Remington-Lee Barrels On Krags

[Knute1]

Here is a link to an article about Remington-Lee barrels installed on Krag rifles used by an American team for the Palma Trophy in 1903. The American team lost the trophy to the British team due to a technicality, the American barrels weren't proofed.

The article is from a 1919 "Outer's Book - Recreation".

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Outdoor_Recreation/BX07AQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=krag+jorgensen+snow&pg=PA34&printsec=frontcover

[butlersrangers]

This article has major errors.

The U.S. Team had match grade barrels that were made by J. Stevens Arms & Tool Company, under the supervision of Harry M. Pope.
(In my initial response, I said Winchester made the barrels, but, I was confusing stories).

The Palma Match rules called for the use of military rifles with standard 'issue' barrels.

According to Frank Mallory, "K.R.S.", 2nd. edition, page 194:
"These barrels, unless specially ordered otherwise, are rifled with our smokeless cut, 8 grooves, 8 inch twist, right handed, so as to allow for the drift angle on the Krag sight".

Brophy page 189 image:

[Knute1]

This link indicates they used Pope barrels. Not sure if this is an "Official" website. But there sure was a dispute.

https://competitions.nra.org/documents/pdf/compete/nat-trophy/tro-090.pdf

[butlersrangers]

FWIW:

Per Mallory, "KRS", 2nd. edition, page 99, the 1907 U.S. Palma Team had 20 Krag rifles with star-gauged barrels and privately manufactured ammunition.

Mallory, page 187, wrote about a Winchester (1905) letter that informed the Ordnance Department about some competitors ordering custom Krag barrels, from Winchester, and asking that 'identifying marks' be left off.

[Knute1]

Here is a British article after the U.S. won the trophy, but before the controversy, on page 363(next page down). I think the British at first "OK'd" the barrels, but not in writing. They got upset after the U.S. had won. I'm surprised they didn't qualify arms before matches instead of having embarrassing moments like this that the U.S. team undoubtedly went through.

https://books.google.com/books?id=RFZJAQAAMAAJ&newbks=0&printsec=frontcover&dq=1903+palma+trophy+picture&hl=en&source=newbks_fb#v=onepage&q=1903%20palma%20trophy%20picture&f=false

[Knute1]

The trophy would not be competed for again until 1907. Here is an article from the "Army and Navy Register" from 2/3/1906 announcing the upcoming event with some background. On the link below you will have to click on the tab on the inset scroll bar to get to the right page. Otherwise, I re-wrote it below for easier reading. Note that the U.S. team would win the trophy in 1907.

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Army_Navy_Air_Force_Register_and_Defense/a04-AQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=1903+palma+trophy+picture&pg=RA3-PA25&printsec=frontcover

Here are some links announcing the 1907 U.S. win. I am assuming they were using the 1903 Springfield by then, but I am not sure.

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Tribune_Almanac_and_Political_Register/Bm5QAQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=1907+palma+trophy+u.s.+rifle&pg=PA283&printsec=frontcover

https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Canadian_Almanac_and_Miscellaneous_D/N8FFAQAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=1907+palma+trophy+u.s.+rifle&pg=PA167&printsec=frontcover

[FredC]

If any of you all still have a copy of 2004 Gun Digest there is a 13 page article "The truth about the 1903 Palma". A couple of the photos of Pope were contributed by Michael Petrov. Pope cut the grooves shallower on the barrels to a .00275 uniform depth. That is 5 decimal places! It is hard to hold 5 decimal places on a outside diameter today, much less on 8 points on a bore diameter.

Today ballistic coefficient is figured on smooth bullets. After bullets travel through the bore and have grooves formed in them the coefficient is less than advertised. Popes 8 shallower grooves would have had less loss of velocity plus the higher initial velocity mentioned.

Evidentially the British had 2 private companies building service arms at the time. Kind of like the pot calling the kettle black.

[butlersrangers]

FredC - Thanks for the mention of the 2004 Gun Digest article. Something worth looking for at future gun shows.

It would appear that perhaps no national team was "awarded" the Palma Trophy, in 1903, after the U.S. returned it.
It may have just been returned to the team that had last previously won it.

I guess some of the British barrels were custom made, but, followed official dimensions and rifling-twist.

p.s. - Heck, I splurged and bought a copy on ebay for $7, shipped.

[Knute1]

I'm sure you'll give us the "low down" on it when you get it.

[FredC]

BR did you ever get your 2004 Gun Digest? It also had a multi page article on Hudson designed bullets for Krags. Now with your photo of the Pope Stevens barrel on the museum thread, it makes it clear no one was hiding anything. If Pope had all original stamps on the barrel it might have been construed as fraud. Not sure what the rules were back then, maybe the eight shallower groves was the point? If he had made them with 4 standard grooves just tighter tolerance, would that have been OK?

http://www.kragcollectorsassociation.org/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1589382321/0#1