Sporterized Krag

[rjathon]

I'm interested in obtaining a Krag rifle. While I would prefer a pristine military version they are very expensive. The sporterized ones are so much cheaper.

It dawned on me that while the military version has a limited history compared to other rifles the sporterized version has a rich history as so many were released to the public at low prices. The Sporterized version has a history all of its own, and in my ignorant opinion is a nice piece of American history.

What is a reasonable price for a nicely done sporterization from the past?

Is this a fun accurate gun to shoot and a nice addition to a collection of cheaply obtained Mausers? I bought a few Mausers back when they were dirt cheap. Now the cheap ones are the sporterized ones, which used to be the expensive ones. Maybe it is time to start a sporterized military rifle collection. Am I nuts?

Russ

[madsenshooter]

Russ, $300-400 ought to get you a good one. Sporterizing, means a lot of different things, could be one with just the forearm lopped off, to a Griffin and Howe or Sedgely made sporter. They come scoped, or iron sighted, reduced in size military stocks to fine custom wood. All my Krags have done some fine shooting, whether in military trim, or this one cut down rifle I have. It is model 92 rifle cut down to a 24" barrel, and it wears a very unique scope mount, a Miller Kodiak Mount that can be quickly removed. When that's done, another bolt with a Rice peep sight on top can be installed. I shot the attached group just the other day with the rifle. Load was the B&M 311169, Belding and Mull's version of the Squibb bullet, over 11.2gr of 101B101, for around 1400fps. Not the greatest of groups, 2.2" tall x .85" wide. But charges were thrown, not weighed, and the rifle is 116yrs old. Scope is an old Weaver 6x.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/imagehosting/thum_12364f89c0365aa15.jpg (http://castboolits.gunloads.com/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=4812)


http://castboolits.gunloads.com/imagehosting/thum_12364f89c056d5037.jpg (http://castboolits.gunloads.com/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=4813)

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/imagehosting/thum_12364f89c06da8dd8.jpg (http://castboolits.gunloads.com/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=4814)

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/imagehosting/thum_12364f89c0a3c1258.jpg (http://castboolits.gunloads.com/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=4815)

[Kraschenbirn]

If you're lookin' for a real cast boolit shooter, they don't get much than a nice Krag sporter. And, as you noted, there are still some around that can be had for a decent price. I found mine a couple years ago on a consignment auction...paid $185 for it, IIRC...and, with the exception of my two Schmidt-Rubins, it shoots CBs as well (or better) than any of my unaltered milsurps.

The .30-40 is an easy round to reload and that long neck makes in really 'boolit-friendly'. Also, I've found I can nearly duplicate ballistics of the original military rounds (220 gr jacketed @ 1960 fps) with cast (215 gr @ 1950 fps) which is certainly adequate for most North American game.

Bill

[frnkeore]

Well,I can't say if your nuts but any well done sporterized milsurp is worth having.

All other things equal, a sporter is easier to accurize and for me, as a shooter, I would rather have a accurate rifle than a safe queen original.

I'm not saying originals aren't accurate or can't be made accurate. If you look at the CBA match results and records, you'll find that at 100 yards, the "as issue" rifles can do well for the sights that they use! But, you can do a lot to the modified scope and iron sight classes.

Regarding price, local auctions (like law enforcement) are good places (maybe the best) to buy. I got what I think is a Bannerman 26" barrel,sportized 1898 Krag for $150 about 5 years ago. I've seen (here in OR) custom done sporters for as low as $150 with a scope (last year) in a pawn shop. I wouldn't pay over $250 for a nicely done sporter but, beauty is in the eye of the beholder :)

Frank

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/imagehosting/thum_88524ea1fb8e7ed4e.jpg (http://castboolits.gunloads.com/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=2462)http://castboolits.gunloads.com/imagehosting/thum_88524ea1fbaad935c.jpg (http://castboolits.gunloads.com/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=2463)

