Krag Collectors Association Forum

FWIW - That looks mighty convincing to me.

Here is the rear sight which I failed to include in my previous post. This rifle is for sale along with 9 other Krag, all different configurations. Also have 14 different, high-condition Trap-door Springfields for sale if anyone is interested in more details, prices and photos please let me know.

I will get mine out tomorrow and take some decent photos. The Bowie is faux.

One key point that is seldom mentioned is that the bayonet lug for those "short rifles" intended for use with the 1905 bayonet is beveled at the front like that of a 1903. This was done because - while the bayonets are completely interchangeable - they latch differently, and the bevel makes the 1905 slide on much easier. I do not know whether this feature is any sort of identifier of PCR vs. SG, but it is worth noting. For anyone with a flat lug (I've seen 'em) tempted to make a quick run to the workbench grinder (1) Please don't (2) Remember that a genuine bevel will have wear, rounding, and patina not easily duplicated in 15 seconds on the wheel . . . . .

Dick Hosmer brings up a very interesting point, concerning some Krag short rifles having a bevel on the bayonet-lug to accept the 1903 Springfield bayonet.
Other 'short' Krags lack a bevel on the bayonet-lug.

Attached are photos of a Philippine Constabulary Sergeant, A Girard College cadet, and a Northwestern Military Academy rifle muzzle,
that all appear to have Krag bayonet-lugs, that do not have a bevel.

These three organizations, incidentally, used the standard Krag bayonet on their 'short' rifles.
Girard (350) and Northwestern (120) purchased a combined total of 470 'School Rifles', during 1906 and 1908.

Whig,

Since you are the only person i know to have a genuine/probable/possible real PCR, did Joe Farmer say anything about this point? For that matter, did he EVER tell you what the feature was that convinced him yours was real? And, if he did, are you at liberty to divulge what that feature was, or is it something so easy to "change" as to be better left untold.

Perhaps I'm totally out in left field here, but I definitely recall seeing, long ago, somewhere "official" that, while Krag bayonets would cerainly fit, the intended bayonet for the short rifles was the 1905. Playing devil's advocate here, that WOULD fly counter to the fact that 1905s were probably needed for the fledgling 1903 production, and should/could not be wasted on backwater arms? Maybe there is a definitive answer, maybe there isn't. Maybe Knute will find it - he has doggedly sniffed out a lot of good stuff . . .

Interesting minutia concerning the bayonet lug and lug beveling details. If the logic for reconfiguring surplus Krag carbines into school guns was to have more appropriately sized drill rifles I can't imagine suing/supplying 1906 model bayonets. Terribly long and muzzle heavy!

Just for yuks, I took a look at my school gun bayonet lug and it definitely has the bevel.

And THERE'S an interesting angle (bad pun) that I'd not considered. The drill/school guns were not made for combat, but the PCRs were . . . and that 4" extra reach could be put to good use.

If I remember correctly, there may have once been an intention to provide the Philippine Constabulary with 1903 Springfield bayonets, but, they opted to use the standard Krag bayonet.

Mine seems to have a slight bevel.