didn't notice the difference in the finger groove cuts on the hand guard. Thanks for pointing that out. Those are the details I appreciate learning about. I like the critiques. That's what we're here for. I'm happy with this addition to my collection and, as all of them beforehand, I am learning a ton about Krags by tearing this one down to the minute details!

FWIW - It appears the shaping of the replica Stock, in the area around the side-plate, is a little off.

Whig: You will want to make sure the rear of plate, #1631, is not in contact with the Stock, before shooting.

Otherwise, the small section of wood, between the side-plate and cut-off, is likely to 'shear off', like it did on your original early Stock.

(Note arrow on lower picture indicating apparent contact).

Thanks for the warning about the wood but I don't plan on shooting this one at this time. I have my "shooters" and the rest I am cleaning up and fixing up and learning from for a collection. The barrel band has kept me wondering about those shapely cornered areas where the ramrod channel is fixated. All of the ones I've seen in real life and pictures are rounded like you point out. It is definitely not 100% original but a nice rifle with many correct parts. I hoped someone would eventually know the origin of the stock but I'll keep digging. Thanks for all the analysis though.

If the barrel band is a "creation", though, it, again, is nicely done.

You may be right!

I have thought about those two areas that are a little proud of the metal but I know it's not perfect and I have slathered it with linseed oil and it all looks nice and darker now than it did. I think I'm going to leave this gem as is and keep it for further investigation in the future as a nice addition to my collection.

It may, yet, be at the range soon for testing!

You mind if I add your rifle to the KCA serial number database?