All Activity

This stream auto-updates   

  1. Last week
  2. Other than a couple of the mag housing rivets coming out{will be replaced soon} mine works beautifully. I shoot it on a somewhat regular basis. Also after appearing on the Forgotten Weapons episode it now gets a bit of attention when i take it out They updated the post on GB with" the weapon has been tried and functions with dummy rounds but should be checked by a gunsmith before attempting live fire" buyer beware... Ryche
  3. when you have none, a repo is better thatn nothing imho. I improvised a coil spring, bought an original on ebay and now picked up one on Sarco...just to make sure I have one.
  4. Obviously. Yours is nicer, particularly the sight base.....and we know it works! The same builder did the 303 Dror and the 41 LMG with the wrong bipod the same seller recently sold on GB. Not quite sure why he welded in the pin which retains the bolt catch support on all 3.
  5. Got one years ago and I think it's slightly different, but don't recall if it was from Sarco or Gunparts. I don't think there's as much of a pinch in the center. Mine is very U shaped and matches what came in the Johnson. This one is more lightbulbish. Repro??
  6. I was wondering if you have any clean1941 Johnson- stripped receivers for sale. I`m an FFl gunshop owner.
  7. I am not sure who the seller is but i bet i know who built it......... Not your guy Brian. Ryche
  8. Earlier
  9. SARCO in the last couple of days, added to their Johnson 1941 parts listing, a small batch (as they described it) of Johnson 1941 Semi Auto Rifle Magazine Door Springs. Under SARCO go to Rifle Parts & Accessories. Under Johnson 1941 go to the 2nd page of parts, to find the new listing of Magazine Door Springs. They are listed as JHN 061, & are somewhat pricey @ $37.50. They do not indicate one way or the other if they are original. A chance for everyone, who has recently been looking, to pick one up.
  10. On gunbroker
  11. Maybe late production vs late?
  12. Wow great analysis!! Thank you
  13. After completely refreshing my memory: I now pronounce these two bayonets to be Originals (in my humble opinion.....for what that's worth)
  14. Hey Harry, Thanks, that the best reference we have. I've almost worn that link out over the years. There are just some bayonets that don't follow all the rules. I do know that at one time Sarco was selling the reproduced bayonets that were well done and they listed them as reproductions. Numrich also sold the domed rivets and proper flatter arched spring. So these two areas could be modified. The muzzle ring can be much heavier on the reproductions also. The spring latch has a couple of "ears" that are usually square cut on the repros and more rounded on the originals. The way the rivet is peened can be altered too. When a bayonet meets every criteria and the sheath does also, it's usually easy to pronounce them as original. There are just some that are ever so slightly off. These are the ones that cause me to wonder. c
  15. This might help you guys out. Harry
  16. I thought the same thing! Definitely made by different companies.. Thx
  17. I vote for authenticity. There are some differences between the two in the manufacturing process used. In your last picture, the side view, the flatter shape of the spring looks like the originals. However there are "machining" marks on the one on the right that are not apparent on the one on the left. Now a question for the real experts: Were all Johnson bayonets made by the same manufacturer, in same fashion, using the same methods and materials? From the pictures it would seem that they were not
  18. I, too, am not an expert but they appear original to me.
  19. Thx
  20. Cosmo, I'm not the expert but they have most of the characteristics of being original. I could guess a bit better if you posted a side view so we could see the depth of the arch in the spring.
  21. Want to know for sure from you experts if these are the real deal. Any help is appreciated, thank you very much
  22. Here's one for sale.
  23. Brian may know this one. It will be at the show in Louisville. He's asking 6K and will entertain offers.
  24. According to Joseph Scott and John Darling before him, the difficult part was not shaping replacements to external and internal dimensions so everything fit. It was properly drilling the stock for the recoil tube. It took a particular "jig" which John Darling had developed and made and Joseph Scott later acquired. They both made "drop in" replacements which really worked. Over the years I have had so called drop in replacements from other makers in which the recoil type assembly could not be properly placed without practically destroying the the hole. Tanker's post about recountouring Winfield sporter stocks is most timely. This is not particularly difficult if you have some woodworking skills and time. The hard part here is redoing the stock key holes which are covered with a wood plug on one side. The Winfield key is often solid and glued in
  25. Rifleman, If someone is trying to "re-militarize" a Winfield Deluxe Sporter, they often just dispose of the Winfield stock with it's cheekpiece, larger heel, and rubber buttpad. Getting the recoil tube out of a Winfield stock, or any older stock, can involve destroying the donor stock just to get the tube out. My preference is to re-shape the Winfield stock. It can take a fair amount of woodworking skill, sanding equipment, and elbow grease to get the job done. Since original stocks are very scarce and pricey when you do find one....reforming the stock you already have is a viable option. I actually enjoy making a "silk purse out of a sow's ear." I feel sure that some of the members of this community have old Winfield stocks squirreled away due to lack of demand for them. At one time I remember Joe Scott said he couldn't give the old stocks away. Now with the possibility of access to new stocks made on a duplicator, and you guys being able to make new recoil spring tubes.....things are looking better for replacement stocks in the future. Hi Bob, I once researched a lot of online "reviews" by people who had dealt with some of the existing stock duplicators. One fellow had retired and sold his equipment to someone else, leaving a big void in the supply. I was afraid that you might get less than you bargained for. I've given some thought as to how to go about drilling the mainspring tube hole. It seems to me that it will require some sort of fixture or jig to hold the stock and drill bit in relative position. I'm going to see if I can figure out a way to drill that hole without taking a chance on wrecking the new stock..
  26. Reshaping a sporter stock into military configuration.. that looks good... nothing wrong with that.. Are these sporter stocks (more) available..? I presume in way better shape than the (scarce) military ones..?
  27. I really hate it when the "armory" repair "technicians" don't make the slightest attempt to match the grain in those repair "plugs" what-so-ever! I'm not even sure why they would use plugs where they did. Maybe they thought the "cheeks" were going to fall off? Perhaps Loctite Super Glue hadn't been invented back then. (or maybe those were bullet holes?) Even so, I think they had the old time glue made from defunct race horses.....even "Elmers Glue" would probably have worked? Glue it ....put the stock in a wood vice and let it dry. The "plugs" in Winfield Sporter stocks, which hide the recoil key for the recoil buffer tube, are sometime done so well that an untrained eye can't find them. I sort of wish I had a chance to do a proper repair to that stock just to show how it's supposed to be done. Of course I did notice the "fit" of the buttplate and that brass screw. Even as shaky as my old hands are, I wouldn't butcher the taper pins in the front sight and bayonet lug! Other than those very minor flaws......The rifle could be an extraordinary specimen. Nothing there which can't be fixed. That sling is not a cheepie either and I'd love to have it.
  1. Load more activity