Krag rifle marked 1894

[Dick Hosmer]

1. I don't THINK so . . . have I missed something?
2. Stage fright is one thing - bullshit is another.
3. Agreed 100% (I can only stand so much Hickok45 at a sitting, now, Mae on the other hand . . . dare I say IN the other hand, lecherous old goat that I am?)

[scottz63]

Yes, Mae is easy to watch.

[rustychip1959]

Here are a few more pictures, I got the proper sight and extractor Saturday. They will be installed when I reassemble everything.

[rustychip1959]

More pictures

[rustychip1959]

A few more

[butlersrangers]

Nice parts!
Your stock appears totally correct to me.
I can't tell about the handguard, without a top view.

[rustychip1959]

Here is a top and side view of the hand guard, also a better pic of the sleeve, I didn't want to disassemble it for fear of losing the spring and ball detent. The stock still has the threaded piece that retains the cleaning rod, but it's a very tight fit, I tried a magnet but it wouldn't move, all I was trying to do was see what thread pitch and diameter they used, I think it's an oddball by todays standards, maybe a 3/16-26??

[scottz63]

That is some nice wood!

Is that not an 1892 handguard?

[rustychip1959]

According to Poyer's book he says the hand guard should be 8 9/16" long, mine is 1/32" longer, the barrel clips are the crimped style.

Also according to Poyer's book he says the magazine cut-off with the plunger and spring were put into use around circa serial #11,900 so the one I have should be correct?? He calls this a type 3

[Whig]

Well, you sure dis-assembled that Krag! Thanks for the great pictures. I have always loved the Model 1892 cocking piece with the ridges in it. And to have an original extractor for your Model 1892 receiver is wonderful. Get some nice pictures when it's all together. Your hand guard looks like the correct Model 1892 rifle hand guard that doesn't cover the front of the receiver. See picture below: