Talk:Krag–Jørgensen

References

Unless otherwise noted, the source is: "Norske Militærgeværerer etter 1867" (ISBN82-993143-1-3)

Early Development

Pretty much all of chapter 5. Details of the experiemtns leading up to the half-capsule magasine, see pages 74 to 77. Details regading the testing of the early prototypes in Denmark, see pages 77 to 78. Details regarding changes brought about due to feedback from the danes, see pages 85 to 93.

Danish Krag-Jørgensen rifles

See pages 78 to 84. Good info at http://www.public.asu.edu/~roblewis/SMLE/IIID2a10b.htm retrived at 2005-01-26

American Krag-Jørgensen rifles

See pages 89 to 91 - allthought this source is weak on this and most info has been provided by other wikipedians.

Found more info about the various subtypes of american Krags at http://home.sprynet.com/~frfrog/kragrifl.htm and added it to the page.WegianWarrior 11:36, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Norwegian Krag-Jørgensen rifles

Selection of caliber, see page 94 to 96. For details on the selection and testing, see pages 95 to 113 (short paragraph on the swedes selection of the Mauser on page 108).

Re: ammunition, difference between swedish and norwegian Despite what some people claim, the ammunition produced in sweden and norway are interchangeable. The norwegian round is insignificantly longer, which means that a spanking new Swedish Mauser may require a certain push on the bolthandle to chamber it completly - thats all there is. The reason the rumour has survived is, I believe, that the swedish weaponhistorian Josef Alm repeted it in a book. Perhaps he did that because he didn't bother to check the reports from "generalfelttygmestaren" and "chefen for artelleriet" - who conclude that the ammunition prodused in both nations are within the spesified parameters and interchangable - or perhaps he did that because he was angry that Norway kicked the swedes out in 1905 and went their own way... I don't know. What I do know is that any rumour to the effect that the ammunition is not interchangable is just that... a rumour. See pages 368 to 370

Subtypes of the Krag-Jørgensen:

• M1894, chapters 7 (militarty rifles), 8 (civilian rifles), 9 (naval rifles) and 13 (M1894 w/ telescopic sights)
• M1895, M1897, M1904 and M1907, chapter 11 (the short K-J carabines)
• M1906 Boys Carabine, chapter 12
• M1912, M1912/16 and M1912/18, chapter 14
• M1923, chapter 15
• M1925, chapter 16
• M1930, chapter 17

Production for Nazi Germany during WWII

See chapter 18. Includes a lot of interesting stuff btw.

Post War Production

See chapter 19.

Ammunition

Taken from various chapters in the book, website mentioned under American Krag-Jørgensen variants (retrived on 2005-01-26) and from a an online discussion on homeloading for the Krag-Jørgesen (retrived 2005-01-28)

Comparison of service rifles

Taken from various chapters in the book, the website mentioned under Danish Krag-Jørgensen variants, and the website mentioned under American Krag-Jørgensen variants, both retrived on 2005-01-26.

Things to do

• Get hold of and upload images (make sure not to violate copyright)
• Find more info on the danish Krags
• Ditto the american Krags
• Perhaps a table comparing data on the various Krags? Gonna take some work to find it all, but I think it's worth it.

Feel free to add to the list people. WegianWarrior 09:27, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I think we're mostly done with the list. WegianWarrior 07:30, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Moved this section below the reference section WegianWarrior 08:24, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Song

The article should mention the famous U.S. song from the Philippine-American War with the verse

Damn, damn, damn the Filipinos!

Cut throat khaki ladrones!

Underneath the starry flag,

Civilize them with a Krag,

And return us to our beloved home.

Infrogmation 11:24, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• I've added it to the article. From a quick Google search, the song evidently has some variations, and continues to be sung by some in the military to present times (!). And the phrase "Civilize them with a Krag" is evidently even more famous than the song Google. -- Infrogmation 11:35, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Excelent information. Would you happen to have a good reference for it as well? WegianWarrior 11:57, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Magazine cutoff

"All production rifles up World War 2 also featured a magazine cut-off," should this read "All production rifles up to World War 2 also featured a magazine cut-off," ?

Shoka

Uhm... might be me not being a native english speaker, but yeah. I seem to have forgotten to put a 'to' in there. WegianWarrior 10:35, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

There is some misunderstanding of the purpose of magazine cutoffs. The theory of the time, late 19th century, was that magazine fed repeating rifles would cause infantry to "waste" ammunition by firing it too fast. The purpose of the cutoff was that infantry would fire in volley, under positive command of their NCO's and officers, a single round at a time manually fed. The magazine would be left full in case of a close charge of the enemy, in which the infantryman would be authorized to flip off the magazine cutoff and fire at will. A silly theory that took a while to leave the minds of ordnance bureaus. 170.186.245.72 (talk) 22:16, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Featured Article

Hooray! This is now a featured article! I wish to thank everyone who contributed so far, as well as everybody giving constructive critizim and helping support it when I posted it on WP:FAC. Thank you all! WegianWarrior 07:50, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

And now this on the front page! This was one of the first articles I gave constructive criticism from peer review... nice to see that such hard work has gone rewarded. - Ta bu shi da yu 02:32, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

And I'm so proud... sort like seeing your kid graduate, except without all that other racket kids cause =)

Couldn't have done it without your input Ta bu shi da yu... or the others for that matter. WegianWarrior 10:36, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Category:Weapons of the United States

Can this be added to Category:Weapons of the United States since it was used by the United States? --Kenyon 06:50, May 14, 2005 (UTC)

you can be bold and just do things like that yourself y'know ;) But, anyhow, consider it done. WegianWarrior 05:32, 15 May 2005 (UTC)