Late production Krag receivers?

U.S. Military Krags
Post Reply
waterman
Posts: 447
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 4:29 pm

Late production Krag receivers?

Post by waterman »

I've recently received Joe Farmer's book. I hurriedly looked for a wealth of information on Gallery Practice Rifles and, of course, on Stevens-Pope barrels. Joe wrote that he didn't collect .22 rimfires and wasn't much interested either. He did write that GPR rifles were simply taken from the last of the regular Model 1898 run-of-the-mill rifles (SN 475,000 to 481,000 range) and re-worked. I have both a '96 with a 5-digit number and a '98 converted at Benecia. Closing my eyes and working the actions of either produces the amazing feeling of smoothness we've come to expect from American Krags.

A few years back, I shot a nicely remodeled GPR in a summer prone league and gave the rifle a workout from the bench. The first thing I learned was that the GPR did NOT have the American Krag smoothness of action. Certainly, part of that was because the extractor on the bolt had to pull on the auxiliary extractor to remove the fired case from the chamber. But even if I left the bolt forward but in a position where the extractor was not in contact with any part of the auxiliary extractor, there was absolutely no smoothness to the remainder of the bolt's travel.

I removed the GPR's bolt and ran my little finger along the inside of the action, along the bolt's raceway, then did the same thing with my '98. The sensations imparted to my little finger were not the same. The GPR action was rougher. And then there is that blankety-blank trip pin, designed to knock the rimfire case out of the extractor's grip.

If unissued Model 1898 rifles were simply re-worked, what happened to the polish and finish of the interiors?

User avatar
Dick Hosmer
Posts: 2273
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 4:11 pm

Re: Late production Krag receivers?

Post by Dick Hosmer »

I'm not a metallurgist, but they had to be annealed for the hole-drilling. I wonder if that created any roughness which they did not bother polishing out? I suspect that, given they were only to be used for .22LR, they were possibly not even re-hardened. I'll have to check mine and see if I can feel any difference. I do have a little drag because one of the extractor plate springs is broken/missing. But, how did it shoot? Never fired mine but I've always planned to.

FredC
Posts: 1991
Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 4:38 pm
Location: Dewees Texas

Re: Late production Krag receivers?

Post by FredC »

Waterman,
I have never seen one of these and can only guess and surmise. If the receiver was annealed not reheatreated the interior surface would have a higher coefficient of friction. The process may have introduced some scale to the interior surfaces. If it was actually annealed and remachined after annealing it could have made a rougher surface. Is the bolt guide still there? It is supposed to be a big part of the Krags legendary smoothness.

You know what you need to do is sell the thing to me for a dollar and i will sell it back to you for $2.00 after I have made a thorough examination. Err, maybe I will sell it back. :-)

User avatar
Dick Hosmer
Posts: 2273
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 4:11 pm

Re: Late production Krag receivers?

Post by Dick Hosmer »

Not sure what you meant by "bolt guide"? If you meant the bolt rib, yes it is still there. The receiver rail above the magazine box is machined off for about 1.5" to allow easier access to the chamber, but that is not a contact surface.

FredC
Posts: 1991
Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 4:38 pm
Location: Dewees Texas

Re: Late production Krag receivers?

Post by FredC »

Dick Hosmer wrote: Thu Jun 03, 2021 4:43 pm Not sure what you meant by "bolt guide"? If you meant the bolt rib, yes it is still there.
That is what I probably meant, bolt rib. Guide would probably better describe the cut in the receiver that the rib runs in.

waterman
Posts: 447
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 4:29 pm

Re: Late production Krag receivers?

Post by waterman »

The sample I experimented with was an early one, loaned to me for a prolonged accuracy trial. Someone went to a lot of trouble to sporterize the issue stock, very nice job, inletted pistol grip, raised comb, "blind" barrel band. Very nice blue. It was fitted with a Redfield (?) "no drill" receiver sight, and IIRC, a Lyman 17A front sight, and a quite decent trigger. The conversion was a really good job. Not a Griffin & Howe, but much like something of theirs.

All the parts of the magazine had been removed, including the side plate and the box on the right side. When you fired the rifle and opened the bolt, the cartridge case was held in place by the extractor until the bolt hit the trip pin. Then the case would fall into the space that once was the magazine. To get the cases out, I turned the rifle upside down and shook it. That part worked very well.

But all that work was probably done without shooting it first. Had anyone put it on the sandbags, they would not have wasted the money on the work, the sights or on sandpaper. The barrel was chambered for .22 Extra Long, had a groove diameter of 0.226", and had an 18" twist. I read somewhere that only the first 50 or so made had those barrels and the rest had barrels made for .22 Long Rifle, with proper chambers, proper groove diameters and 16" twists, but I don't know if that is correct.

I shot the rifle in a few "smallbore prone iron sight" matches at 50 yards, 50 meters and 100 yards. From prone, using Eley Club or a Lapua equivalent, and using the standard NRA smallbore target, the rifle would barely keep shots in the 8-ring. The other competitors kept theirs in the 10-ring and the match was always won by the X-ring count. From the bench, at 50 yards, it would not reliably hit any of the commonly used bench rest targets.

I have a Waltz die for reforming ordinary .22 LR bullets and the guy who made the PACO accurizer made me a special version for this rifle. Eley Club run through either of those was a bit improved in accuracy, but the bullets tipped going through the target paper.

I had a couple of boxes of CCI "Stingers", the kind with a longer than normal LR case and a thin jacketed bullet. I tried those and was amazed. It shot pretty well, much better than any ordinary .22 ammunition. And actually shot Stingers better than any other .22 that I tried with them.

Post Reply