Krag Collectors Association Forum

Wondering what this is?

Can't be a 9, 6, or a 1. Nor a 8, 5, 3, or 2. So that leaves a 4 or a 7. It cannot be a 4 because it will have a vertical stroke like a 1 and perpendicular cross mark.

This has a swoop to the vertical and no cross mark so I will say the serial number is 77961.

Do you have a pic of the left side of the receiver? Does it say 1895, 1896 or Model 1896?

Yes. I would have said 77961 as well.

Model 1898 Springfield Armoury is stamped on that plate. Dave..??….is it just my eyes or does the last digit look altered from a six to an eight? And why? Does it look like it is all there? Is it a genuine carbine? I am beginning to believe it may be correct for an 1896 carbine.

That is a Model 1896, not 1898, and is in a believable carbine range. I did not check the exact number, which I too, read as 77961.

From Mr. Mallory's The Krag Rifle Story. 2nd Edition. Remember this is a snapshot in time.

77961 96c 04 11 1901 Troop I 5th Cav (Turned In)

A close up picture of the Model 1896 will show the 8 and forth digit are way different. They may look the same but that is because of the stamp and how heavy it struck the receiver.

Also, look to the right side of the receiver. The Model 1898 does not have a "track" for the bolt handle to fall into like the earlier receivers.

https://kragcollectorsassociation.org/k ... es01-1.jpg

Culpeper, I am having trouble deciding if you are telling me this is indeed a genuine 1896 carbine or that it is not. I added the only other photos I have. The seller is not being much help to me. I am not sure if he is being straight or not. Dave

I was handling a very similar Krag carbine this morning in the 78,000 range.

Technically, they are U.S. model 1896 carbines, but, they were arsenal refurbished and received model 1899 type stocks, handguard, and rear sights,
to make them more like the later model 1899 carbine.

They are a valid 1896 variant, but do not command the interest or money, that a standard and correct model 1896 carbine does.

It's all about historical use and appeal.

That is for you to decide.

All evidence points to 1896 Carbine but with the upgrades like BR mentioned. The only thing you can be certain of the barrel is 22 inches and the receiver is a known 1896 Carbine receiver per Mr. Mallory. After that you know the stock is a carbine stock but not a "saddle ring carbine" stock.

Buy it if the price is right. I would if I had the money and not 11 or 12 Krags already. Then buy a case of ammo and have at it.

Sunshineboys wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 6:28 pm Culpeper, I am having trouble deciding if you are telling me this is indeed a genuine 1896 carbine or that it is not. I added the only other photos I have. The seller is not being much help to me. I am not sure if he is being straight or not. Dave

What you are seeing is the 1890s equivalent of the M1903s, M1917s, Garands, M14s, M16s and any other mass produced military rifle. Rifles were upgraded. Worn out parts replaced. Damaged battle field pick ups were repaired en mass in the rear areas as the armies rolled forward and issued as replacements. There are plenty of WWII pictures showing armorers, with stripped down Garands and buckets of parts, putting rifles together. Nearly every Garand is a mixmaster. Krags are not that different.

The seller may not know anything beyond what he knows. You have the straight poop by coming to KCA.