1898 30/40 Krag Serial #247150 with pictures-hopefully in order...

[gnoahhh]

Ah, I didn't see that. Those oversize pics are a little tedious to look at. If a hunting tool is the final goal, again were it me, I would ditch the 1902 sight and install a no-drill Redfield or Pacific receiver sight. They, and Lyman 48's have been my go-to's over 50 years now of messing with Krag sporters.

[Krfoote]

If I am understanding this so far. There were never any 24" barrels produced?
I have other rifles to hunt with but I do enjoy shooting it, cutting the barrel would make it lighter but its never going to be more original than it is now so i don't see a reason to cut the barrel.
Other than perhaps a front site and a complete 1902 rear site. I think I will leave it as is, I just wish hadn't stained it.

But I am considering buying another rusty old Krag that will likely need all of those things so I will look into them.

Thanks for the input

Originally Posted by gnoahhh

Two courses of action maybe. One, leave it as-is and use it to generate some venison. Two, apply some TLC and make it more representative of a carbine or NRA Sales rifle. If the latter, were it me, I would replace the stock with a repro carbine stock, leave the metal alone (except maybe to replace the bodgered trigger guard and the severely pitted side plate - both of which are to be had cheaply), and finally cut the barrel back even farther to 22" and install a correct Krag front sight, again pretty cheap. Luckily it sounds like the bore is ok, but if it turns out to be screwed up the easiest solution is a Criterion replacement barrel - around $200+change, plus cost of fitting which is an easy chore for someone who understands the rifles.
If you go with solution #2, definitely hang onto the current stock. There is a certain little bit of charm in such things from a folk art standpoint!

I don't mind the side plate or the trigger guard. It gives it a little character! I was mostly interested in determining if I was correct in my assessments of what I had, and it sounds like I am.
Does the stock appear to be an 1899 carbine ?
I have another possible project coming up and all of this info is helpful and appreciated as I will likely need to do much of this.
So thanks very much.

[JimF]

[QUOTE=Krfoote;2094485 . . . . .
Does the stock appear to be an 1899 carbine ? . . . . ..[/QUOTE]

No . . . .AUTHENTIC carbines had NO SLING SWIVELS!

[Mark1]

Carbine stocks do not have the relief cut in the barrel channel filled.. Also they have a band spring. They do not have pistol grips added nor are they checkered. It is a rifle stock cut down and modified.

[AzMedic]

may get lucky here:

https://www.granpasgunparts.com/krag-springfield

https://www.granpasgunparts.com/new-products

[Krfoote]

Originally Posted by JimF

No . . . .AUTHENTIC carbines had NO SLING SWIVELS!

Lol, calm down. I know its not correct NOW, just wondered if thats what it was. But now I know.

Originally Posted by Mark1

Carbine stocks do not have the relief cut in the barrel channel filled.. Also they have a band spring. They do not have pistol grips added nor are they checkered. It is a rifle stock cut down and modified.

I know they don't have palm grips added, It is clearly modified- as I made clear in my post. Lol I meant could it have been a carbine stock. Not sure which relief cut you are referring to, there are 3 of them in this example. But if your certain then its good enough for me.

Thanks.