[bunkysdad]

http://img.tapatalk.com/63709704-3776-692c.jpgI was just noticing how long I have been a member here and I don't ever post anything. For the past year I have focused on purchasing a few firearms and the reloading has sat dormant. This post is an interesting one. As a milsurp collector, I have primarily leaned toward original rifles with a strong lean towards preservation. It is much easier to do when collecting Russian rifles, or even some others. But American arms are just going through the roof. They are not as thick on the ground as they once were, and I count my blessings for finding this one, a m1896 Springfield. I can surely see the interest. I think there is a huge difference between a guy in his garage hacking up a correct classic, vs a classic Krag that was sperterized long ago. These are the ones like several here have posted, a nice piece of American heritage in it's own right. :)

[HighHook]

I am also a Mauser collector and ran across a few Krags years ago. Once you toss in few cartridges in the side door, chamber the round with the silky smooth action, pull the trigger and hit what you aim at. It will be one of your favorites. :grin:

Even if you get a Sporter you can get parts and Stocks on ebay and GB to restore them if that's what you want. 8-)

[madsenshooter]

The first time I shot mine rapid fire in a match, I had to open the bolt a couple times to see if it picked up a cartridge cause it sure didn't feel like it did! Luckily, it was just a practice match and they let me finish out the string.

[uscra112]

I think it was an anecdote from Elmer Keith - to the effect that in military matches around 1910 or so they had to ban the Kraq to force the shooters to use the '03 Springfield. Seems the Krag was the better shooter. It certainly is no slouch.

Personally I love the sporter Krags - they often show a level of craftsmanship that speaks very well of our grandfathers. Often done under dire financial constraints, due to the Hoover/Roosevelt Depression. I even have one converted to .22 Lovell R2, and another converted for the .219 Zipper. It's possible to eliminate the "Krag Bulge" at the expense of cutting magazine capacity to 2 rounds, and by eliminating the magazine AND leaving off the left sideplate, (making it a singleshot), the action fits into a "normal" stock.

Military purists sneer and shout "Bubba" at Krag sporters, and I just smile and haul away three good shooters for the price they paid for one beat-up relic.

This is the Lovell Krag:

[Char-Gar]

I think it was an anecdote from Elmer Keith - to the effect that in military matches around 1910 or so they had to ban the Kraq to force the shooters to use the '03 Springfield. Seems the Krag was the better shooter. It certainly is no slouch.

Personally I love the sporter Krags - they often show a level of craftsmanship that speaks very well of our grandfathers. Often done under dire financial constraints, due to the Hoover/Roosevelt Depression. I even have one converted to .22 Lovell R2, and another converted for the .219 Zipper. It's possible to eliminate the "Krag Bulge" at the expense of cutting magazine capacity to 2 rounds, and by eliminating the magazine AND leaving off the left sideplate, (making it a singleshot), the action fits into a "normal" stock.

Military purists sneer and shout "Bubba" at Krag sporters, and I just smile and haul away three good shooters for the price they paid for one beat-up relic.

This is the Lovell Krag:

That is a bit of oral myth that I very much doubt. There reaches a time when a certain model become general issue and then it is used for matches. I know Krags and I know 03s, and the Krag while a good rifle, is inferior to the 03 in many ways, including accuracy. Nobody who hopes to win a match will use a Krag against an 03.

Those interested in the use of the Krag on military rifle ranges and the transition to the 03, should read two articles by Townsend Whelen, "Days of the Krag" and "Days of the Springfield". This happend when Whelen was on duty and active in military rifle competition.

[4570guy]

When shooting .308 jacketed ammo, my 03A3 will definitely outshoot my Krag. When it comes to properly sized cast bullets however, the two rifles are dead even. Both will shoot 1.5 MOA from a rest when I do my part. From field positions, my scores are very similar with both the Krag and the 03A3. I've shot 99's with both rifles on separate occasions. I have to keep the two apart in the gun cabinet to keep them from arguing with one another:)

[frnkeore]

"I think it was an anecdote from Elmer Keith - to the effect that in military matches around 1910 or so they had to ban the Kraq to force the shooters to use the '03 Springfield. Seems the Krag was the better shooter. It certainly is no slouch."

I've read a similar quote. I believe my sourse was either Shape or Hatcher. I'll do some looking tonight and see if I can find it.

