S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
3 members (L. Brown, SKB, 1 invisible),
610
guests, and
4
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums10
Topics39,492
Posts562,050
Members14,585
|
Most Online9,918 Jul 28th, 2025
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,516 Likes: 569
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,516 Likes: 569 |
I am dallying in with the idea of buying my first bolt rifle - if I do, I will be yet another victim of this website. But regardless, I'm curious if any of these old rifles are notably better suited for .30 caliber bullets than any of the others. Are the .30-40 Krags, for instance, more suited to lead bullets than a .30-06 1903 Springfields (presuming original barrels and chamberings)? Perhaps it is more about the cartridge, but again, I don't know much about any of the cartridges of this era. I'm pretty strictly a blackpowder cartridge guy and maybe th e.30-40 come closest to that, but I don't know why that would have any bearing on the use of lead bullets.
Anyway, if one was looking for a good rifle for use with lead bullets, what direction you tend to bear?
_________ BrentD, (Professor - just for Stan) =>/
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 262
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 262 |
Both work fine with cast bullets, but you are much more likely to find a nice smooth barrel (which cast bullets require) with an 03 than Krag. On the other hand, a Krag with a good barrel is better suited for cast bullets which use a relatively small powder charge.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 465
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 465 |
I like the Krag cartridge for cast bullets. It seems almost designed for cast with its long neck and near perfect case capacity. The '06 is also good with cast but just not quite as good. The Krag action is a work of metallic art made by artisans in metal and wood. While I do love the '03 nothing compares to the Krag for bolt action retro cool. My personal opinion is get a Krag but don't turn down a good '03 Springfield. Considering your proclivities I think you might be happier with a Krag.
Jerry Liles
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 678 Likes: 15
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 678 Likes: 15 |
I'll second both sentiments. If a cast shooter is the goal and not necessarily historical accuracy, I personally would lean toward the Krag and re-barrel it with a Criterion barrel whose inside dimensions are much more consistent than a 100+ year old barrel that may or may not have been within spec when it was made and then had countless thousands of shots fired through it. I've been shooting cast bullets out of Krags since 1968- from lightweight "cat sneeze" loads to full throttle Arsenal equivalent loads and have come to grow a little fond of it. The '06 on the other hand is every bit as versatile...
Close your eyes and pick one.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,516 Likes: 569
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,516 Likes: 569 |
Great comments! Many thanks. You guys make a good argument for the .30-40 Krag cartridge. It's the rifle I have an issue with. I have to say I find the things darn ugly, though I think there was an exceptional one posted here within the last year that did sort of look attractive but really, I am ugly enough that I don't need to hold an ugly gun to boot. Yes, I realize that doesn't really sound to rational but this is about hunting for rifles, and so who needs rationality to get in the way. That said. I'll look a little more closely at Krags if I can find one to trip over. I'll try to wrap myself around that "retro cool" idea which does sound a lot like the things I find interesting, but it needs to grow on me a bit more. Where I am, such beasts are few and far between. I have only held one in a shop and never seen one at a range.
I'm mostly interested in rifles that have some history and stories, albeit unknown, so those that have been rode hard, and put away carefully appeal to me the most, even if I don't know where they have been. I don't want to rebarrel one or anything like that, just a nice, well used sporter that somehow I find attractive. I feel the Lyman receiver sight or the equivalent is important to me. I hunt and compete with tang-sighted singleshots (and, recently, vintage lever guns). I can't imagine a rifle w/o a rear aperture, unless it is my flintlock.
In the end, this is probably as much about the hunt for the rifle as it is about the rifle I end up with.
_________ BrentD, (Professor - just for Stan) =>/
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 1,329 Likes: 109
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 1,329 Likes: 109 |
Remington Lee 30/40 Brent just another idea. This is military config but if you have ever have the pleasure to see one of these as a factory sporting rifle you would be a luck man. I have only ever saw one in deluxe grade as a 32/40.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 465
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 465 |
I think if you actually handle a Krag in good condition and see just how finely and carefully built and just how slick they are you'l be hooked. As for history these rifles fought the Spanish American War, the Philippine Insurection, and marched to Peking during the Boxer rebellion and acquitted themselves well every time.
I'm like you with a love of single shot and black powder rifles and double guns and I find the Krag fits very well in this 19th century niche.
Jerry Liles
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,226 Likes: 3
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,226 Likes: 3 |
And to add to Jerry's note, Krags were used for a long time in the 'teens and '20s and '30s by Caribbean regimes set up by the US military in Haiti, Nicaragua, and other nasty little hotspots. They also were used a fair amount by Mexican revolutionaries in the 1910-29 festivities next door, as were Winchester 1895s in that caliber. Not as much as .30-30 "Oinches" but I see them in pix from that era a fair amount.
What I really like is the single shot rifles made on Krag actions like my no-name .22 Hornet.... Most of my experience with the .30-40 is in 'walls and Ruger #1s. It is a very under-rated round.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 627 Likes: 47
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 627 Likes: 47 |
Though I have yet to work with one the I would take a Krag before an -03 and an 03-A3 before an -03. I did have a nice Remington 2 groove 03-A3 that was a tack driver with 180 gr. cast bullet....that I forget what it was or the powder charge.
Don't overlook some of the European (German) cartridges in a Mauser bolt. The 8.15 X 46R is a fun, accurate and fairly available cartridge in a lot of different actions. It's also miserly on powder, having nearly the same ballistics as the 32-40. The various cartridges based on the Mauser A base and 47R case length are usually good cast bullet shooters also.
NRA Benefactor 2008 NRA Patron 2007 NRA Endowment 1996 NRA Life 1988
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,516 Likes: 569
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,516 Likes: 569 |
To be honest, I don't know the difference between a 1903 and an 03-A3. This is all virgin territory for me. But I'm no looking for a military rifle but rather one that was sporterized to a hunting rifle. Just like most of the rifles that Michael and the rest of you have been discussing here for years.
I know Mausers are fine rifles but I won't be going after one. Only interested in American made rifles. I don't know why. Just the way it is right now.
The sound of the .30-40 cartridge is appealing. So, I'll look into sporterized Krags and 1903s and its variants (like I would even know what they are).
Well the slope is long and steep the climb promises to be fun and interesting.
_________ BrentD, (Professor - just for Stan) =>/
|
|
|
|
|