User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/24/2017 3:59:00 PM EDT
[#1]
Stock has been refinished. Probably reblued as well. Circle P is a standard proof mark.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/24/2017 6:05:48 PM EDT
[#2]
rifle looks pretty well used, and some one pimped the stock hard core. I'd be afraid of bore from what the outside looks like.
Price is way too high, that same rifle would sell for about $5-600 here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/24/2017 9:21:48 PM EDT
[#3]
Bleh, I wouldn't touch that one with a 10 foot pole, pretty much no collector value whatsoever....
I guess if you were looking for a shooter, it would be ok, but that one is pretty pimped out and ruined.... And I agree with jnk....WAY too high of a price for what it is, and it has been heavily bubba'd.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2017 1:23:02 AM EDT
[#4]
Cool, thanks fellas.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2017 1:42:54 AM EDT
[#5]
Ol' Joe has a few. I don't know what your budget is, but they are honest and have a quickly revolving inventory. They price stuff to move and do layaway. I've done business with him/them a couple of times and couldn't be happier.
Joe Salter |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2017 10:32:06 AM EDT
[#6]
It's a shame that Italian Walnut stock is all lacquered up.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/25/2017 12:17:07 PM EDT
[#7]
Looks
Like it Was some VFW's parade rifle. Reblued and ugly unoriginal gloss finish. I'd have to get it cheap and I'd strip the finish off and BLO it. And still I'd be lucky to get $500 because of the reblueing. IIRC the rear sight leaf should be In the white not blued. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/26/2017 2:16:03 AM EDT
[#8]
Front sight looks OK but the rear sight is badly pitted.
The stock is a disaster. Oversanded and varnished. Probably reblued. Asking price is way too high. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2017 8:51:32 PM EDT
[#9]
Why does the first post have a frown face having his finger?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2017 9:21:23 PM EDT
[#10]
My untouched 1898
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2017 12:18:46 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My untouched 1898 Looks exactly the same to me....  
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/7/2017 11:55:30 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why does the first post have a frown face having his finger? That post was stomping on the add. A mod deleted it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2017 7:31:00 PM EDT
[#13]
for comparison sake.. i paid roughly 720 $ for this a few months ago. Can you spot the differences? One area is the stock, Someone RAPPED that stock in the example in the OP.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2017 7:35:10 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My untouched 1898 http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/banditman1/DSC_0935.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/banditman1/DSC_0934.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/banditman1/DSC_0933.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/banditman1/DSC_0932.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/banditman1/DSC_0930.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/banditman1/DSC_0928.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/banditman1/DSC_0927-1.jpg Not to flame.. but someone differently touched that rifle's stock with sandpaper at one point. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/10/2017 5:59:39 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not to flame.. but someone differently touched that rifle's stock with sandpaper at one point. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
My untouched 1898 http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/banditman1/DSC_0935.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/banditman1/DSC_0934.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/banditman1/DSC_0933.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/banditman1/DSC_0932.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/banditman1/DSC_0930.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/banditman1/DSC_0928.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/banditman1/DSC_0927-1.jpg Not to flame.. but someone differently touched that rifle's stock with sandpaper at one point. The rear sight is a replacement as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2017 9:20:39 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The rear sight is a replacement as well. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
My untouched 1898 http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/banditman1/DSC_0935.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/banditman1/DSC_0934.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/banditman1/DSC_0933.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/banditman1/DSC_0932.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/banditman1/DSC_0930.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/banditman1/DSC_0928.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v655/banditman1/DSC_0927-1.jpg Not to flame.. but someone differently touched that rifle's stock with sandpaper at one point. The rear sight is a replacement as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2017 1:17:41 PM EDT
[#17]
Dracster wrote:
The rear sight is a replacement as well. Krag rear sights merit a study in themselves. There was a whole series of sights, designated by year model (separate and apart from the year model of the gun). The army was constantly replacing sights, updating the guns with the "latest and greatest." Therefore, I wouldn't be too concerned that the sight is a replacement. It could be, and still be perfectly "original." |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
