What’s it worth?

[butlersrangers]

There is no Springfield Research Services (SRS) listing or data on U.S. Krag #40093.
(This means it was not found documented in government records, researched by Frank Mallory and others. IIRC - less than 4% of Krags are listed).

Krag rifle, #40093, would have been assembled at Springfield Armory, around August, 1896.

IMHO - The wood pores appear 'open' on your Krag's stock. It may have been 'cleaned' with some form of chemical 'finish stripper'.

The wood, possibly, is Italian walnut. The interior looks like it, but, I am not sure. I think this stock is a bit of a riddle!

The Italian walnut blanks were not purchased from a New York City lumber company, until June and July, 1899.

If 'Rookhawks' stock is stamped with an '1896 cartouche', that seems too early for Italian wood, as an original stock, on a Krag. (It must be American black walnut).

FWIW - Over 30,000 Italian walnut blanks were utilized by Springfield Armory. (These Italian stocks usually appear dated 1899 to 1902, in my experience).
Some of these light colored stocks were darkened with stain, (maybe at the unit level), to better match the predominant black walnut stocked rifles.
When stained, the interior wood surfaces were mainly neglected, leaving some of the 'yellowish' natural colored wood visible, upon disassembly.

Note - All the American black walnut stocks made at Springfield Armory were also stained, using 'log wood' stain, during manufacture. The interior surfaces of these stocks received the benefit of a bit of stain.

If the OP's stock was chemically 'stripped', we may actually be viewing how the stripper acted on the wood, compounded with some partial 'refinish attempt'.

It is hard to analyze a rifle just from photos.
I am trying to be objective and I am not 'trashing' this Krag.

In my opinion, the stock has been 'messed with', at some point of time.

With an excellent bore, someone will find it very desirable as a 'shooter' and may pay extra. I think $700 to $800 is still a fair valuation.

[Dick Hosmer]

I'm very sorry if it was inferred that I was "trashing" this rifle. I said it was very nice, and even gave it a higher price (on reflection perhaps too high) than B/R - but after more than 50 years of doing this, I call 'em as I see 'em, and that rifle is nowhere near the suggested "unissued" state. It has very definitely been subjected to a fair amount of wear, or "processing", or both, but is still quite desirable.

[butlersrangers]

Dick - I did not think for a moment that you were 'trashing' the OP's Krag. You are a Gentleman.

I do not want anyone thinking that I am seeing his rifle in a bad light or as being undesirable.

I did think that the OP was portraying his rifle's condition as better than the photographs should merit.

I was trying to be objective and give some insights on his Krag and how a value is estimated.
There is no desire to disrespect or hurt feelings.

Members of the KCA forum have seen a fair number of Krags.
('Rookhawk', from what he stated, has not seen so many).

We all can learn on the forum. Feedback and discussions teach me a great deal.

Of course, the past year has totally destabilized gun and ammunition prices. Putting a value on firearms has always been subjective and tricky, at best!

The 'gun collector community' and 'appetites' also seem to be in a state of flux.

[rookhawk]

Just to clarify, I don’t know how Krag collector’s describe their guns, but I was giving an opinion based upon the NRA antique grading standard. For guns 100 years old or older, there is no such standard per se as mint. 95% original finish is as far as they go. The bore is exceptional as compared to any number of best grade non-military guns I’ve owned from that vintage for comparison. The internals were not even patina gray from sitting, they were shiny and immaculate. The bolt face has no shadow ring or any indication that it saw any issued service. I assume 1896 era ammunition was corrosive? There is no corrosion to the breech face as I would expect for a gun of this era. The butt plate is most definitely the most worn feature of the gun. As though it lumbered around in racks quite a bit. The bolt handle has equal patina all over it, no significant amount of wear or unique patina on the knob itself suggesting the bolt wasn’t racked much either. Most of my rifles will show wear pattern exclusively to the knob after as little as a week on a hunt.

As to the stock, I completely agree something is odd about it. A cursory look at other stock photos do not provide a match to this stock. This stock is very pink, quite similar to mahogany. As you’ll note in the interior and protected surfaces of the stock, there was never any finish or stain applied to many areas of the gun stock. Odd. As another person mentioned, the pores of the wood are open which again is very, very odd. I have a variety of walnut gun stocks on guns valued between $500 and $50,000 Claro, Bastogne, California Hybrids, French, English, Turkish, European, American Black, and none of the woods have the grain structure of this particular rifle. There are no signs of sanding or scraping on the gunstock at all which is hard to believe if someone was tinkering with the gun 50 to 70 years ago…too many shade tree gunsmiths existed not to totally mess up the gun if they were refinishing and for what reason one would rework the stock I have no idea as the condition is very good.

While I cannot prove this to anyone else’s satisfaction, I know this rifle and the others I purchased in a bulk group were not messed with, cleaned, or fired since FDR was president. Could someone have stripped the gun stock with a chemical stripper back in the 1940s? Possibly, but there weren’t a heck of a lot of chemical strippers out there back then and those I can think of like TSP would have bleached the wood. Add to that, people are slobs and its odd that the arsenal nor the owner got any chemicals or stripper to the natural, original, and unfinished interior of the stock. It’s just weird all the way around. The other odd thing is that the cartouches are profound and visible, the idea that a stripper or sanding didn’t remove the cartouches gives me consideration that this stock wasn’t reworked, but rather was in this state for a very long time, maybe always.

[butlersrangers]

Sorry ... You have clearly 'out grown' my knowledge, experience, and opinions.

I am often wrong in life and try not to argue. By now, I have lost track of your question.

attached: OP photo - IMHO the arrows point to some likely evidence of 'sanding of wood',
(faint area of cartouche and 'proud' metal in tang area that is usually flush with wood).