Serial Number Info Request

[Rarecat 0]

Thank you in advance for any build information.  My Winfield has arrived and it is Serial Number 7119.  In addition, I got my hands on a bare receiver which is Serial number 7700.  While I don't have high hopes the Winfield has any of it's original parts left, you never know.  As for the bare receiver, it will be interesting to see if it was ever built.  The serial number stamping on 7700 is poorly done....  see the photo

[ArtR 0]

The following information from the production logs:

Receiver SN 7119, Received From: Cranston Arms, Date Received 4/7/42, Stock No. 2, Barrel No. 2793F, Hammer Block No. A1066, Hammer No. 2156A, Bolt No.  9166, Locking Cam No. A1180, Firing Pin No. A5643,  Extractor No. 9321,  Magazine No. A3208, Disposition Date 4/9/42, Transferred to J.A. Inc - N.P.C

Your receiver 7700, the numbers stamped seem unusual for sure...however, 7700 was assembled.

Receiver SN 7700, Received From: Cranston Arms, Date Received 4/27/42, Stock No. 2, Barrel No. 0915F, Hammer Block No. 9880, Hammer No. 1902A, Bolt No.  A2458, Locking Cam No. A2078, Firing Pin No. B3192,  Extractor No. A0607,  Magazine No. A6649, Disposition Date 9/17/42, Transferred to J.A. Inc - N.P.C

[Rarecat 0]

Thank you Art!

[Rarecat 0]

@ArtR   Would like to request one more if you don't mind.  Serial number 1234 is a bare receiver sold as "Unissued"  It's a cool serial number in any event....  Thanks in advance

[ArtR 0]

HI

SN 1234 is an interesting case. In the production logs, it shows as having part SN's but each one is crossed out (single line thru each number) and then each number is reapplied to SN 1235 below it.  So, appears that 1234 was never built.

ArtR

[Rarecat 0]

Interesting, thanks again Art

[Ed Johnson 0]

Even so, that number and receiver might have some slight monetary value.

[flyer338 0]

Any idea why that receiver was not used to build a rifle? I infer from the parts listed for that serial number and then crossed out, that the factory started to build that rifle and then discarded the receiver or at least set it aside.

[ArtR 0]

No. More than probably, the person doing the log entry made a mistake, as 1234 was the first entry on that page and 1235 was the 2nd

Log entries were made in ink, before the days of white out, and thus crossing out a number was sufficient. There was ample space above the crossed out number to enter another number

 

[flyer338 0]

Yet, there is no entry showing parts other than those crossed out were used to build a rifle from receiver number 1234.

[ArtR 0]

Not sure where you are going with that????? As I said, the entries were made for 1234, then crossed out, and re-entered for 1235, a clear example of mistaken entry in the wrong line.

[flyer338 0]

It appears that receiver 1234 was never built as a rifle. If it had been, there would have been numbers recorded for the parts used. My question is WHY wasn't 1234 built as a rifle?

I infer from the ledger (I know the rifles were not necessarily built in serial number order - I do not know whether rifles were listed in the ledger in the order built) that someone started to build 1234, stopped and used the parts to build 1235.

To say the entries are simply a clerical error is belied by the fact there are no superceding entries for 1234, and all these years later 1234 shows up as an unbuilt receiver.

[ArtR 0]

As has been stated many times previously, JSAR's  were not assembled in any SN order.

If you know anything about manufacturing processes, it appears, from the production logs, that JA used what appears to be FILO process. That is a FIRST IN-LAST OUT system with parts. That sort of means, that if a box, tote, or queue was in place to hold parts for in-process, if the box had no parts, and parts were dumped in, LOW SN first HIGH SN followed, the HIGH SN would be built first. If the box still had parts in it, such as a LOW SN, and the box was filled again, by the same process, whatever SN on top would be built first and the lowest SN might not be built until box was emptied. Having done considerable work on the production logs, and having come from a manufacturing back ground, I can attest that this is the way the production logs reflect their build process to be. 

Some VERY LOW SN's were assembled and had some very late build dates. For example, SN 0216, appeared to be started 11/24/42 and was dispositioned to the NPC 12/07/1942 , which is one year after Pearl Harbor, and nearly 15 months after the earliest recorded assembly dates of 9/10/1941. Also, from considerable work with the production logs, I can attest that from the first 2000 SN log entries nearly 300 never  had any log entry. That is 15% may have never been assembled. Also, as we do not have access to the A and B series production logs, we cannot assume anything about when the A and B SN's were introduced into the production schedules. However, if the 'parts SN' items have any bearing on the process, they may have been introduced to the  assembly process at the same time as the no prefix SN's, or shortly later.

It is also very interesting to note, that since the Receivers and Barrels are the largest parts in the assembly process and from the production records of  the first 2000 rifle SN's, only 20 or so had no prefix/suffix barrels. The remaining nearly 1800 had barrels with either an A,  E, F, or G suffix SN's. Primarily A or E.  Those A and E suffix numbers began to appear in late October early November 1941. One has to wonder where all the NO prefix/suffix barrels went? Was the metal determined to be a bad lot and was it returned for smelting and re-manufacture?

[camstuff 0]

3 hours ago, flyer338 said:

It appears that receiver 1234 was never built as a rifle. If it had been, there would have been numbers recorded for the parts used. My question is WHY wasn't 1234 built as a rifle?

I infer from the ledger (I know the rifles were not necessarily built in serial number order - I do not know whether rifles were listed in the ledger in the order built) that someone started to build 1234, stopped and used the parts to build 1235.

To say the entries are simply a clerical error is belied by the fact there are no superceding entries for 1234, and all these years later 1234 shows up as an unbuilt receiver.

Maybe the assembler decided he wanted the 1234 for themselves because of the unique serial number, and years later it has finally surfaced. 

[Dutch2 0]

Maybe the 7700 number was stamped in by a pilot or air traffic controller.

7700 happens to be  the emergency transponder code on an airplane.

[ArtR 0]

Ha ha....Hey Dutch....knew that, but did not associate with a JSAR.....and 7500 HIJACKING and 7600 LOST COMMs

[Ed Johnson 0]

Anyway......If you want to sell me what might be a defective receiver, I'll send you a check for $100.00 and put it on my mantle as "the one that got away."  ej