Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters 6.5x55 in Norwegian Krag

At the Sioux Falls gun show this last week-end, I was unable to walk past a 6.5x55 Norwegian 1910 Krag. I'll be reloading for it. I see that most everyone uses a bolt action (with dual lugs) when they work up loads in the 6.5x55.


I don't want to stress this single lug action. I was wondering about loads for this rifle.

The reloading manuals that I have looked at, Ken Waters' "pet Loads" and old Handloader magazine articles on the 6.5x55 do not have or at least do not show pressure readings on the printed loads.

Any suggestions on safe loads for this rifle?

I had a Norwegian Krag for a while, and there's a chapter on it in GUN GACK II. It had a 24-inch barrel, and the two loads I worked up use the 140-grain Hornady with 37.5 grains of IMR4895 for around 2450 fps, and the 156 Norma Oryx with 36.0 grains for 2230 fps. Both grouped 3 shots a little under an inch at 50 yards, using the military open sights.

Thanks. I happen to have a copy of Gun Gack II (didn't think to look there) and I bought some 140 grain Hornady bullets at the show. I'll try those loads. I appreciate your rapid response! It has military sights. Maybe I'll have an opportunity to try it on a whitetail doe this fall.

How's the bore? I've been wanting one for decades and every one I ever picked up had a sewer pipe bore, so much so that I quit looking long ago.

Don't the safety lugs bear against the receiver too on these, making them in effect two lug bolts versus the U.S. Krag whose safety lug doesn't make contact?

Same boat I'm in, the one I have has a sewer pipe bore but was reputed to shoot well. haven't tried yet, planning on rebarelling.

To the OP, these are technically a two lug actions, the bolt handle serves as the second. Still, not "strong" by modern standards and best to use loads reserved for the 1896 Mauser and the like.

I should know this but is there any diff between the Nor and Swed 6.5 round? I know diff between the Mauser and Krag rifles but how about the cartridge itself?

Bugger, have one I put together from just a barreled action I had laying around for years. Do try JB's load with the 140s. Fortunate to have a very pristine bore in mine. Looking forward to really wringing it out this spring.

JB’s load for 156 also worked for me in my Norwegian Krag - I did substitute the 160 grain Hornady RN and it also shot very well. The bore in mine is pretty good - not pristine but not a sewer pipe either....a fun rifle and one that I have used for some local vintage military matches.

PennDog

LEADMINER,

One thing I pointed out in the GUN GACK II chapter on the 6.5x55 Krag is the cartridge was not just developed by Sweden. Instead it was co-developed by Norway and Sweden, as at the time they were semi-joined into one kingdom--but each could design/choose the rifle they wanted to use. Sweden chose the 1894/96 Mausers, and Norway the Krag-Jorgensen. (One of the interesting sidelights I point out is that Norway was the LAST country to adopt the Krag-Jorgensen for their military, even though it was a Norwegian design. The others were Denmark and the U.S.A.)

But apparently Norway and Sweden read the drawings of their new round a little differently. Consequently, there was occasionally a little difficulty in using Norwegian ammo in Swedish Mausers, and vice versa. But the problem apparently wasn't vast, and nothing like the difficulty sometimes experienced when British .303 ammo was used in often tight-chambered Ross rifles in WWI.

Thanks, John

The bore looks like the rifle has not been shot. But it had been I used some foaming Outers bore cleaner and the patch came out black and blue. The bore looked great after the patch though. The bore was dirty when I bought it and that probably discouraged others.

A dealer that knows a lot more about European rifles than I will ever know told me this rifle was a 1912 Norwegian Kraig. But there is lettering on top of the front of the receiver that says 1910, what does that mean? Maybe there were different date-versions like our Kraig?

I bought the rifle really cheap, I'm afraid to mention the price or I would likely be called a derogatory name worse than "bugger"... The guy didn't have a price tag on it. Normally, I walk by such items with unmarked prices. I guess I have been looking for a Norwegian Kraig ever since I read John's article in Gun Gack II when it came out (and subsequently forgot where I read it).


The guy who sold it to me said it was so cheap because it wasn't a 30-40. Well I have a 1896 Kraig that is a 30-40 - I wanted the 6.5. I'm part Norwegian myself.

The barrel and sights are original. I think as is everything on it but the stock. It has matching numbers on all the steel.

