Presentation JSAR

[Brian Alpert 0]

Our board has beed somewhat dead this past week so I thought everyone deserved a treat. This evening, Marc Crumpton of Indianapolis brought over JSAR #0067 he had recently acquired at auction. The production log had no information on #0067. (There is no information on most of the 1st 100 in the log).The rifle was unique and appeared to be a presentation rifle as many of the 1st 100 were supposed to be. The rifle was flat out new. I believe I was dissassembling it for the 1st time since manufacture. The finish was black or blue black like prewar 1903s. The lettering and logos were filled with the white material usually seen in the sight elevator numerals. There was a "P" stamped near the serial number, near the Cranston Arms logo and on the bbl. I have never seen this on other JSARs. Perhaps this stands for Presentation?? Examination in good daylight with a magnifying glass showed no polish marks or rounded lettering associated with a refinish. The serial number of the receiver matched the numbers on the bolt, locking cam, rear collar and bbl. and they did not appear to be restamped (like the so called Queens Guard Carbines). The wood was obviously original complete with against the grain sanding marks, 3 proper buttstock holes under the buttplate, characteristic inletting on the face with a letter and number stamped. The forend was semifancy. I have never seen a presentation JSAR but believe fthis to be the real deal. What do you think?

http://i29.tinypic.com/30wnmnr.jpg

http://i25.tinypic.com/14jc29t.jpg

http://i31.tinypic.com/24ffudf.jpg

http://i28.tinypic.com/hsmkhc.jpg

http://i29.tinypic.com/a0xlrt.jpg

http://i29.tinypic.com/4qqwz6.jpg

http://i26.tinypic.com/2yjsp3s.jpg

http://i32.tinypic.com/107taaq.jpg

http://i28.tinypic.com/2h55xc8.jpg

http://i29.tinypic.com/15cenw6.jpg

[Black Tom 0]

Damnit Brian, after looking at the pictures I took my JSAR and smashed it to pieces and threw it in the trash! After breakfast I'm going to stab myself with the bayonet!

Does your friend know anything about the history of the rifle?

Which auction house, was it from an estate etc?

Let us know.

Thanks, B.T.

[webmaster 0]

This is the same rifle mentioned in the post about S/N 0075. The member got the S/N wrong when he posted (he meaent 0067).

[Bob K 0]

Yep Jim, that's the one we talked about last week. I told Marc the day he bought it that it might be a presentation piece according to your theory.

[Joseph Scott 0]

Brain, did the large head stock screws have lock washers or the early red rubber inserts in the split slots? The early manuals show the rifle, on the foldout drawing, without a buffer assembly. Does this have one? Really a super nice example.

[Brian Alpert 0]

Joseph, I only got to field strip the rifle. I did not remove any screws. As such, I do not know whether the large head screws had lock washers or red rubber inserts in the slit slots. I did not actually remove the butt plate. Marc told me he had removed it and there were the 3 holes underneath. I have no idea whether it had a buffer assembly or not. Perhaps if Marc is reading these posts he can check out these areas and respond.

[Brian Alpert 0]

I just talkedwith Marc who does not have a computer handy to respond. The rifle came out of a collection in Northern Indiana. It had been acquired by the man's grandfather who was a conducter on The New York Central RR on the New York to Chicago run. (I think it was called the 20th Century Limited). He first remembered seeing it in the 50's. Marc reports that the large head screws have both washers and lock washers and are not slotted with rubber inserts. The rifle has a buffer mechanism on the mainspring cap screw.

[mc41 0]

Our board has beed somewhat dead this past week so I thought everyone deserved a treat. This evening, Marc Crumpton of Indianapolis brought over JSAR #0067 he had recently acquired at auction. The production log had no information on #0067. (There is no information on most of the 1st 100 in the log).The rifle was unique and appeared to be a presentation rifle as many of the 1st 100 were supposed to be. The rifle was flat out new. I believe I was dissassembling it for the 1st time since manufacture. The finish was black or blue black like prewar 1903s. The lettering and logos were filled with the white material usually seen in the sight elevator numerals. There was a "P" stamped near the serial number, near the Cranston Arms logo and on the bbl. I have never seen this on other JSARs. Perhaps this stands for Presentation?? Examination in good daylight with a magnifying glass showed no polish marks or rounded lettering associated with a refinish. The serial number of the receiver matched the numbers on the bolt, locking cam, rear collar and bbl. and they did not appear to be restamped (like the so called Queens Guard Carbines). The wood was obviously original complete with against the grain sanding marks, 3 proper buttstock holes under the buttplate, characteristic inletting on the face with a letter and number stamped. The forend was semifancy. I have never seen a presentation JSAR but believe fthis to be the real deal. What do you think?

