Ed Johnson

Yes, that makes sense to me. ej

The stock with complicated checkering looks familiar. Have we seen this rifle previously? ej

It does look like one of my small quantity of production items after Dad passed away.. The stock is hand-checkered and the Williams Ramp sight is what we used. I think this would have been a model 5771. It doesn't look in bad shape...maybe a few dings and scratches.

Mark, thank you for the comments. We also suggest you obtain the book "Johnson's Rifles and Machine Guns" by Bruce Canfield. There is more specific history on the "Spitfire" on pages 234 through 243. ej

To follow up with Art's remarks.....the best move is to (a) BUY the book, (b) READ the book, and THEN (c) use this website and message board to ask questions. In addition, some of the other Website pages can also be helpful. Granted, my father was the inventor and I helped produce the book, but at my age of 81, as I approach my "Daffy Duck" years, I find myself re-reading pages and checking photos at least 4 or 5 times a week. ej

The penciled in "308 NATO" is obviously not a Johnson Automatics (JA) factory production, which were (to my knowledge) only produced in 30:06 and .270 for barrels. "EB's" and "ArtR's" comments above are appropriate. I assume that the JSAR recoil mechanism will function properly with .308 as long as pressure isn't too high. As for the removal of the iron sights and the drill & tap for scope mount, this (to my knowledge) would not have been a JA factory option but a later modification by a gunsmith, or possibly a Winfield product.

OK. Here goes: 1) I purchased receivers in 1965-66 from Plainfield Machine (NJ) which were stamped in 3 digits which varied (109, 208, etc.) and another outfit stamped in 4 digits (1004, etc.). I was not a full-blown manufacturer. Everything, including finishing and assembly, was produced by subcontractors or by GI surplus. 2) So....receivers were new, trigger groups were GI surplus, stocks & handguards (new sporter) were by Wysowski (CT) and (new folding) by Bianchi, new barrels by Wilson Arms (CT), new sights by Williams (MI). 3) Bluing and assembly - by Johnson Automatics Associates (former employees of Dad's . in RI). 4) The carbine in the photo is basically one of my sporter models....with a carbine barrel. We can only guess why it was converted, as described above. 5) Ammunition never got off the ground the way we wanted. I started by hand-loading and testing (with a sound reducer) in the basement of our house. Farmed out the work to a small Texas company with poor quality results. I had to hand-load again. Was working towards the end on automated equipment but product quality was lacking. 6) By that time, we had recognized that this was a great little carbine, but sales demand was not high so it did not justify setting up an expensive full-blown manufacturing plant. The only folks who could make the product profitably were actual .30 M1 Carbine producers. Some of them tried. All failed to hit high sales figures. And there was scant ammo available. 7) As to the value of the carbine above, you would simply treat it as a sporter-ized .30 M1 Carbine....maybe $400 to $500 value....as opposed to a legit military surplus M1 carbine which will sell circa $1200 or more these days. Happy trails.... ej

Tell other folks you are looking for them? Start with this site.... ej

Phil, that piece would be from a Dror, which is very similar to the '44 JLMG. The butt plate is the easiest giveaway, if you compare photos in the JR&MG book. ej

MMJ Jr now rotating at 6000 RPM...... ej

Sounds like it is already sold.....I'm a bit concerned that there also be handloaded brass product out there where the shoulder to base measurement on some of them is not to proper spec. This is based on problems one of our team members is having.

Folks, you might also affect velocity by lightly oiling the slide to reduce resistance. And yes, the tubing these days might be different. And the original guns were not supposed to break the balloons worn by the scantily clad model, mentioned in the Johnson Rifles and Machine Guns book (pp 212 to 215). A muzzle velocity of 90 to 100 fps is also mentioned. Accuracy at 15 to 20 feet with the ability to light match heads is noted. I remember having one of these as a 7 year old kid and learning how to shoot with it, but then being bored with it when I got a bit older. However, at least they weren't noisy.

