Information on rifle

[j.rivet 0]

Hello. I have just purchased a Johnson m1941 with book. attached are the only three pictures I have at the moment that the seller has sent me. According to him it does fire and function properly. Unfortunately it has had the sight removed and been drilled and tapped for a scope. Are there any instances of this being done where it is correct to history? Or is it a bubba. As well it has been rebarreled and I am hoping it is still correct to be original to the history. It is electro penciled 308 and beside it nato. I am aware of navy and other instances converting these to the nato 7.62x51 and I believe that is what it is. I understand 308 is very similar to 308. Just seems odd that it says 308 and nato. Unless it is just what the guy converting it had stencilled for whatever reason saying it’s functional with both. Let me know what you folks think. I would love to track down a sight to slap on to help it become closer to original. Thank you. I will post more pictures as soon as it’s in my hands.

[camstuff 0]

Hello, and welcome.  I’ll add some info based off of the pictures and info you provided.  
 

I think the pictures get somewhat distorted when I zoom in, but it appears the stock does not fit the bolt stop at the rear that well, so I suspect that the stock is a replacement stock.  It also looks like the stock fit to the rear of the magazine might be flat instead of rounded.  But with the distortion it’s hard to tell for sure.  A lot of Winfield sporters would be drilled and tapped for a scope mount, so it’s possible that you may have one of these.  I know some members here have 308 barrels along with myself, mine is not of military descent, but just a modified aftermarket barrel. I can’t speak for the other barrels here.   Winfield did offer other calibers when they sold the sporters, maybe yours is one of them.  You can usually find  reproduction rear sights for these, but expect to pay a lot more for an original, if they ever show up for sale.  
 

the electric pencil makes me want to ask if you might have any import markings, which is typical practice of the importers.

 Anyway, probably not to much help from me on this.   It will be interesting to see more pictures when you receive it.  Enjoy your new rifle.!

[ArtR 0]

I strongly suggest using a set of Go/No-Go gauges on this rifle prior to firing. If you are not aware of the differences between .308 Win and 7.62x51 NATO, I also suggest reading up on that as well.

[eb in oregon 0]

1 hour ago, ArtR said:

I strongly suggest using a set of Go/No-Go gauges on this rifle prior to firing. If you are not aware of the differences between .308 Win and 7.62x51 NATO, I also suggest reading up on that as well.

The differences in .308 and 7.62x51 NATO are minuscule, as long as the commercial ammunition is within the standards in bullet weight and pressure of 7.62 NATO there is no fundamental difference. Any problems interchanging the two in a military rifle are a direct result of diverging from the standard military load and using far too heavy bullets which do operate at higher pressure levels and have a lot longer bullet. Which can engage the lands in a military chamber. That causes pressure spikes.

[Ed Johnson 0]

The penciled in "308 NATO" is obviously not a Johnson Automatics (JA) factory production, which were (to my knowledge) only produced in 30:06 and .270 for barrels. "EB's" and "ArtR's" comments above are appropriate. I assume that the JSAR recoil mechanism will function properly with .308 as long as pressure isn't too high. As for the removal of the iron sights and the drill & tap for scope mount, this (to my knowledge) would not have been a JA factory option but a later modification by a gunsmith, or possibly a Winfield product.

[ArtR 0]

I have not read of any JSAR being drilled or tapped for a scope by the factory during the war years. That is not to say someone did not try. After the war, and especially during the Winfield period, many rifles were modified for scopes, and those rifles are frequently discovered today. There are many instances of people removing the rear sights on rifles that have been returned to full military configuration only to find taps, filled or not. 

As for .308 Win or 7.62x51 NATO, I was just suggesting the buyer make sure that the chamber was in good condition, and if the buyer is not aware of the differences in the two cartridges, to just be aware. Outward appearances of the two cartridges are minuscule, but if one has not checked the headspace, the results could be much different. My understanding is, that today, most of the modern M1A and AR10 variants are now manufactured so that it would make no difference which cartridge was used, but the older government M14's were a different story. When I was shooting a US ARMY M14, we were told not to use any commercial .308 Win, and to reload to 7.62x51 NATO standards. We even bought 2000 round lots of Lake City brass. As the buyer probably does not know when his barrel was manufactured, I am using common sense and  just urging caution.

There are different Go/No Go gauges for the two cartridges.

[camstuff 0]

3 hours ago, eb in oregon said:

The differences in .308 and 7.62x51 NATO are minuscule, as long as the commercial ammunition is within the standards in bullet weight and pressure of 7.62 NATO there is no fundamental difference. Any problems interchanging the two in a military rifle are a direct result of diverging from the standard military load and using far too heavy bullets which do operate at higher pressure levels and have a lot longer bullet. Which can engage the lands in a military chamber. That causes pressure spikes.