http://i29.tinypic.com/30wnmnr.jpg

http://i25.tinypic.com/14jc29t.jpg

http://i31.tinypic.com/24ffudf.jpg

http://i28.tinypic.com/hsmkhc.jpg

http://i29.tinypic.com/a0xlrt.jpg

http://i29.tinypic.com/4qqwz6.jpg

http://i26.tinypic.com/2yjsp3s.jpg

http://i32.tinypic.com/107taaq.jpg

http://i28.tinypic.com/2h55xc8.jpg

http://i29.tinypic.com/15cenw6.jpg

[mc41 0]

Regarding the presentation Johnson Automatic rifle and Johnsons being an icon of American firearm history, by simple good fortune,I'm honored to own this example. I wish to thank Brian Alpert for his past and current guidance in collecting and judging Johnsons. Also the previous owner, who was generous in sharing his family's history along with the rifle's provenience. As Brian Alpert had stated, he and I both felt that he was dissassembling the Johnson for the first time since it's manufacture. Therefore, we agreed that the rifle had never been shot. Rest assured that under my ownership, it will remain in it's current state of perfection.

[Bruce Canfield 0]

Guys,

After following this I do not believe this is a presentation rifle. When JA assembled rifles the only matching parts were the barrel / locking collar and whatever parts that matches the production log. They were not stamped as shown. Usually the stamped numbers were uniform in size and serial numbers were stamped on the straight. For presentation rifle these were ordinary production rifles with what I believe to be was a better grade of wood. Also present with this rifle was a soft leather fleece lined gun case that came with it. I'm not sure who produced this case but Redhead comes to mind. I don't believe the receivers were ever highlighted with white material. As for this single stamped letter, why would JA stamp it with a letter P and leave the buttstock with sanding marks? I wonder if Doc was up to his old tricks as he did with the Queens Guards rifles. Guys don’t jump on the bayonet or take a suck on the gas pipe as of yet. I think this is another one of Doc Hollywoods rifles.

Walt

[Bruce Canfield 0]

Walt is correct. The only "presentation" Johnson rifles that have been confirmed were standard production M1941 rifles that MMJ, Jr. took off the assembly line to give to company shareholders, VIPs, etc. They had no special features or fancy finishes...just standard Dutch service rifles. Johnson may well have picked rifles with above average wood but that is speculation. He did have some "Redhead" fleece-lined leather fitted cases made for at least some of these rifles. I am not aware of any "special presentation rifles" being produced by Johnson Automatics and would be highly skeptical of any purported example.

[Ed Johnson 0]

Grrrr....! Here we go again.....?

Before making any definitive comments, I would want to have the history on this rifle verified all the way back to the source.

I repeat....verified.....actual names, addresses, etc. .....this is the only thing that will satisfy me personally. The "20th Century Limited" doesn't do it for me.

Otherwise, lacking that, I'm in agreement with Walt and Bruce.

Bruce actually owns a rifle that came from one of the Directors of J A, Mr. Sheldon Jones. Bruce can confirm matching part numbers or lack of same and we have direct connection with that Director's son. There is a photo of Mr. Jones on page 30 of the Johnson book along with photos of the rifle and "Redhead" case on page 112.

I have never seen "white" lettering. That's a new one for me.

The Johnson book covers one "presentation" rifle to the Netherlands on pages 112 and 113.

I suspect Bob Lamoreaux will probably agree with my comments. He recently donated a Johnson Rifle that had been the personal property of my father and hung on his library wall for many years. Although it had a blued barrel, it was nothing terribly special or fancy. It had no major matching parts. Dad was not "into" matching parts, as the book confirms.

Basically, Dad was not a gun collector for the collections sake. Perhaps this frustrated some collectors who felt there should be matching parts. Hence, the emergence of so called "presentation" guns to raise the price of the rifle to collectors, many of whom would expect matching numbers under those conditions.

My Dad was a very practical man....more interested in proper mechanical function than proper "collector" appearance. The best example of this was his modification of a 1940's Chris Craft speedboat. The standard, flat windshield looked very proper but passengers (especially my mother, who was quite vocal) would get wet with the big waves on Moosehead Lake in Maine. So, Dad took a windshield off of our 1946 Willy's Jeep and put it on the Christ Craft. The boat looked like hell but my mother remained dry....and much happier with my father.