Got my 5 small ones with the JSAR photo. Looks great! Ordered 5 more. And I'm impressed with the shipping packaging from Zazzle. Bravo to Frank for the effort !! ej

It appears to be, as suggested above, a Johnson Sporter barrel in 30:06 but I cannot be sure if it is for Springfield or Mauser or other receiver setup. The Mauser 98 mentioned above would be the most likely. It is definitely not a 1941 JSAR barrel. I agree that it is surprising for Numrich to make such a mistake. Hopefully, they will co-operate and credit you accordingly, especially if they advertised it as 41 JSAR. If they do not, please advise. I do not have any direct contact at Numrich after George died years ago, but I can drop them a note if it will help.

Frank, I'll buy 2 schematic mugs and 2 "image" mugs, either from you or Zazzle. Just let me know how much. You might already have poster $$ by now. Ed J

Based on these photos and knowing that nothing, including lettering on a coffee mug, lasts forever after several washings, I think I prefer the rifle itself rather than the schematic, but I'll probably take both. Frank, I think you said you had some stuff coming in to you? So should we buy that stuff from you, or go with the Zazzle page you sent us and order from them? Standing by for directions. I'm already mailing you poster $$.....

We purchased around 100 PMC receivers and also used one other source that required feed ramp modifications. Phil, your gun has one of the earlier feed ramp inserts, I think. I don't know if it has a sleeved barrel, which they experimented with in early development. Thank you for taking that feed ramp photo. Yes....a rare gun !

Phil, EB makes a good point about the photos. When you get a chance, get a shot of the receiver from the top but with the bolt retracted so we can see the feed ramp area more clearly. After I see that, I'll follow up with more comments. Ed J

Guys, the best answer on this is that....yes....it must have been an early receiver and I'm also guessing from Plainfield Machine (PMC) in New Jersey. Dad and Jack Fitzgerald had a few initial guns made up when they had an office in Hamden CT and used the name Johnson Guns. I was away in the Air Force at the time They had a local gunsmith put some together for sale, including three that went to the New Haven Police Dept. after I got home and started loading ammunition. They never got into actual production line guns. That came later, after Dad passed away, and after we reformed the company into Johnson Arms, New Haven, CT. So the gun that Phil bought is even more rare (and more valuable) than the ones I produced with subcontractors later. This explains why there was a more standard rear Williams sight, rather than the "ramp" style that I used later from Williams. The stock is GI in style, and might have been added on later. The bolt is an M2 style, heavier than the M1 bolt, because it had been designed for full auto use in the M2 Carbines. So Phil, in a very real sense, you do have a "prototype" Spitfire....Bravo!

Me too.

I love a guy who, when told he can't have something, goes to another door to find it. Happy New Year! :-)))))

OK. Thanks for this summary. I may not have made the point clearly that when Plainfield changed their investment cast receivers to include the Johnson style ramp, they used these receivers for BOTH the 5.7mm cartridges AND their .30 M1 Carbine cartridges. Both worked well. No problems, apparently. When Dad and Jack Fitzgerald (his right-hand man at the time) initially dealt with thew feed problem, they had a gunsmith braise some material onto the M1 Carbine feed ramp to give our smaller 5.7mm bullets more "lift" up into the chamber. I'm surprised IAI didn't pick up on that. Oh, well.....

At the risk of making a complete fool of myself (nothing new about that) and being now age 81 which qualifies me as being an old fool anyway, I am happy to provide you with a letter saying that (a) the patents have long been expired, (b) people have been "borrowing" Dad's ideas for years, and (c) you have family permission to use the designs on coffee cups, T-shirts, toilet seat covers, etc. etc. Several years ago, Joe Scott had T-shirts made up with Johnson Rifles on them. Walt Liss had some shirts made up. I think it is an over-reaction by an over-sensitive company to send you that kind of correspondence. There has to be someone out there with more common sense. Ed J

Frank, at this point, I would buy at least 5 of number one for starters. A couple will be gifts to others, including family. Really appreciate your efforts here. ej

Hilarious!!!