The draw backs are:
1. The stock had a super high cheek piece - clearly after market.
2. The stock had some unfinished checkering.
3. There are two slots cut into the receiver that must have been made for some kind of mount. I didn't notice them but the knowledgeable dealer pointed them out to me.

I'm taking a rasp to the stock as the sights would have to be set on at least 1,000 meters for me to use those sights.

Pics, man, pics!!

Please Mr Bugger....answer Gnoahhh's post...does the bolt handle root bear on the receiver wall. Does the guide rib bear on the receiver wall? Inquiring minds, and all that rot.

I can slide a piece of paper behind the bolt handle. I cannot get that same piece of paper behind the guide rib.

I wish I had taken pictures before I took after that stock with the rasp. If I took a picture and put it in the art gallery, could someone transfer that to this thread? I have not mastered that with my phone.

One other thing - it has been blued, unless it came that way. But the the lettering looks good. Whoever did it, did a good job, I think.

I am a long way from finishing the stock.

Back in the heyday of U.S. Krag customizing, sometimes over-eager smiths would grind/lap the single locking lug so as to set the bolt back enough that the guide rib/safety lug would bear also (in attendance with setting the barrel back a thread to re-establish proper headspace)- to create a "stronger" action. Looked good on paper but the cold reality was that by removing that much steel from the locking lug the case hardening on the back of the lug was removed also. That made for an overly soft lug that quickly set back a lot farther on its own accord, and headspace grew like crazy.

Michael Petrov, collector/researcher of pre-war custom sporters extraordinaire, once took a U.S. Krag and tested it to destruction, to get a feel for just how strong a .30-40 Krag is. He loaded ever increasing charges of Bullseye pistol powder until the action came unglued. I regret I don't remember the exact charge that finally caused its demise, but it was unholy in nature- somewhere well over 20 grains (which if you know Bullseye in a rifle case would put it fairly into the "pipe bomb" category). After describing the whole experiment he dropped the punch line- he had ground the locking lug completely off and did the whole experiment with just the safety lug taking the brunt.

Can't help with the pics, but Nörge Krags were nicely blued. U.S. Krag receivers were left the "natural" color after carburizing, barrels and stock furniture were blued, bolts polished bright.

Frank deHaas in his book, "Bolt Action Rifles", remarked that Griffin & Howe, back in the day, lapped the front lug sufficiently to allow the safety lug(s) to bear on the receiver. Unfortunately I have never been able to closely examine a Norwegian Krag. An old hunter of local fame, Dragseth, used a sporterized Norwegian Krag for many years, he could afford whatever he wanted but chose the Krag. He bought a large quantity of Swedish roundnose military ball ammo from me. I asked him what he was going to do with it (cupro nickel jacket, corrosive priming)? He replied that he filed the tip gently to expose some lead, and that made better hunting ammo than you could buy. In those days, Norma was about the only factory ammo for the 6.5x55, which I thought was fine ammo, if a little pricey.
Anyway, I think the reports of overhardened Krags with a cracked lug was confined to American Krags by Springfield Armory. (yes Virginia, the same Springfield that produced the bad heat treated low number 1903's that came unstuck) I have never heard of a Norwegian or Danish Krag failure. The older loading manuals suggest 46,000 CUP ceiling, and with an 18 inch barrel, the older books show up to 2,600 fps with a 140 spitzer. What more could we ask for?

I'm asking because I don't know- were Norwegian Krags made of alloy steel and heat treated accordingly, or were they made of low carbon steel and carburized (case hardened) like we did with our Krags?

Bugger,

Congratulations on the Norwegian Krag. I am sure you will have a lot of fun with it. Pictures would be wonderful if possible. You mentioned that there were two slots cut into the receiver. Could you elaborate on that? Location of slots and direction of cut? Size of cut? Good luck with the project.

Regards,
sixfive

If you're axing ME about the metallurgy of Krags...move on, nothin' to see here. What I don't know could fill the Grand Canyon. In my musty 'library', Phil Sharpe, Julian Hatcher, Frank de Haas, Bob Brownell, have little to say other than one Petrov, ground off the locking lug, stoked 'er with 20 grains of Bullseye...with the result, it did wreck the rifle but the bolt did not exit rearward. Which, was better than the same test in the vaunted 1917 Enfield, which sheared both lugs (estimated 70,500) used to make many custom belted cartridge rifles. So, metallurgy-shmetallurgy.