JEM

 Parts for the Model 1941 rifle. The extractor is a new one from Numrich, the rest appear to be OEM. Anyone interested, all or none, sorry.

Original post by Black Tom is dated 18 May 2010.

Art, thanks for the post of the vintage Winfield ad.  It was from just this kind of advertising that my father bought the military version of the Johnson rifle.  He made the purchase in late 1954 or early 1955 for $65.  The rifle is still in the family.

Art, firing pin is fluted along the spring end and OL is 5.534 in. by my measurement.

My spare.

Mr. Pullen has a picture of this badge on his Johnson Rifle Site.

Picture 30 of 30 of this offering shows the serial number as 1967.  Interesting, as there was a post on this site, in August of 2018, about a rifle with this same serial number.  Did it sell at the auction listed that time?

 You all may have seen this.  I think it is well done. Your thoughts?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bIorkdUgL8

ok

I would surmise that a lot of the Johnson rifles used by the Bay of Pigs invasion force where scooped up by the Castro forces as seen in this picture. Maybe a lot of 41’s in Cuba?

M48 TANKER: Good catch!

On Guns America auction site there is a JSAR for sale with a serial number of A9081 which would indicate to me that the full allotment of 9999 rifles were built. That being said, with out the production records one can only speculate. Of the 18 rifles listed at the recent auction in Indianapolis not one was an "A" series. Again, "where have all the "A"s gone?"

Over the pass couple years I have jotted down JSA rifle numbers I have seen on auction sites and web photos. I have listed 116 with no prefix, 29 with "A" prefix and 83 with "B" prefix. If, as stated in Canfield's book that there were 9,999 units in each of 3 blocks, that could mean that 29,997 rifles may have be manufactured and my count is less than one percent of the total. Lots of rifles to be counted!

tmsgguy,

The Johnson rifle I have was purchaced from Winfield but is the military, not one of the sporterized versions that they were also selling. Still, that does not answer the questions about the extra markings.

The collar and barrel on my rifle have different serial numbers but the barrel is an orginal because it has the right markings-JA;

.30-'06; the proof mark with the sword and the right markings on the guide collar (.30-'06 and 41). Also stamped on the barrel, in a different font is the number 882, which in this case does not match the receiver number. There is also the letter J with a top bar on the barrel. There are no numbers that match the prodution log for the receiver number of this rifle. The rifle was purchased from Winfield in1953 and has never been out of the family. My best guess is that the barrel is there fore one that was put together from avalible parts, most likely at Winfield or maybe before they received it. And on goes the fun of owning a "Johnson Semi-Auto".

Joe,

If the numbers on the collar and the barrel are different, I assume this means that it is not an original barrel, but one that has been put together from random pants. Your thoughts on this.

Thank you Joe for you comments. My guess is that it was done by Winfield Arms or before they got ahold of the rifle, because this rifle was purchased in 1953 and has been in the family ever since. Another quirk in the saga of the JSAR.

On the JSAR I have there is a number stamped on the right side of the front sight. I have looked a any number of picture of other Johnson rifles and not seen any numbers or have I read any think about any numbers being on the sight. I have waited until I could get a good picture of the sight before asking what the number might be. Any one have an insight into that it might be about? Thanking you for taking a look and any replys.

Brian Alpert: Thank you for the quick turn around on the information about JSAR #5521. This rifle has been in the family since 1953. None of the part number match with the "as built" numbers, no suprise. Thank you again.

I am seeking information about JSAR #5521. Any information would be appeciated. Thank you.