To add to the guys favoring Krag's might be that the Krags barrels and recievers stayed together during those first few years that the '03's were blowing up. It's hard to keep from flinching if you think the rifle may go somewhere while your holding it :)

Frank

[KCSO]

I've got one PM me with e mail for pictures and prices, a professional job not a bubba.

[Char-Gar]

The Krag rifle had serious issues with their barrel groove and land specs. The old black powder Trapdoor rifles also had specs all over the map, but it wasn't a problem with black powder and hollow base bullets. Like the Minie bullets, they expanded to fit whatever barrel they were fired in.

With the switch to the Krag, a small caliber bullet and jacketd bullet barrel specs became a serious concern. Springfield was late getting out of the starting gate on this matter. The barrel specs were all over the map from .308 to .316 in the grooves. .3095 was the most common found in the early barrels.

The Krags just would not compete in the Palma Match and Harry Pope was called in to see if he could find the problem. He found the problem pretty darn quick. It was the loosey goosey barrel specs. Being a barrel maker old Harry was pretty much horrified by what he found.

Toward the end of Krag production, the barrels were coming out .308 and that is where the 03's started.

The Krag is a great cast bullet rifle because we can compensate for the odd ball barrel groove specs. I have four Krags with issue barrels and they run .312, .311, .3095 and .308 in the barrel grooves.

The Krags did have some advantages over the 03 on the range. They had less recoil, the bolt was much slicker and faster to operate. The longer barrel gave better sight radius. Because of these features, the Krag would give you what it had to give easier than the 03. But the fly in the ointment is that the average Krag had less to give in terms of accuracy than the 03. Now if you can guage and had pick Krags with .308 barrel, that is a different story. I am talking about the rack grade Krag and not a hand picked rifle.

So when folk talk about a Krag being more accurate than an 03, the question is which Krag and which 03 and which shooter. Pull one of each out of the baracks rack and give it to the same expert marksman and the 03 will win hands down.

[rjathon]

Thanks for all of the great info.

Once a Krag is sporterized does it matter if it has a refinished stock vs one with the markings intact?

Does it matter if it has original sights vs a receiver aperture sight and store bought front sight?

If one can obtain a mold that will match the bore is accuracy on par with a .308 barrel?

Thank you all so much I'm learning tons of great stuff.

Russ

[gnoahhh]

Once sporterized, all bets are off as far as collector value goes. Refinish to your heart's content! (It is neat though to maintain the original inspectors stampings if possible. Why? Just because, IMO.)

The only way you'll wring the nth degree of accuracy out of it with issue sights is if your eyeballs are not old enough to buy liquor. A good aperture sight will do wonders. I personally don't mind the front blade, but a sight with a more defined profile would be better IMO.

If the bullet is carefully matched to the throat/bore of a Krag, and the general condition of the bore is up to snuff, it'll deliver wonderful accuracy.

[rjathon]

The enjoyment of classic military rifle shooting for me comes from shooting from positions that one might encounter when hunting- off hand, sitting, etc. Shooting benches are great for comparing and working up loads. These rifles weren't made for the bench and IMHO they still don't belong there. I had a hunting buddy who had never shot his rifle on paper. He said that it had never disappointed him in the field and shooting on paper would only risk his confidence. I had another friend who shot his trusty hunting rifle on paper and was thoroughly disgusted by the huge group that it threw. I mentioned to him that he might try shooting another five shot group only this time just shooting one shot per day. That group was fine and his confidence was restored.

You all have convinced me that a Krag rifle that was sporterized 100 years ago is a worthy firearm and that with proper mould selection can shoot reasonably well as a sportsman would shoot it. I am well on my way to obtaining said rifle.

Thank you so much. There is one important thing that I want to be credited with after I am dead and gone. "He left his sons fine rifles." Hopefully their sons will say the same.

Russ

[KCSO]

Here is one of my Krag sporters. 24" barrel old Bishop stock, paneled cheekpiece 18lpi checkering and old Weaver side mount scope with Springfield front and Williams rear sight. Bore 309.