I finally got to shoot the .405 after our monthly MBA Match.

Here's Kermit (AKA The Amazing Rob) nestled in with the .405



Target after semi adjusting windage. The sights are somewhat trying for target work ...but I think I can get around that.
Load is 49 grains of 4985 with a 300 gr SP. Wind was 40-50 MPH!
Recoil was noticeable .
[img:center]

"Recoil was noticeable"
I don't see any snot on the rifle?

MBA Match?

The wind blew the snot and tears toward Kansas.
MBA= Military Bolt Action (Bench Match)
Issue military rifles with essentially no modifications.

10 shots for group (2) 10 minutes
10 shots for score (3) 10 minutes

300 yard reduced target at 100 yards.

At our club <1.75" will generally win the group.
It usually takes >296 to win the aggragate.
Lots of fun

Doing all the testing for my .400-Whelen & .400-Niedner articles has left me no big hurry to get back behind them ;-).

Have you tried North Fork bullets?

Ever try a stand up bench rest? Standing up makes absorbing recoil a whole lot more pleasant, or, perhaps, a whole lot less unpleasant. Crouching down behind a kicker on a regular rest, especially a rifle stocked for offhand with a lot of drop at heel and, perhaps, a curved butt plate is just going to hurt.

Jerry Liles.

Are all original civilian 95s drilled & tapped for the Lyman mount that was screwed into the left side of the rifle? Those sights are being made again. Temporary mounting of the rear sight might make load development & evaluation a bit more meaningful.

Mike,

I have not tried the North Fork bullets. I'll research.
My buddy and I tag team the testing sessions. Recoil doesn't bother... bother... bother... either of us .

w'man

That could be an option but I will probably stay with the express sights. A different target may provide a more concise sight picture.

I have three .405s - a 95 with shotgun butt, a custom Krag with pad, and a custom HiWall with pad. They all kick.

I honestly didn't know that the Krag action would handle a .405. Of course I've never compared the chamber pressures and the .405 may actually be quite low like a lot of the big guys.

What is the Krag's maximum potential without self immolating?

I've seen several Krags in 405 Winchester. I don't have the figures in front of me but I think there both about the same chamber pressure.

If you remember my experiment with the Krag, the Krag action was built a lot stronger than most people realize.

Just in case you've never seen this before.

The Krag

There seems to be a lot of customized Krags on the market at this time, many not bad and in the $300-400 range.

I’ve seen a lot written about the Krag and many times the one locking lug is always mentioned as the “Weak” link in the Krag. This is to address the design of the Krag not the strength for a better understanding of the rifle.

Please understand that I do not advocate loading the Krag action up beyond the designed pressure limits. Stick with published loads found in any loading manual.

A few years ago after hearing one warning after another I decided to test a Krag action, to destruction.

I built a box out of wood 2x12’s with a steel top, the inside of the box was painted. I set it up so I could fire it remotely, a long string. Word traveled fast and there were a half-dozen folks on hand for the day. Who could resist seeing a gun blowup?

After everything was ready I fired two factory 220gr rounds to make sure everything was fine, it was.
I loaded all the ammo with Remington brass, 200gr Sierra bullets and CCI large rifle primers.

I then shot the following loads which showed maxim in the loading manuals.
A. 40.2 gr. 4895 All OK no problem opening the bolt
C. 36.3gr. 3031 All OK no problem opening the bolt
E. 40.9gr. 4064 All OK no problem opening the bolt
The following loads filled the case to the base of the bullet.
B. 43.0gr. 4895 All OK no problem opening the bolt
D. 41.0gr. 3031 All OK no problem opening the bolt
F. 44.0gr. 4064 All OK no problem opening the bolt

G. 20.0gr. Bullseye, Very loud noise, flattened primer, bolt very hard to open. I was a little surprised that the rifle was still in one piece.

H. 30gr. Bullseye receiver sheared off at the safety lug, both sides, receiver broke off at the bolt handle, top flange on the bolt face gone, back 3/8” of case gone, could read the headstamp on the bolt face. The barrel and back of the receiver flew out the front of the box and the box was blown apart but the paint was not so much as scratched.



