Johnson with cartouches, ever seen one like this?

[wwiifirearms 0]

Got my third JSAR today and it has a few odd markings. Any theories on what these could mean?

The first is a crossed cannon cartouche on the right side wood between the trigger and the rear sight.

The second is on the opposite side and looks like a smaller version of the dod cartouche seen on Korean era m1.

The third is an mark just before the serial number where it looks like a mark may have been removed (serial number is completely intact, hard to get a good pic of the mark but I attached what I could get with my cell phone until I get home and have a proper camera.)

-wwiifirearms

[oldtirediron 0]

I am not the big expert on WWII firearms but I know enought to say that these "" Markings"" were applied post factory and not by the US Military; any branch-- I once examined a good number of Johnson rifles that were originally at the Winchester museum before the sell off sale of 1975 or there abouts. All of these rifles were rifles sent originally back to Johnson Automatic's for repair during WWII Perhaps Johnson had more rifles than he knew what to do with because the damaged rifles were all tagged pretty well as what had happened to them and why they were being returned for repair- They had standard repair cards for the US arsenals (ARMY) on them. Had I had the time; I should have made a log of all the serial numbers and damages the rifles suffered. However out of about 30-50 rifles there was not a complete one in the bunch; maybe with some parts or barrels you could make a few but otherwise they appeared to have been R&D department items; or hanger queens; where they are slowly stripped for parts. Some had H.P. White Laboratory; Bell Aire MD Brass tags on their stocks . I can tell you from my experience with WWII fireams the ordnance wheel that small was never used on a fiirearm; If it were to be on a Johnson the wheel size would have also had to be around 1 1/4 inch wide and an inspector would have to be indicated. Another person here devaluating a rifle by fictious markings ! Sorry to be so crass but collecting fine firearms now is starting to get aggravational.

By the way the major damages to these rifles seemed to be split and damaged barrels; some with big goose eggs near the bayonet lug. Looks like a bunch were damaged by firing them with plugged barrels; hense maybe the trip to HP White to determine chamber and muzzle pressures!

Another note to the wise; anytime you see an Ordnance wheel and an eagle with three stars property mark on the same item; be immediately suspect It is either one or the other !The eagle and three stars property mark was applied starting in the early 1950's. Now if I only could remeber where I left that bag of pristine 3 dollar bills !

[wwiifirearms 0]

I would agree with part of your assessment. Clearly the marks are post factory and clearly the DoD mark was not used until long after these gun were made. However, I am at a loss to understand your confidence that marks were "not by the US military; any branch".

Nobody is claiming these to be WWII, or any specific branch. The size of the marks is unusual, as you noted, which makes it at least somewhat unlikely that they came from the generally available stamps used to restore/fake garand and carbine marks. On the other hand the US Military may have had stamps of various sizes for other purposes. It is clear they were not in the habit of putting any marks on the "Marine" WWII guns. At least not as part of any regular program, and not during WWII.

If someone was trying to enhance the guns value through fakery, I suspect they would try using at least WWII era marks, I also suspect they would have tried selling it at a premium. This gun was actually being offered somewhat below the market price for an average (or even below average )JSAR.

Some information suggests that the US Military may have Johnson rifles floating around in small numbers well after WWII. I have heard the there is a documented sale from the US Military of a small lot in 1947. Another source suggest they may have been using them in that nasty CIA business in 1961(yes I realize the CIA wasn't going put US marks on anything). I am not suggesting these marks have anything to do with either of these, just that US Military could have had Johnson rifles somewhere during the period when the DoD marks were in use.

Does anyone have any information on any applications that did use stamps of this size, and perhaps the dates they were used?

-wwiifirearms

[wwiifirearms 0]

Just to be clear I'll start by saying, I am NOT claiming these marks mean anything and I doubt any specific meaning could ever be conclusively established.

With this in mind, I was re-reading my copy of "Johnson's Rifles and Machine Guns" by Bruce Canfield. On page 219 There is a quote from Maynard Johnson's manuscript regarding the use of Johnson Rifles by Communists in Korea and Cuba.

Quote: "Some of our U.S. combat people overhauled captured Red Johnsons and used them in the proper manner, so they wrote me."

This presumably would have been in the 1950's or early 1960's.