I thought NATO ammo had harder primers to prevent slam fires. And commercial ammo did not.  Seems like a big difference to me. 

[j.rivet 0]

I have the rifle in my hands but first I am going to give some backstory on it. I had sold a set of tires on Facebook to a guy. His profile showed him as a avid hunter. When he arrived to buy them I asked if he had any firearms for sale. He thought about it and said he actually did. Shortly afterwards I received those three pictures of this rifle. I was not familiar with the gun at all and neither was he. I asked him how much he would like and he told me 350 bucks. I said sure. We both did some researching shortly after and discovered what the firearm actually was. Of course the price was altered a little bit but I sure came out of this deal pretty happy. You never know what someone has unless you ask. Anyways attached are some more pictures for you guys to look at. He had purchased it off a guy something like 30 years ago. It came with what I believe is an instruction manual or just a informational book. The book is stamped to a guy. I’m not sure if that is who had owned the rifle before him but I will try to see if I can track him down and figure out more info. I will throw up a few pictures of the first few pages aswell. I can share the rest if there is any interest. The stock is in tougher shape than I had thought. I will disassemble gun one  of these evenings when the kids aren’t jumping around. If you guys would like any specific pictures while I do that let me know! Thank you. Let me know what you think with the new pictures.

was having difficulties posting pictures but they are up now!

[j.rivet 0]

It is showing an error code 200. I didn’t have trouble posting the above three pictures. Can anybody give me advice on how to post them? I fixed it they are posted.

[matconcrete 0]

I’ve seen some of the original books sell for several hundred, what is the serial number of the jsar if you don’t mind giving it?

phil m

[j.rivet 0]

It is 2572. Do you know how I can post pictures? Fixed it

[camstuff 0]

I’ve had that same error before, If your using your phone for this, I do screenshots and edit the edges, and they always upload at that point. 

[j.rivet 0]

Thank you! They are up now!

[ArtR 0]

Hi

While you do have a 4 digit SN rifle, I will let some other more knowledgeable members point out some of the serious defects. Many JSAR's are worth some serious money,  but defects are major detractors and will affect overall value.

For now, I will give you the production log serial number data for the rifle....that is, the parts that it had when it shipped from the factory:

Rec'd from Cranston Arms 12/5/1941. Stock No. N/A, Barrel No. 3708E, Hammer Block No. 3593, Hammer No. 3118, Bolt No. 4551, Locking Cam No. 2329, Firing Pin No. 3464, Extractor No. 2613, Magazine No. 6821, Disposition Date 12/6/1941 Transferred to J.A. Inc. - N.P.C.

ArtR

[j.rivet 0]

Thank you. I will peel it apart and check if the numbers match up once I get the chance. I am attempting to try and source the sights, bayonet lug and stock to help restore it. 

[eb in oregon 0]

20 hours ago, camstuff said:

I thought NATO ammo had harder primers to prevent slam fires. And commercial ammo did not.  Seems like a big difference to me. 

True, but primers have nothing to do with minor dimensional changes. Military chambers are minisculey larger to account for dirt, debris, and carbon in combat situations. I've never seen a rifle in either caliber that won't chamber either cartridge. I've loaded and fired thousands of .308 and 30-06 (mixed cases) in military chambered rifles with never a problem due to case manufacture or the RCBS .308 and 30-06 Winchester dies I've been using for over 30 years. And again the cautions are more towards cartridges not of NATO standard rather than cartridges of the same weight and pressures. Then too military brass can be slightly heavier than commercial brass, mostly due to the fact military ammunition can be and is sometimes roughly handled. I have weighed numerous commercial and military cases in .308, 30-06, and .30 carbine and I've rarely found a nickle's worth of difference between them in weight. I've even found commercial cases (Federal) that out weighed military cases.

Primers: yes some commercial primers are considered soft, but if correctly seated in the case (flush, or better yet .002 to .003 below the case head) there is usually no problem. I've never had a slam fire on a US made rifle, but I did experience one on a MAS 49/56 one time using reloaded ammunition. However I'm convinced it was more a high primer than a firing pin problem. I had a very nice Egyptian FN M49 once, it was a "nice" rifle." I sold it. Weeks later I got an email telling me he had blown it up and he was asking if I'd refund him some money. No, it was a perfectly fine rifle, you blew it up, that's not my responsibility. It turned out he was using reloads with Winchester primers (known to be a soft primer) and had a out of battery strike on his primer due to a high primer not fully seated. Pity, that was one swell rifle, it was the nicest one I'd ever seen. Regardless it is my understanding that NATO ammunition is loaded with the same primers as most commercial ammunition, they just use those primers noted for thicker cup material. There are several manufacturer's that make primers for military rifles but they are of a thicker cup material than other primers. 

