Figured some may want to keep these pictures for comparison if you see a fake and want to show some one the difference if one o fthese ends up on a gun for sale as orignal.. Rick B
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Krag-Gun-Stocks-/321208366601
Figured some may want to keep these pictures for comparison if you see a fake and want to show some one the difference if one o fthese ends up on a gun for sale as orignal.. Rick B
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Krag-Gun-Stocks-/321208366601
No matter how good the rest of the wood might be, they can never duplicate the inletting at the grasping groove like Springfield.
Comes with genuine fake inspection stamps - wonderful. *(NOT!)
"We make men without chests and expect from them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst."
--C.S. Lewis
I don't know, I wouldn't mind having one for the purpose of using a spare 1896 receiver and carbine barrel to build a classy knockaround rifle- one I wouldn't cry over if I mucked it up while hunting with it. Biggest complaint is the price of the stocks, aside from the fact that someone, somewhere, will use one to pass off a fake as an original. Re-ennactors will probably take a shine to them also- nothing like having a factory fresh rifle to portray a SAW trooper who, incidentally, would have been carrying a factory fresh rifle back then, not a 115 year old patinized example. These stocks do have their place.
Do they open up avenues of fakery? Yes. Should we ratchet up our diligence? Maybe. Should newbie collectors learn about such things before taking the plunge? Definitely- but there's nothing new under the sun in that regard anyway. There has always been fraudulence in every field of collecting. (I know of a guy who is faking antique beer can openers. Some rare 'church keys' from obscure breweries bring big bucks from guys who collect the things.) Caveat Emptor.
Last edited by gnoahhh; 09-18-2013 at 07:06. Reason: spelling
Not very good workmanship there - over-sanded, proper curvatures lost, varying grooves, bad stamping, lousy finish, etc. I believe that at least part of the problem is the use of lightweight "Home Depot" grade duplicators which flex under the stress of cutting a dense wood.
Probably, the cartouches bother me the most - as do the a$$holes who have been renting them out for the last few years. While I can see a re-enactor need, I do not know how to provide for same without opening the door to future chicanery.
There's no need to ever duplicate an inspection stamp on a rifle. The moment that you enhance a marking, it devalues the rifle forever. Why would anyone with a brain do this? If a person cannot find a rifle with clean readable stampings, then they should keep looking for one. That's the thrill of collecting. Not producing something that's a fake just to say that they've got something. That isn't any part of collecting. What's the thrill or fun of that? It's like renting some hot looking whore out to be seen on one's arm in public. She's still a whore. You're not impressing any serious collector. Just who are you trying to impress?
My problem wasn't with the wood as that is easy to pick out. The Inspection stamps are what I wanted everyone to see. That has always upset me. Rick B
I still shake my head over a thread on "reproduction" stamps on CMP a year or two ago - about 35 posts, all but maybe 6-8 not seeing what the problem with them was or telling to mind my own business!
"We make men without chests and expect from them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst."
--C.S. Lewis
Well Rick you know me and I have no problem going after these folks and smacking the idiots around who find nothing wrong with it. I have had my name attacked, my family and my business to which I invited lawsuits and a good go around behind my barn if anyone had enough testi's to try. So far no takers and two tries at lawsuits with no luck on their parts. Rick B