Now to the important part of this experiment. ALL the rounds fired and listed above were fired after the single locking lug had been completely removed. The Krag has a well designed and strong safety lug.

That's great - I never saw that. Thanks.

I'm impressed all over again by Micheal's experimental feat and by the "poor ol' Krag."

That poor action gave its life to better our understanding, may it R.I.P. Many thanks Michael for sharing that with us.

A 35 Whelen in a Krag action and stocked up a'la 1930 would be a blast...

IMO
The Krag is a fine action for what it was designed for, although the US Army dropped it as soon as they could for what ever reason. (mostly because the Mauser kicked its backside, and may hold the record for shortest lived official service rifle, or certainly one of the shortest)
It would not be my choice to see how far it could be taken for the sake of just being able to say I did it. Big powerful cartridges usually say big and often dangerous game. Not the place I would want a "Opps just shouldn't have happened"; least wise when there are so many many better safer action choices.

Of course to each his own.
I have a 405 and it is fun to shoot. I shoot 54 grains of 3031 behind a 300 gr bullet in a single shot Fraser action.

I have seen Krag sporters in .35 WCF and in .405 WCF, but they require some modification of the magazine to accommodate the slightly longer rounds.

You're right - no flies on the 30-40, a great hunting cartridge and one dropped before its time. I always thought it would have been a great choice for Savage's break-open combination rifle/shotguns.

Does anybody know if the Army ever tried spitzer bullets in the .30-40 ctg.? Although I think the main reason it was dropped was that it was slow to reload compared to the Mauser.

I've always thought the Army was dumb not to adopt the Lee 1885/99 series instead of the Krag, although the Brits WERE trying to get rid of the Lee before WWI in favor of an improved Mauser like we had done. Probably Ordnance had its reasons; certainly they tested the Lee half to death in .45-70 and other ctgs. (I'm not referring to the Lee Navy, a whole other concept and a LITTLE ahead of its time, like 50 years or so....).

Most if not all ordnance decisions are made according to the NIH rule. You know, Not Invented Here.....
Regards, Joe

Way more complicated than that, Joe. I recently bought a book written by one David A. Armstrong in 1982. Title is "Bullets and Bureaucrats: The Machine Gun and the United States Army, 1861-1916". The writer points out that there were only 5 Chiefs of Ordnance 1861-1918.

1861-1863: James W. Ripley
1864-1874: Alexander B. Dyer
1874-1891: Stephen Vincent Benet
1891-1901: Adelbert R. Buffington
1901-1918: William Crozier

The Army was always preparing to fight the last war, but these guys ran what was described as a "closed corporation". Internal Army politics determined the instructions given to the various boards (made up of junior officers) assigned to evaluate different types of weapons. The boards followed their instructions closely and dared not deviate. Neither did they tell the big shots about any questions that should have been asked or instructions that should have been given. There was at least an "assumed" list of favored inventors and favored manufacturers.

Possibly as in the US Armies choice of Colt over Savage for the first auto pistol. (Nothing bad to say about the 1911 however the deck was maybe stacked a bit.)

There were a lot of experimentation with a 30-40 Krag with different bullets.

One that they did quite a bit work with was a hollow bullet with a sabot. These tubular bullets were invented by Prof. F. W. Hebler of Switzerland.

In 1894 they experimented with the Farley sharp pointed bullet that weighed 131 grains but not adapted.

The early 30-03's used a round nose bullet until the Spitzer type was adopted in 1906.


Background on the Krank-Hebler

There were 2 spitzer loads for the Krag in addition to the Farley experimental bullet.

Pitman's notes refer to one Frankford Arsenal limited production of the 1907 Palma Match loaded with Hudson-Thomas 190 grain pointed bullets. One type of load had an OAL of 3.245" and would not function through the magazine. Another batch was loaded to an OAL of 3.084" and would function through the magazine.

The second load was the M-1925 load for a sub-caliber device, loaded with the 172 grain M-1 boat tailed ball, instrumental velocity 1960 fps.

