Updated 1898 carbine?

[BradB]

Thanks for pointers on previous thread (1898 carbine SRS check). After several trips back to examine, I purchased this at a local auction this morning. Slow day for the firearms they had; an original finish 1897 production Winchester Model 94 with octagonal barrel in caliber 32-40 sold for $600 immediately prior to this lot. I paid $500 plus fees for this as the only bidder, so even if "humped", I have my money back in parts (which included a correct 3-piece rod and tool in the buttstock). Crappy pics on the web helped. Comments and analysis requested and appreciated. I know the front sight blade needs replaced, but all else appears to be original as updated in the field (hence the absence of a stock cartouche which would not be correct anyway?). Finish is as nice an original blue as I have seen to include excellent nitre on the extractor and a near mirror finish blue on the trigger guard and barrel band. Much dust and age settled into nooks and crannies which I will clean later (wanted to take photos "as found" first since this helps ID anything messed with recently). The stock MAY be cracked along the grain at the base of the loading port/sideplate. I'll see when I take it down, but it does not look promising. If so, hairline only with no opening. (Don't plan on shooting anyway). I am not going to remove the HG for cleaning as I do NOT want to crack it.

The "story" from consigner is that their great grandfather was stationed at Guantanamo Bay in World War One and was given this carbine for guard duty of some type. Because it was obsoleted, he was not required to turn it back in when he transferred. Irrelevant but interesting. I will see if I can get more detail / provenance. Thanks in advance.

Krag2.jpgKrag4.jpgKrag6.jpgKrag8.jpgKrag11.jpg

[BradB]

Barrel is correct 22 inches with pristine bore. Crown is evenly rounded with no sharp edges and worn finish that matches barrel in color and depth.

Krag12.jpgKrag15.jpgKrag20.jpgKrag19.jpgKrag13.jpg

[BradB]

Any other photos desired to help ID please let me know. Thanks!!

Krag14.jpgKrag17.jpgKrag18.jpgKrag5.jpgKrag3.jpg

[madsenshooter]

Good deal for you!

[BradB]

I bought an 1898 carbine about 25 years ago out of Shotgun News (pre-internet). It showed up with a correct but heavily sanded stock and little finish. I returned it and have been looking for a correct Krag Carbine ever since that was not humped up, boogered, trashed or priced at the upper end of retail. Because of all the fakery, I was looking mostly at 1899s which is what I thought this one was until I looked at the SN. Everything looked good to me except the front sight blade; I think I may have started 2014 off right. =-)

Suggestions on where to get a replacement front blade (original "C"-marked if possible) appreciated. I will likely have to settle for a standard 98 blade? Any requirements on profile or height?

[dave]

Rear sight base and ladder are correct carbine but have never seen the c on the slide before.

[BradB]

Stock was indeed split behind the sideplate and loading gate... and previously repaired under the trigger guard with two wood screws angled into the "meat" portions of the wrist. They do not interfere with function, but clearly not Govt. work. Guard screws were "set" in old hardened grease inside the receiver. I have encountered similar in WWII era "put-aways". The barreled receiver seems to have been very well reblued; there is some old pitting that is present on the bottom portion of the barrel where it is covered by the forearm of the stock. Blue around and over it is same color as rest of barrel. The loading gate is also a poor match for the weapon in finish and also appears to have been redone. At this point, sadly, I am thinking this was put together in the 50s or 60s using a refinished receiver and barrel, a repaired stock and excellent condition original bolt, buttplate, band, handguard, rear sight with rod sections and tool added as well. That is all I can come up with; this was made by a collector for display with the best parts he could get his hands on in that timeframe. Reblue is professional job without any obvious buffing that I can see except a slight thinning of text in the middle of the springfield designation. Could this be an arsenal or depot reblue with updated parts? (I know; doubtful). So, although I did not get burned too badly, this is not the example I wanted for my collection. Based on responses, I may consign at a local gunshop with all appropriate disclosures. Expert comments and shared analysis welcome. Thanks!

Krag21.jpgKrag22.jpgKrag23.jpg

[jon_norstog]

Brad,

I would give it the benefit of the doubt for now. That sight blade means you have someone's hunting rifle, at least. The hunter may have left it in a closet or behind a stove too long ... I'm trying to see how this could be a fake, rather than a real carbine that was used as a hunting rifle and maybe neglected a bit. You'll probably never be sure unless you can track down the previous owners.

Real or fake, I would repair the stock and shoot that carbine.

jn

[sdkrag]

Rear sight looks right as rain to me. Tiny C on the slide is correct.

[Dick Hosmer]

Jon, it could be a fake if someone built it up on a rifle receiver with M1899 carbine parts. That is the problem with 1898 carbines - only about 160 numbers are known out of the 5000 made.

5MF claims he can tell if a particular arm was a carbine, but he has not, and I suspect he may not, tell us how he can tell. He has hinted that "Tom" (presumably Tom Pearce, a fine gentleman, and a Krag guru/expert of long standing - see KCA site) has alluded to the same feature or circumstance, but not what that "key" might be. So, we will all be in suspense for a while longer, I guess.