eb in oregon

I cannot dispute that you and another bought parts from different auctions, but I've one of those SKS "doors" in a box someplace. And after working on 1911's for 30 or so years I can recognize what appears to be a worn out extractor when I see one. As for the other mentioned "scope" parts (supposedly Johnson parts) look at any schematic of the 1941 JSAR you won't see them there. Winfield parts at best and I'm not convinced they are. That cylinder thing looks more like a muzzle attachment than anything else, and I'll bet money that pin with the spring clip goes to something entirely different. HK's, Robinson Arms M96, and more modern rifles use pins like that, I don't think the JSAR ever did, those are straight pins retained otherwise.

That's because they aren't all Johnson parts. There is cover to the cleaning kit in the butt stock for an SKS, an extractor for a 1911 Colt, the spherical bushings, and that other thing on the very top. No, they are not all 1941 JSAR parts, so the auction is bogus, but I'll be darned if I'll write the seller and tell him.

Agreed. Punch dies aren't cheap and the very narrow market would hardly justify the cost. I'll add that a single die can't form the piece in a single step. The rolled portion that retains the cross pin would require a separate die as you can't form a piece in two different directions at the same time.

I loved the Tom Baker "Dr. Who." Good stuff.

I believe he's talking about the small spring clip on the right rear corner of the forearm (actually nailed to the forearm) that captures the lever of the take down pin. It looks simple, and if making one, it is possible. With several tries and lots of cursing. To make more than one would require making some dies to stamp the part in several operations. And in the end it would be a labor of love.

I bought one of these the other year specifically for the 5.7MMJ. I haven't needed to use it since Ed assisted in the purchase of a quantity (which was what I was writing about) however I intend to use it shortly to re-build my stash of 30.06 which I've pretty much used up my reloads. And I'll add that the MRB annealer is a fine piece of equipment. Well made and takes the labor and thinking out of the problem. I bought it for 5.7MMJ forming, but I've done a bunch of .223 cases on it, and am soon (hopefully, depending on mood) going to do some 5.7MMJ fired cases and some 30.06. The plan is to use it a bunch as I've old and who knows how many times fired brass. In multiple calibers. https://www.mikesreloadingbench.com/mrb2018_006.htm

The other year I bought some ammunition for the 5.7MMJ due to a post by Ed. I bought a bunch. Both formed brass and loaded ammunition in three different bullet types. There was a 40 grain semi-spitzer that must of been swaged from some hard metal (as it isn't lead and there is no lubrication grooves or lube), then there was some 40 grain semi-jacked soft points, and some 40 grain open tip match type bullets also apparently swaged from something hard. No lubrication grooves and no leading. All three loaded with 12 grains of H110. I took the IAI clone and the Johnson to the range and tried all three loaded cartridges. The IAI feeds the semi-spitzers, not the match type. The Johnson feeds anything. At 25 yards both put most rounds into the 10 ring of a SR-1 target. One slightly out, two on the ring of the other rifle. I forgot to record which rifle to each target. 100 yards wasn't what I wanted. A man sized target, for sure. A varmint of rabbit size, well it would be nip and tuck. But I'm liking this cartridge. It doesn't get the respect it deserves. However I did have some split cases in all of the three loads which reinforces my belief that to form .30 Carbine to 5.7MMJ annealing is required. I've got plenty of brass at present, but if I needed to make more I would anneal the cases before forming, tumble, size, and trim to the minimum.

Well, that pretty much entails that letter prefixed JSAR's went to Chile.

And they probably got fired and then drafted.

I can't help you there, I've never had one. But the .270 is based on the 30.06 and can be made from a necked down 30.06. That much I know. Donnelly's "Manual of Cartridge Conversions" states anneal the 30.06 case, run it into a .270 die, square the case mouth, and chamfer. It will be a little bit shorter than factory but a little bit short hurts nothing. Especially if using un-cannelured bullets. Seat to normal length and crimp. The bullet doesn't care where it is crimped if you choose to do so. However in a semi-automatic rifle it is a recommended thing.

"It seems irresponsible for RIA to state that rifle serial numbered B1483 is a Chilean contract rifle and have no documentation to support the claim. Is this how a "reputable" auction house does business?" As no production records exist for the letter prefixed JSAR's it is impossible to actually determine if that rifle is an actual Chilean or not. While the records exist for the non-prefixed serial numbers merely going through those won't necessarily answer the question or not. I'm not about to go through the entire production log available and try to count 1,000 rifles, first of all because if one counts 950 there is absolutely no way to either prove or disprove the remaining 50.