In late 1961, I was a seaman stationed at LualuaLei Naval Ammunition Depot on the west side of Oahu. As one of the flunkies, I was assigned to work on the station inventory. I inventoried several cases of those cartridges, still in storage. I asked a Chief Gunner's Mate what they were for. He told me they were used in a 1903A2 sub-caliber device, used in the Marines 37 & 57 mm anti-tank guns. You can imagine my surprise and shock when I found out that he was wrong. A Chief Gunner's Mate? Unthinkable!
There was a sub-caliber device made out of M-1898 Krag barreled actions that was replaced by the 1903A2.

LRF, Colt was certainly on the list of preferred suppliers. In addition to the 1909 New Service contract and the experimental pre-1911 Brownings, all of the later Gatling guns were made by Colt. Colt had a no-bid contract to manufacture about 290 US M-1904 Maxim machine guns. Colt had another no-bid contract to manufacture about 335 US M-1909 Automatic Machine Rifles, the Benet-Mercie. Springfield Armory made a similar number. The favored designer list was alive & well. The Benet in Benet-Mercie was the son of the Chief of Ordnance, 1874-1891.

Wm. Crozier was Chief of Ordnance 1901-1918. He absolutely hated Lt. Col. Isaac Lewis, inventor of the Lewis Gun. If I understand things correctly, Savage was helping Lewis through the developmental stage. Savage later made them for the Brits. That kept Savage off the list.

Thanks for the info on .30-40 bullet development. I sort of knew about the "tubular bullet," but hadn't known about the various pointed bullets.

I don't think the demise of the Krag really had much to do with the Krag nor the tactical superiority of the Mauser. I think it had much to do with the excellence of the Spanish regulars we faced in Cuba and the Philipines and the fact that few of our enlisted men had any combat experience while the Spanish had been fighting insurrectos for decades. For all kinds of reasons the Spanish couldn't win against us, but they could, and did, kill and wound a lot of us. My grandfather fought against them in the Philipines under Arthur Mc Arthur, and had great respect for them. (And, as a bonus, they taught him some elegant Castilian when he was in charge of guarding surrendered officers....).

Waterman, it's interesting you quote "Bullets and Bureaucrats." That was my (crabby) older brother's (BG David Armstrong, USA Ret.) Ph.D. thesis at Duke U. He now lives on Bainbridge Island WA and is still a gun nut.... He helped plan the First Gulf War when he was with what he always calls "those people I worked for" after he retired from the Army. Still can't say those three little letters out loud. We're planning a "The CA Where Nobody Ever Goes" road trip for January: earthquake faults, asbestos mines, and oil ghost towns. Great Mexican food every 120 miles, a lot of NOTHING in between.

Mike, the path that led me to "Bullets and Bureaucrats" is long & convoluted. I have been reading about the Benet-Mercie and "B&B" came up as a secondary reference. I found a like-new copy via ABE. It was $25 or $30, money well spent. At the same time, I purchased an original copy, 2nd ed., of "Machine Guns" by J. Hatcher et al and one of those print-on-demand copies of Ordnance Department Manual No. 1926, the Manual for the Benet-Mercie.

In 1963, I had advanced to the illustrious rank of MN3 and was at the US Naval Magazine in Guam. One of the guys in my unit was a local and said "you must meet my grandfather". Grandfather was one of those Spanish regulars, probably a lowly private in the rear ranks. He told me he figured that he would enjoy the rest of his life in Guam, with fresh fish & fruit, a friendly woman, lots of rain, home-made beer and maybe children & grandchildren a lot more than anything the Spanish Army had in mind. When it was time to board the ship for Spain, he walked into the woods. He did the same thing when the Japs showed up in 1942. I enjoyed the few evenings I spent with the old man.

Interesting, Waterman. I'll tell the old man his opus is still getting read.

Funny how the "Daylight Gun's" near relations, the Nambu LMG/HMG worked very well by day AND night for the Japanese Army. Killed a BUNCH of good people from China to New Guinea....and more than a few in Korea.

I admire somebody who could "walk into the woods" when the Japanese showed up. And then come back out in one piece when they went away!