-wwiifirearms

[oldtirediron 0]

You can argue that these marks are original until you are blue in the face- however the truth is that anything overhauled over seas is not proofmarked; in fact proofs on wood are usually scrapped off-- The proofs added to your rifle has actually devalued it in my humble opinion- as the ordnance circle is not even a correct ordnance circle but a newer reproduction of the old wheel. The government property mark would never have been applied to this rifle. If it were in fact overhauled in a government arsenal different marking would have been applied; most likely on the barrel Case closed on my end. a nice refinish on the stock should cure your problems.

[wwiifirearms 0]

The marks look like they will mostly steam out if I try, when I start working on the other dents in the wood. I just want to eliminate any chance of them being part of they guns history before removing them. You mentioned the wheel is a " newer reproduction of the old wheel". Just curious how to tell the reproductions from the originals? Is it the size difference?

I'll agree these don't look like arsenal rework marks, but it is very common for overhauled guns to be marked on the wood with various cartouches and other marks. I have a number of rifles that came directly to me from the CMP or DCM which have US Ordnance and / or arsenal stamps in the wood. Most of these are non-standard arms such as .22 rifles which were overhauled. Other non-standard rifles like the Canadian Ross rifles and mosin-nagant which were issued to US soldiers can be found with well documented US marks on the wood. I point this out not to suggest that the marks on the Johnson are the same, but just to be clear on the facts. There is plenty of evidence that the US did mark rifles, on the wood, during overhauls. These usually aren't wheels, but I think I have one commercial .22 that came through the CMP with a large wheel on the stock.

I suspect the marks on this Rifle are Not from an arsenal overhaul, however, they also don't make much sense as someones attempt to inhance the value through deception. The guns are worth plenty without the marks. Marking the gun so that it appeared to be overhauled makes no sense, since overhauled guns are usually worth less than originals. Anyone who had done enough research to know a US Marine gun was worth a premium, would surely have also discovered that they didn't have any such marks. Perhaps the worlds worst forger got their hands on this rifle, but unless there is a definitive way to tell the marks are from a known reproduction stamp it would be just as likely that there is some other explanation that we will never know. If there is a definitive way to ID the marks as reproductions I would be happy to know so that I can be confident in removing them.

-wwiifirearms

[M48TANKER 0]

WWiifireamrs: My humble opinion, for all the two cents it's worth, is this: Don't do anything to it right away, especially if you are going to keep it. I don't think anyone can positively say exactly what the markings represent, or who put them on there. We can speculate, from what we know about the firearms we've seen...but no one has seen them all. Your's could be a unknown version, marked by some US agency, an attempted fake, or just an embellishment by Bubby Gumpsmith for his own pleasure ? In the end....it's your rifle and you can do as you please with it, and you can interpret the markings as you wish. (why is it that it's "a penny for your thoughts" ...but your opinion is "two cents worths"? Someone is getting shortchanged) M48TANKER

[emmagee1917 0]

During WW2 , the crossed cannons / flaming shell / belt was the final inspectors mark. It meant the firearm had passed inspection and was accepted by the US govt. It was the final stamp put on it at the factory , and was not used by the rebuild armories. It was replaced in the '50s by the eagle and three stars in a box stamp. Was only applied to new firearms at the factory after final inspection , same as the one before. No gun would have both because you can't build it new twice. The small size of the CC is prob'ly due to a die based on one for a pistol plant.

Chris

[wwiifirearms 0]

Thanks for all the input. I don't plan to sell it and if I ever do a good friend of mine has already reserved the right to buy it. I think I'll leave then alone for now. It makes sense to me that I can always "fix" them later, but it would be hard to "unfix" then on the 1 in a million chance that they some how offer a clue to rifles history at some point in the future. Who knows, maybe we will find out that a specific reseller was in the practice of doing this back in the 60s as a marketing gimmick, and then we might find that that reseller got his supply from some source with historic importance. I hate to say it but if I were to sell it on then open market, I would fix them, just so nobody would say I was trying to pull something over on people. In the process I might be erasing some clue to the guns history, but on the open market they would just be a distraction to what is otherwise a really nice example.

On closer inspection of the area in front of the serial number, it looks like maybe something was polished off, but it must have been done before the gun was finished. The finish is very consistent over the area, and consistent with the rest of the gun. I am completely confident the finish on the gun is original. Perhaps there was a flaw or error in the stamping that was corrected before the gun was finished.

-wwiifirearms