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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I can slide a piece of paper behind the bolt handle.
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.
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?
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.
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.
I am no Norwegian Krag expert here but, form what I have read and heard Krag type actions did take special care for heat treating simply due to their configuration. I assume due to the unique magazine? I have read that some observations are that if a Krag did fail it was often times in the front right corner of the ejection port. It is where the steel is narrower. Some Norwegian Krags had the steel squared out in this front right corner and some of the later Norwegian Krags and Steyr manufactured Norwegian Krags had a radiused corner there. The radiused corner was deemed to be stronger or better I guess from a design standpoint. Supposedly there was a lot of hand fitting done when Norwegian Krags were made but, I don't know for sure. I have put different bolt bodies in my Norwegian Krags and never had two fit exactly the same. That is just my very limited experience.
This is obviously a bit late to chime in but since people were talking about sights for Norwegian Krags, I got lucky a few years ago and was able to buy a Krag "sniper" receiver sight from a seller in Norway on Ebay. It was designed to fit perfectly behind the bolt handle and a local gunsmith that is great at metal work mounted it like it was factory installed. He also removed the military folding rear. The sight is adjustable for windage and elevation like a Lyman 48 but what was really unique is the aperture is adjustable via a rotating button with four different diameters. The widest is still a bit narrow for deer hunting in the thickets of northern of Wisconsin.
The gun has a military stock with the top handguard removed before I got it, great "tiger" figuring, is light and handing. I have been using federal ammo with 140 gr spitzers because it has been so available for a reasonable price at the local farm & fleet, However, I am interested in handloading for it going forward, so does anyone of.264 round nose bullets other than from Hawk bullets currently available?
Hornady still makes a 160 gr. Interlock. Great for hogs.
Glad you've had good luck with it, but both I and Phil Shoemaker (458Win on the Campfire, and an Alaskan Master Guide) have experienced very erratic results with that bullet on deer.
Someone mentioned rebarreling a Norge Krag, I believe they have a left hand metric square thread. Hope your gunsmith has PhD and I don’t mean post hole digger.
Hornady still makes a 160 gr. Interlock. Great for hogs.
Glad you've had good luck with it, but both I and Phil Shoemaker (458Win on the Campfire, and an Alaskan Master Guide) have experienced very erratic results with that bullet on deer.
I wonder if that might not have been a twist problem. The 6.5x54mm Mannlicher Schoenaur was basically designed for 160 grain round noses and IIRC had a 7.5" twist.
I experienced my problems when shooting a M-S 6.5x54 carbine with a measured 1-8 twist, at a muzzle velocity of around 2200 fps. I believe Phil used basically the same rifle, but my memory isn't what it used to be.
150-200.000 active shooters used the Krag like this each week for a couple of decades. . Now they, and Sweden and Denmark use the Sig Sauer 200 STR instead.
Since we have a few Krag fans here...anybody have a "hurtiglader" or two laying around for sale? It's the quick charger used in the above video. I emailed a sporting goods supplier in Norway, but never heard anything back.
Hornady still makes a 160 gr. Interlock. Great for hogs.
Glad you've had good luck with it, but both I and Phil Shoemaker (458Win on the Campfire, and an Alaskan Master Guide) have experienced very erratic results with that bullet on deer.
Mule Deer; Good morning to you John, I hope you and Eileen are well and weathering the winter okay thus far.
With the understanding that my experience with the 160gr Hornady bullets would be close to 30 years back now, there was one particular box of them that made the rounds between 3 of us reloaders back then. The other two chaps loaded them in 6.5-06's and I loaded them in the 6.5x55 I'd modified for my father.
One of us ended up shooting what we'd call a "circus bear" with one when I was present and I want to say at least one local buck as well. Since I was the one who performed the evisceration on the bear, I recall being sufficiently unimpressed with the damage that we stopped using them in Dad's rifle forthwith.
Now somewhere in the mists of time, what I saw and didn't like I just can't recall, but there it is for whatever it's worth from way back then.
In Dad's rifle, until our eldest inherited it and began hunting with the 130gr TSX bullets, the most consistent performance was either a 140gr Hornady Interlock or 140gr Partition.