Mike, in 1963 those same woods were still home to the Zanrushi, Japanese soldiers who had not surrendered and were waiting for the command from on high to attack. Their Type 92s were in good shape & still worked. Or so we thought. That is another story.

Later that year, I encountered some guys from what was probably the same organization that employed your brother. They also had working Type 92s. I got to see a couple close up. They had a large amount of ammunition. That is also another story.

If you read enough of Hatcher's writings, he paints a picture of the "Daylight Gun" that is entirely different from the Yellow Press account fed to the public.

I'm still looking for a first edition of "Hatcher's Notebook" at a price I can afford. Have a reprint, but would like a vintage one like the one in the Santa Rosa CA Public Library when I was a kid. A historical treasure house,that book.

Funny how those Nambu "woodpeckers" got around, isn't it?

Do public libraries still have books like "Hatcher's Notebook"? My working copy is a 3rd (1962)edition. I bought it mail order from Ray Riling in late 1962. I rented a PO Box in Ewa, Hawaii because Riling would not or could not guarantee delivery to a military address. I read it cover-to-cover sitting in one of those cargo-strap seats in a GV-1 flying from Guam to Hickam to El Toro with a stop at every little island between Guam & Hickam. About 18 hours flying time and 4 or 5 more on the ground. Too slow to get jet lagged. I was just worn out.

Few public libraries have any gun books. I had NRA send my American Rifleman subscription to the University of Idaho library years ago,when they dropped it in one of their (apparently monthly) budget cuts. Wonder if they shelve them....didn't make it to the U when I last was in Moscow. (DID make it to all the local gunshops, tho!).

Mike,

I didn't know any students used the U of I library back in the 70's! That's right, you were employed by the U of I, I guess that it explains it.

Cameron, the Vandals' reputation for partyin' is greatly exaggerated. The REAL problem is the nightly invasion of Moscow by children of all ages from that other place across the border by King County's "permanent adolescents."

I worked at both places, often simultaneously, as well as having a huge home garden, a contract editing enterprise, weekend scrap metal gathering in the Palouse's many machinery graveyards, gold sniping and garnet digging in ID, selling coyote pelts and upland bird skins, you name it. Your part of the world is a hard place to make a livin' in, especially if you have no marketable skills (i.e. English major...)! But it is darn fun tryin'.

Mike, North Idaho is a tough place to make a "good go of it."

For a good share of the 70's, Idaho's drinking age was 19, while a few miles across the border in WA, the age was still 21. WSU students would flock to Moscow for a night of partying. I'm surprised there weren't more deaths on the Moscow-Pullman highway. Of course, I'm not telling you anything new.

I worked at the FS work center in Clarkia on an IR Fire crew and some of the boys, particularly those from ND, were fascinated with digging garnets at Emerald Creek-be interesting to know how it got the name Emerald Creek, as opposed to perhaps, Garnett Creek! Anyway, after a few summers, they had a nice collection of rough garnetts, which they took to Moscow to have cut into stones. Beautiful semi-precious gems! Not sure what they ever did with them, maybe had them made into jewelry for someone special.

Sorry, I've kind of diverted this thread a bit.

Have a great Thanksgiving day-we have much to be thankful for.

Cameron, I probably sold garnets and gold nuggets (very few) to that same rock shop in Moscow; can't remember the name. Owner had a winter house in Sri Lanka and got a lot of gems there before the civil war made it too dangerous. We also sold him various mineral specimens we "came across" in our wanderings (mostly in abandoned mines). There was also a local buyer who bought all our antlers, teeth, hides, and game bird feathers. The scrap metal had to go to Lewiston.

Funny thing is that we always felt cash-poor when we lived there, but when we left, we realized we'd saved up a nice little nest egg....go figure.

Hope you had a great Thanksgiving!

back to the subject. IMO the US Krag notwithstandiing Mike's sttrength test is not really suitable for a diet of factory .405. It can be made into a double locking lug like a NOrwegian or Danish Krag by welding up the rear of the safetyrib.and I have had this done on Krags in .405 and .35wcf. However this gives asymetric backthrust and Norse military rifles had a different zero when bolt was wet in rain, hence covered military firing ranges in Norway.