Page 2 of 3

Re: 1898 .30-40 vs 1894 6.5x55 for action stregnth?

Posted: Tue Feb 27, 2024 5:22 pm
by Dick Hosmer
psteinmayer wrote: Tue Feb 27, 2024 1:20 pm The test Dick is referring to was performed many years ago by Michael Petrov... and demonstrated that the US Krag was actually incredibly strong. As Dick said... it took a LOT to cause a failure!

https://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ub ... ber=211013

Rest assured, I wouldn't go and purposely remove the locking lug... but that guide rib provides quite a strong backup safety, should that single lug crack!
Thanks Paul, I'm pretty sure that's the SAME test, but not the only write-up of it? I'm remembering some different pictures, and the verbiage was different too, because there was the zinger at the very end - "Oh, and by the way, the bolt lug had been machined completely off . . . ." Any one else have the other write-up?

Re: 1898 .30-40 vs 1894 6.5x55 for action stregnth?

Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2024 12:44 pm
by psteinmayer
butlersrangers wrote: Tue Feb 27, 2024 4:25 pm If you want a magnum ... buy a magnum ... not a Krag.
Well said Chuck!

Re: 1898 .30-40 vs 1894 6.5x55 for action stregnth?

Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2024 12:46 pm
by psteinmayer
I used to have MP's original report Dick. I'll see if I can dig it up...

Continued:
Well, I did some searching, and it seems that the link I shared was MP's original post on the DoubleGun forum (dated 12-27-2010). The part about the locking lug is contained in the reply below the post. Most of the pictures were either removed or have expired (at the photobucket site) - this could be because Michael passed away in 2014. I wish the photos were still there because they were very interesting and integral to the story!

Re: 1898 .30-40 vs 1894 6.5x55 for action stregnth?

Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2024 3:36 pm
by Dick Hosmer
Wasn't the whole thing also posted here - and so should be available somehow - or was it by link reference only? Hope it isn't gone - was kinda neat . . .

Re: 1898 .30-40 vs 1894 6.5x55 for action stregnth?

Posted: Thu Feb 29, 2024 1:03 pm
by psteinmayer
Agreed!

Re: 1898 .30-40 vs 1894 6.5x55 for action stregnth?

Posted: Thu Feb 29, 2024 5:59 pm
by waterman
Dick Hosmer wrote: Wed Feb 28, 2024 3:36 pm Wasn't the whole thing also posted here - and so should be available somehow - or was it by link reference only? Hope it isn't gone - was kinda neat . . .
I'm old, also, but I seem to recall that, once upon a time, MP's Krag destruction article was posted here.

Re: 1898 .30-40 vs 1894 6.5x55 for action stregnth?

Posted: Thu Feb 29, 2024 7:46 pm
by butlersrangers
"OLD" ... is so overdone!

Re: 1898 .30-40 vs 1894 6.5x55 for action stregnth?

Posted: Thu Feb 29, 2024 11:10 pm
by Rapidrob
Thank you for the replies.
I do not reload any higher than 7/8 of the max load for any of my rifles. I want the best accuracy and case life.

Re: 1898 .30-40 vs 1894 6.5x55 for action stregnth?

Posted: Fri Mar 01, 2024 1:49 am
by butlersrangers
Mild loads, with accuracy and long case life? - That is what a .30-40 Krag does.

Re: 1898 .30-40 vs 1894 6.5x55 for action stregnth?

Posted: Fri Mar 01, 2024 3:37 am
by Rapidrob
I'll be shooting the Krag at 500 meters this Saturday. 185 grain BTHP over IMR-4350. Hoping the rifle does well.
Also 220 grain RNFB as well.