I'll add that (at least for machine guns) there is a different set of head space gauges for foreign deployment that are slightly more generous in head space. How do I know that? I worked in small arms repair once.

https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/a-primer-on-primers.6936610/

[camstuff 0]

Yep, you shared some great info here. I like it. That’s a shame about the FN, and the buyer was pretty bold to come back for a refund.  I’ve had one slam fire and it happened to be in a JSAR a couple of years ago, it turned out the firing pin spring and washer were not attached to the firing pin correctly. Luckily Joseph helped me identify the issue and it’s worked fine ever since. 
 

I just realized the Egyptian FN actions did not have the Firing Pin Safety Stop (FPSS) which they declined to have installed when produced for them, and I believe the single piece firing pin for awhile, instead of the more safer two piece firing pin, Which helped with the slam fire issues the had. 

[eb in oregon 0]

53 minutes ago, camstuff said:

Yep, you shared some great info here. I like it. That’s a shame about the FN, and the buyer was pretty bold to come back for a refund.  I’ve had one slam fire and it happened to be in a JSAR a couple of years ago, it turned out the firing pin spring and washer were not attached to the firing pin correctly. Luckily Joseph helped me identify the issue and it’s worked fine ever since. 
 

I just realized the Egyptian FN actions did not have the Firing Pin Safety Stop (FPSS) which they declined to have installed when produced for them, and I believe the single piece firing pin for awhile, instead of the more safer two piece firing pin, Which helped with the slam fire issues the had. 

You know, the other month I was at the range with the JSAR and a friend. I gave him two stripper clips and told him to have at it. He fired one and on the second shot it doubled. Both of us at the time attributed it to a loose hold on the rifle and he "Bump fired" it. He did admit to not holding the rifle firmly and he didn't quite expect the recoil. It's fired another 60 rounds since normally. However I just may strip it down and take a look at the firing pin assembly.

[ArtR 0]

2 hours ago, eb in oregon said:

I'll add that (at least for machine guns) there is a different set of head space gauges for foreign deployment that are slightly more generous in head space. How do I know that? I worked in small arms repair once.

While I was still shooting on the State Service Rifle team, at the start of each season,  we all had to submit our M14 service rifles for a battery of testing (trigger pull, throat/muzzle erosion, headspace, etc)  and our rifles were individually checked. While I cannot attest to the manufacturer (Forster??), we had a set of 3 gauges, Go/NOGO/Field for 7.62x51 NATO and they were all so marked. I am not sure why we had a Field gauge, as any Army M14 rifle that closed on a NOGO gauge was rebarreled. I was issued and used 2 M14's while on the team, and the 2nd one was rebarreled with a new barrel at Camp Perry before the matches.

Rifle was rebarreled in July 1996 with a 7/92 DCM barrel. All team rifles were recalled by the Army and returned in Feb 2007.

Edited February 25, 2022 by ArtR
Added photo and more info

[eb in oregon 0]

"While I cannot attest to the manufacturer (Forster??), we had a set of 3 gauges, Go/NOGO/Field for 7.62x51 NATO and they were all so marked. I am not sure why we had a Field gauge, as any Army M14 rifle that closed on a NOGO gauge was rebarreled."

The "Field Gauge" is essentially the "overseas maximum" gauge. A little more generous than the "No Go" yet it is still a safe rifle, just not the best rifle. Fine for combat, not so much for competition. I "spaced" on that fact on my earlier post. If the "Field Gauge" allows battery the rifle does need re-barreling. Soon.

[ArtR 0]

The instructions  stated that if the rifle went into battery on a NOGO gauge, then the Field gauge should be used next. If it did not go into battery on a field gauge, the barrel might still be safe to use, but it should be addressed soon.  Closing on a field gauge I understood to be a big no-no. It was always our understanding, that if the rifle went into battery on the NOGO gauge, it was in need of attention now.  In our case, that attention was always a new barrel. While some may let it pass, we did not.  That was why I wondered why our set included a Field gauge. We never got to use it. I can only think that at the time, the three came as a set.

[matconcrete 0]

 

8 hours ago, camstuff said:

I’ve had one slam fire and it happened to be in a JSAR a couple of years ago, it turned out the firing pin spring and washer were not attached to the firing pin correctly. Luckily Joseph helped me identify the issue and it’s worked fine ever since. 

I also had an episode of slamfire , by flipping the safety from safety to semi on the jlmg the bolt closes and this time it went into full auto for about 4-5 rounds, that ended the range session. Upon disassembly I found the washer on the firing pin loose and had slid back a little as well as I believe the firing pin itself is several thousandths to long.