All the best to you and Eileen for what is left of our winter. We're bracing for a serious Arctic front supposedly landing tomorrow.
Hope you make it through the Arctic front all right. It's already here--woke up to -6 Fahrenheit this morning, and it's predicted to get colder for the next week.
The problem I had with the 160 6.5 was erratic penetration. It broke both shoulders of one deer, and exited. On another it didn't make it to the far ribs on a broadside, behind-the-shoulder lung shot. As I recall Phil saw similar stuff.
Have never killed anything with the 140 Hornady Interlock, but have shot some animals with the 129 6.5, which has always worked very well. The 140 Partition is as reliable as tax bills, but more fun.
I've stuck with Hornady Interlock 129's and Nosler 140 Partitions for deer killing purposes with 6.5x55's lo these last 40 years or so since I got my first M94 carbine, up through my current Ruger #1. Accuracy and terminal performance is all I could hope for and want.
These last couple of years saw me expanding my horizons a bit as I laid in a supply of Berger 130 VLD Hunting and Lapua 139 Scenars. (Why, I don't know. There is little to no chance for long range target shooting or hunting where I live and where I hunt.) That was all moot as Covid + personal health issues precluded most of my shooting and all of my hunting last year.
The Norwegian Krag I hunted with as a kid never saw a reload. It would put three 139 Normas in to a group the size of a flamboyant sombrero at 100 yds but the 156 RN shot quite well (3moa) and I killed a couple of deer with it. I have used the 160 Hornady on some deer (out of another 6.5x55) and they worked fine but all shots were easy. Ranges were 80 yards or less and the shots placed through the ribs; not a tough test. I like the 160 Sierra a lot better but it's no longer available. I have re-barreled a few Norwegians; one in 7x57. They are a perfect example of an unusual design; done very well. GD
So, Bugger, a year has gone by now. Any updates on your odyssey with your Viking Krag? Have you been trying to get in touch with me to sell it, haha?!
A fellow on the fire wanted that rifle more than I and I let him have it. I cruise the aisles of gun shows looking for uncommon cartridge rifles, uncommon riles. I'll be looking this week-end at the Sioux Falls show. I was still trying to shape the stock when he pried it out of my hands (figuratively speaking)
Gun Shows are a most wonderful place to be unless I don't bring enough cash.
I have not handloaded for my Krag but am working on it - question for the experienced ones: my 3rd Ed. Hornady manual includes loads using IMR 4350 - list a max of 43 gr. for 160 gr RN @ 2400 fps. The test rifle was a '96 Swede with 18.5" barrel, Thoughts/experience with 4350? I have not read anyone using in their 6.5x55.
With a name like Krag Larsen...you should be telling us how to load. Anyway, my personal experience with milsurp '96's, 38's have all caused me eventually to end up using powders in the 4831 burn rate category with heavier bullets. When I finally acquired a 1912 Lang Krag, I didn't do much experimentation and went right to 156 gr roundnoses and 40 gr of VihtaVuori N160, which is just a tad slower on most burn charts than the 4350's. In these times, you have to adapt the powder you have, rather than the powder you wish you had. Anyway, in my slightly rough bore Krag with a 24" bbl, iron sights, I have managed several 5 shot 100yd groups hovering around 2". I am only getting around 2250 fps but I am not going grizz hunting and the 156 PPU is a textbook mushroom in frozen snowbank at 100 yds. What more could I ask for? Lots of loads listed using the various 4350's, go with what you have, nearly 50 years with the 6.5 and I have never found a 'bad' powder.
Lots of loads listed using the various 4350's, go with what you have, nearly 50 years with the 6.5 and I have never found a 'bad' powder.
My thoughts exactly. I got my first 6.5x55 in 1978 (a cherry M94 carbine, one of those I wish I had back) which started a long history with that caliber for me. A string of Swedish Mausers of all flavors and even a couple U.S. commercial jobs (Model 70 and Ruger #1) have blessed me with their presence- but alas no Norwegian Krags. One thing I've found is that this cartridge in general is very forgiving of powders, but I have graduated to the slow suff. IMR-4831 is my current powder of choice, as well as medium weight bullets in the 120-140 weight range. If I couldn't have a .30-06 if limited to "one gun", please let it be a 6.5x55!
