doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion Classic & Custom Single Barreled Sporting Rifles @ doublegunshop.com .405 Revisted

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