As long as you have a good quantity of 30.06 brass you have 270 brass. Though I'd anneal the cases before and after forming, and then resize them again after the second annealing.

This is also speculation, but having worked in many businesses producing products for sale I never worked for one that allowed employees to purchase something as small as a bolt when there were orders that had to be fulfilled on a strict timeline. That would be a poor business practice and as Melvin Johnson was running himself ragged to procure orders I find it difficult to believe he would have allowed even the first ten rifles produced as an employee purchase. Then too I know of no employer that would approve of any employee to take the time to "cherry pick" parts for a specific product. That may have happened, but any employee doing so was placing his "bread and butter" in dire jeopardy. I can see his maybe giving a few out as "seed" to grease the skids, but as Bruce mentioned those were standard grade rifles with maybe some selected wood. Not the same thing as this rifle in my opinion, which is speculation on my part also.

"JSAR Aficionados, Those who have examined rifle #0067 from mere enthusiast, to long and well respected expert, all agree that this is an important firearm." It may be, but I'm convinced it has been altered from the original condition it came off the production line. Thus not worth the asking price. But that is merely an opinion as the prices for JSAR's has gone ballistic these last few years. I've been fooled before by very good forgeries or alterations so I take a pessimist's view of everything these days.

I recognized the Ross. An excellent target rifle, an awful battle rifle. At least in the trenches of WWI. If the designers had stayed with the bolt locking system of the Mannlicher M1895 it copied instead of the interrupted screw it would have been a far better rifle.

I'm thinking high quality but not educated forgery.

I like that laminated stock on the Garand. Mine have standard walnut stocks, but the laminated is pretty. If available I'd stick one on the Johnson just because. It would look "racy."

Boy howdy.

Interesting as 5955 is on GunBroker right now up for auction. The rifle appears re-furbished with a replacement stock and the bidding is still under $3,000 with about 24 hours left. I was considering it as the cost is still more than reasonable, but now I'm seriously considering the history of that rifle as well as functionality. https://www.gunbroker.com/item/927069448

Those of you possessing a license I have a recommendation regarding it's renewal. At the end of last October I realized I hadn't received my renewal paperwork for my Class I license. I was a week away from expiration, so I called the ATF, spent some time on the phone and finally got a real human being. I explained my dilemma and was told that the paperwork had been sent in August. I replied I never received it. I was then told to call "your local agent" and given a name and phone number. I called immediately (it's Monday) and got voice mail. I left my name, license number, and phone number. By Friday I'd received no response so I called again and left the same message including my license was near expiration. And received no response. Monday, the day before my license expired, I again called "my local agent" and left a message. I also called the ATF, finally got a voice message about renewal, and left the same message. One week later (my license had expired) I'd received no reply from "my local agent" or the main office so I closed my books and all firearms in those books not sold by the expiration date of my license were recorded as "Retained by dealer." Copies were made and things left on the desk. The ATF regulations specifically state "if the business is discontinued the licensed dealer, manufacturer, or imported must surrender all records to ATF within 30 days." The deal is I didn't "surrender" my license, the ATF refused to contact me regarding it's renewal. As the ATF refused to speak with me I decided to wait for them to come and get my records. Which they eventually did, more than a month after expiration. Three agents came to collect my records the following week, wearing a face diaper the entire time. And copies of all documents (not the bound book or 4473's), dates of phone calls, and letters had been sent to a good friend as a backup. Trust no government agency these days.

That looks great and I think you lucked out. I'm thinking whom ever varnished the stock just varnished over the oil. No penetration. So the varnish just wiped off and the oil restored the original finish.

Navy Arms might have stamped the barrel of a complete rifle, I doubt they would stamp spare parts. It's hard to track spare parts.

When I was working in the armament section for the state of Oregon the unit received a bunch of M4 Carbines that came back from Iraq. Inspection and gauging was the job. When I took one down for inspection there was a good sized beetle in there. It was long gone and I wondered when the soldier that had this rifle took it apart. As with that beetle in there it couldn't fire. But I still can't figure how that beetle got in there.

Nope.

"Patina" in my book is dirt, corrosion, or maybe Dung Beetle poop, I clean my rifles as the manufacturer intended. To some people that's an anathema. Tough.