Figure that one.......

Anyway....like I said......I would want to see proof of ownership on that rifle.

[Brian Alpert 0]

OK, Here we go. For what it's worth.

I have never seen a presentation JSAR. I only suspected #0067 might be, based on the statement that many of the 1st 100 were not identified in the log and were supposedly presentation rifles. Actually only 11 of the 1st 100 were identified, 10 of these were for Chile and 1 for NPC. It is also hard to compare different vintages. Bruce Canfield's 8780 and the Queen's A series were produced somewhat later.

Although my pictures do not do it justice, the finish appears to be original based on examination in bright daylight with a magnifying glass and 50+ years of gun collecting.

With regard to the matching numbers on the bolt, locking cam, bbl & collar, they look factory to me. I have also seen (and indeed own) rifles with numbers NOT straight. As many of you know, I own a Mexican crested LMG look-a-like and a "W" crested "Queens Guard Carbine" so I know what our friend in California's redos and stamped numbers look like. He had to mill off the old numbers before restamping and it showed. I actually compared the numbers on the QGC to the rifle in question and they are most different, with the ones on the QGC obviously restamps.

I have seen many rifles....JSARS and others...with white paint or wax in the lettering to make it stand out. I always assume this to be added after. In this particular instance, it has been there a long time (it has age cracks under magnification) but I don't assume it to be factory.

I have no idea what the "P" means. I have never seen it before and I have carefully examined between 50 and 100 JSARs over the years.

The stock is, without question, an unblemished original.

Is it a presentation rifle? I don't know but if nothing else, it sure is looks like a beautiful untouched original to me.

[mc41 0]

JSAR Aficionados

OK, Here we go. For what it's worth.

I have never seen a presentation JSAR. I only suspected #0067 might be, based on the statement that many of the 1st 100 were not identified in the log and were supposedly presentation rifles. Actually only 11 of the 1st 100 were identified, 10 of these were for Chile and 1 for NPC. It is also hard to compare different vintages. Bruce Canfield's 8780 and the Queen's A series were produced somewhat later.

Although my pictures do not do it justice, the finish appears to be original based on examination in bright daylight with a magnifying glass and 50+ years of gun collecting.

With regard to the matching numbers on the bolt, locking cam, bbl & collar, they look factory to me. I have also seen (and indeed own) rifles with numbers NOT straight. As many of you know, I own a Mexican crested LMG look-a-like and a "W" crested "Queens Guard Carbine" so I know what our friend in California's redos and stamped numbers look like. He had to mill off the old numbers before restamping and it showed. I actually compared the numbers on the QGC to the rifle in question and they are most different, with the ones on the QGC obviously restamps.

I have seen many rifles....JSARS and others...with white paint or wax in the lettering to make it stand out. I always assume this to be added after. In this particular instance, it has been there a long time (it has age cracks under magnification) but I don't assume it to be factory.

I have no idea what the "P" means. I have never seen it before and I have carefully examined between 50 and 100 JSARs over the years.

The stock is, without question, an unblemished original.

Is it a presentation rifle? I don't know but if nothing else, it sure is looks like a beautiful untouched original to me.

[mc41 0]

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.

As acknowledged, information regarding the first one hundred Johnsons is limited. Simply, the log fails to identify all past numbers, and visual descriptions documenting those early production rifles does not exist. Therefore, the question being

if this Johnson is a Presentation issue, is one certainly open to discussion. Employing research and analysis, how exciting it would be for all who treasure Johnsons to determine that in fact it truly is. Hence, another piece found to the already remarkable Johnson Automatic story.Yet, everyone who has seen #0067do agree it is in fact a superb and exceptional example.

As to the firearms provenance, I shall in the near term,once again contact the previous owner and will attempt to glean any additional pertinent information.

The arrival of this Johnson has sparked a debate which I welcome and support. Therefore, I encourage and will allow those qualified to examine the rifle for themselves. I live in Indianapolis, yet plan to attend the Ron Dixon Louisville, KY Gun Show this September 27th. That Saturday, with the assistance of Brian Alpert, the rifle will be available for those to inspect. I would entertain other possible arrangements.

Respond via this message board site and I thank you for your continued interest.

MC41