1899 Krag Carbine

[Culpeper]

You are all rong. It is a rare 1899 carbine produced in 1895 with a serial number of 56106. The reason the number eight is there is hide the fact this was a proto-type carbine from the Armory. However production was halted way before the regular rifles got to the eight hundred thousands which means they could not hide their work. Darn those M1903s!

Yeah. That's the ticket. "The truth is out there." But don't ask me where.

[Dick Hosmer]

It would probably be most instructive if we could find a really definitive explanation, hopefully with illustrations, as to how the numbering die(s) were operated, indexed, etc. While some receivers can show very nice clean, evenly struck serials, others can have huge differencesr. I'd guess a "1" would require significantly less force to achieve the same depth/apperance as an "8" or "9". The lead digit would be the one receiving the most wear, the second digit would be hit ten times less, and so on down the line until the last - which had to be changed for every hit. They probably rotated the individual dies so that the same one was not always in the lead position. I'm sure glad I'm not a trivia nut . . .

[butlersrangers]

I've read, what I've been able to find, about the manufacture of the Krag at Springfield Armory.

I have been unsuccessful in finding details about the 'mechanics' of marking and numbering Krag receivers.

Even questions as basic as:
Were the serial numbers and other markings struck or rolled?
Were they applied before or after Heat Treating?
What did the mechanism, that applied letters and numbers, look like?
These questions remain unexplained and unanswered.

Over 125 operations went into reducing a 6 and 1/2 pound forging into a 1 and 1/2 pound finished Krag receiver.

It appears, the marking of the Krag receiver was so mundane a shop matter, that the actual process may have escaped mention and description.

My opinion is that some markings may have been applied prior to the receivers being placed in the heat treat ovens.
The "P" proof stamp, by logic, had to be applied after hardening and 'proofing' the receiver.
Maybe, since a royalty was paid on manufactured U.S. Krag-Jorgensen rifles & carbines,
the serial number was possibly applied after all machining and case hardening was completed?

[scottz63]

Wow. A lot of thought into numbering these things. LOL!!!

[Culpeper]

Given the times and technology would it be instructive to look the Trapdoors on some of the questions? Manufacturing norms do not change all that quickly.

Certain presumptions can be made in many cases.

[butlersrangers]

The OP's serial number photo displays a 'riddle' that begs for a logical Explanation.

We know, from documentation and experience, that 800,000 U.S. Krags were not made.
In all likelihood, 500,000 U.S. Krags were not built.

1899 carbines are marked "Model 1899". They were produced in three main batches or 'blocks'.
The serial numbers seem to cluster in approximate ranges, with a few 'outliers'.

The first Block in 1899 (approx. - 225691 to 230581).
The second Block in 1900 (approx. - 279500 to 288670).
The third and largest Block in 1901 (approx. - 341000 to 362450).

There are some model 1899 marked carbines that were apparently assembled in 1902.
I saw model 1899 carbine 420551, clearly shown in a Hickock youtube video.
Joe Farmer owns 1899 carbine 420813.
A presentation model 1899 carbine, made for General Frederick Grant in 1903, bears serial number 429596.

My opinion is that the photo, posted by the O.P., shows a damaged or altered first digit in its serial number.
'Pilot error'? intentional alteration? Damaged Die?
(I am reminded of the numerous 1873 Springfield breech-blocks, struck with a damaged Die, that appear to read "1878").

Attached is a photo of the serial number stamped on a third Block model 1899 carbine, number 349187.
This carbine was made in 1901, possibly one month before the one posted by the O.P.
Note how the 'blurred' and oversize first digit, in the confusing number, looks nothing like the 3 or the 8, contained in the properly stamped serial number.

[scottz63]

It does look much closer to the 8 than the 3 though. Much closer. It has the downward crossover from the left to the right while the 3 is straight across in the middle from the right to the left. The "dots" in the middle of the numbers as well. Two very separate small dots in the 8 and two larger oval dots in the 3 that almost connect on the left side.

I know it cannot logically be an 8 but, it sure does look like one. I would call it an 8 all day long any day.

Maybe it was restamped at some rebuild point because it was worn or light. Whoever restamped it incorrectly did the 3 with an 8 stamp. Actually the whole number looks strange.

[butlersrangers]

Krag serial numbers are a funny thing. Some are a cinch to read and others get easily misread.
Some Krag numbers look like they were stamped in a dim hut at the Khyber Pass!

.... and then there are the model 1896 receivers that seem to read "1898"!

Part of the charm of the Krag.

A couple of these serial numbers might have 50% of us coming up with conflicting 'reads'.

[scottz63]

Hmm... Even different font in close serial number ranges. Interesting these Krags are.

Here is mine 244531

Serial1.jpg (32.62 KiB) Viewed 4100 times

[GUNZABLAZIN]

I would hold to the 'broken' Die Theory, because the first digit appears to be in a 'taller' font, than the following digits, which are all of equal height.
Something had to be 'floating' or moving around, when the serial number was rolled or stamped.

(The only other explanation, I can think of, is that a single "8" hand stamp was used to alter and overstrike the original Armory "3", but this would be farfetched).

An informed dealer would be in a real quandary recording this serial number on a BATF form!

BTW - serial number, 356106, would date from around November 1901.

The Pawn shop has the S/N with the 8 , when I was trying to get the price down ,I was explaining all what was wrong , I pointed out that there weren't that many made !