Need opinion

[eb in oregon 0]

I'd wage a bet it is a PMC receiver. One of the early ones before they got the right stamp for the receiver bridge.

[Ed Johnson 0]

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!

[eb in oregon 0]

"So Phil, in a very real sense, you do have a "prototype" Spitfire....Bravo!"

 

I concur as that makes perfect sense. The issues of receiver stamp differences are logical as it is a different company name, as well as the methods of stamping. And too numbering the barrel to the receiver is also understandable as it was a very limited number of rifles made under the "Johnson Guns" name. I'll have to pull mine out of the stock to look and see if the barrel is numbered but I'm pretty sure it wasn't numbered as yours Phil. If it is I'll slap myself for not seeing it earlier. However it would be nice to see some pictures of your entire rifle.

 

[Ed Johnson 0]

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

[matconcrete 0]

Ed and Eb

 Now this is beginning to make sense, interesting you ask to see the feed ramp as I noticed it isn’t like anything I’ve seen on any m1 carbine. Please ignore the c96 carnage.

Here’s the feed ramp and it does look like Ebs

[eb in oregon 0]

So that looks like a poorly assembled rifle. But if you were to consider selling it I might be interested. 

[matconcrete 0]

Even with the questionable stock, this little rifle just became quite exciting.

Ed, would you venture to guess how many PMC recievers were purchased for the spitfires?

Phil

[Ed Johnson 0]

 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 !