Why did the US go with the Krag design?

[butlersrangers]

That looks like a very interesting read .... and will probably beget even more debate!

[gew98]

For decades I wondered about the lack of innovation and keeping up with foreign technology in US military small arms up until the M1 rifle and carbine were adopted. The vast majority of issue rifles up to that point were plagued with being delicate and or overly designed with target shooting and not combat shooting in mind - a serious drawback to my thinking and experience.
To that point the adoption of the M14 was a retrograde...but was soon replaced by the Armalite. And as usual corporate military industrial complex allowed initial manufacture to have deleted qualities of rifles and ammunition to suit their suppliers wallets. The armalite has about reached it's anilities with taking anymore meaningful enhancements.
Anyhow the krag though a great rifle to toy with has delicate sights and wood compared to european issue rifles of the same period. The europeans and even japanese were more keen on more efficient means of killing.

[butlersrangers]

IMHO - Terrain, tropical weather & diseases, poor logistics & tactics, volunteer troops armed with BP .45-70 rifles, and poor overall command had much to do with U.S. Army shortcomings in Cuba.

I imagine, that if the Spanish troops entrenched on the heights at Santiago, Cuba, had been armed with Krag-Jorgensen rifles, they would have inflicted a similar number of U.S. casualties.

The American Civil War provided ample lessons of the terrible cost of taking strong defensive positions defended by determined riflemen. (The British Army would suffer similar outcomes during the Boer War).

[macqnj107@aol.com]

“The vast majority of issue rifles up to that point were plagued with being delicate and or overly designed with target shooting and not combat shooting in mind - a serious drawback to my thinking and experience. “

That’s how wars were fought in those days. “Firepower” was not a thing. When US soldiers got to France, they were hitting targets at here-to-fore unknown ranges. Germans in the opposite trenches could no longer do their laundry because US riflemen were picking them off. It probably a myth, but it was said they would pick off the German’s clothes pins.

We do think in terms of firepower in modern warfare – and you’re right, the M1 Garand did give us that when warfare had evolved to that point – but keep in mind that the world’s armies were still slowly evolving away from single-shot weapons where every shot had to count and the thinking of military leadership is always slow to change.

It’s a “Chicken and the Egg” question. Do weapon improvements drive tactics or do tactics drive weapon improvements? Which came first? We’ll probably never know.

[butlersrangers]

FWIW - I have a Ludwig & Loewe Model 1893 Spanish Mauser that was made in 1894 and refurbished at Oviedo at a later date.
I consider the Spanish Mauser a very rugged and well designed arm. Although, original models have little provision for venting gases away from the shooter in the event of a failed cartridge case.

Interestingly, when I obtained this Mauser, the original front-sight blade was 'sheared off' the dovetailed base.
The German rear-sight 'slide' had been arsenal replaced with a more robust Oviedo designed slide.
The various Mauser rifles, (models 1894, 1895, and 1896), derived from the 1893 Spanish Model, are notorious for having a fragile rear-sight slide.

I am not aware of period reports of the various models of U.S. Krag Rifle sights being overly fragile in the field.
Cavalry carbine sights were easily damaged by saddle scabbards. Front-sight 'hoods' and protective hand-guards were devised.
From experience, the 'slide-locking knobs' on model 1898, 1901 and 1902 sights are often found 'sheared off'.
(I have repaired a few).
Many model 1902 sights are found with the slide 'locking-knob' that was designed for the early "Rod-Bayonet" 1903 Springfield. It would appear that Armorers and surplus dealers repaired a lot of 1902 sights.

Most rifle systems seem to undergo a process of use, with subsequent "fixes" of flaws and deficiencies, in the course of their service.
No matter how good a design is, if any thing can go wrong, it will. (Then the Ordnance Guys tinker with it).

[Local Boy]

"That’s how wars were fought in those days. “Firepower” was not a thing."

I'm sure the over one million casualties of the Somme Campaign (1 July to 13 November 1916) would beg to differ.

The Winds-of-Change seem to keep blowing every where...here's a video concerning the possible adoption of a U.S. replacement cartridge for the .556:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h43ToUjBkPQ

[Knute1]

When most weapons are adopted by a military there is a period of further trials of the selected item before going into full production to get some minor, unforeseeable kinks worked out. Not so much with the Krag-Jorgensen design of the US. Krag production was delayed so American gun makers could have another chance of winning favor. I don't know if it was because the U.S. was behind the eight ball in coming up with a repeating "magazine" rifle, but the Krag was put into production rather fast once the go ahead was given. Necessary changes were made later, after the Krag was already issued. Not saying this was unusual. Just that some of the changes could have been found out before the weapon was issued with a little more time.

[butlersrangers]

You want "Fire Power"? Try the Evans .... 40 plus rounds, held in the rifle butt-stock and fed by an Archimedean screw principle magazine!

(Not all ideas are good ideas).

IIRC - Francis Bannerman tried submitting a .44 cal. Evans rifle for the Ordnance Department's Magazine-Rifle Board tests.

[Doubly Reincarnated]

A few Evans rifles are in circulation even today. Be aware that they will function mechanically with modern .44 Magnum revolver ammunition. Sooner or later, someone will load one and pull the trigger. Results will not be tidy.

[butlersrangers]

You are very correct 'Reincarnated'!

I remember fiddling with a friend's Evans carbine, years ago. There was nothing to like about it.
IIRC - The lever had to be worked to feed each cartridge into the magazine. Forty some repetitions until the first cartridge appeared in the action!
I believe the only thing that held the breechblock in 'battery' was the shooter's fingers wrapped around the lever.

UGLY INDEED!