0053 in upcoming auction

[matconcrete 0]

I was contacted recently by a friend at a local auction house, this jsar is going to be in the fall auction, he had some questions about the barrel and weld grind marks on receiver, he wants to be careful not to misrepresent the gun and wanted my input, I figured better than being smart is knowing a handful of smart people, so here are a few photos for you guys to comment on. Thanks 

[camstuff 0]

Nice low serial number!  I would have to say the barrel is not original. Unless the early barrels had that perpendicular groove and large timing mark for the collar at that early production stage.  One thing that stands out to me is the “cal 30-06 semi auto” stamp is really close to the edge.  I would have to look at mine to compare. Then again it’s an early production and maybe the stamp had not been perfected yet.
 

I took a look at my rifles and the “cal 30-06 semi auto stamp does not touch the edge. There is about 1/16” or more space from the edge. The barrel stampings are reversed compared to an original, and what I mean by this is hold the barrel with the muzzle pointed to your right and you should be able to read the JA stamped just above the 30-06.  This barrel shown in the picture you have to point the muzzle end to the left to read it and the JA and 30-06 are not stamped properly, unless early production had this practice. Also, I would check for the two matching serial numbers on the barrel and collar. Hope this helps.  

[Rarecat 0]

Here is a pic of the receiver of one of my JSAR's for comparison.  The longitudinal groove on the barrel looks similar to a Garand Barrel which has that type of groove for the upper hand guard.  My opinion, for what it's worth, is that this is some type of restoration.  

 

[Blueheeler 0]

The reciever markings are a bit fuzzy but they don't seem to match up to an original- the location and font of 1941 seems a bit off, the spacing in Providence seems different, and there should be a period and comma after the I in R.I. (R.I., U.S.A.), a nuance some miss when remarking a receiver. A better picture might help.

[tinsoldier 0]

I would concur with rarecat, looks like a Garand barrel to me, groove for the lower band pin is present as well.

[ArtR 0]

Others may chime in here, but SN 0053, appears in the production logs, with no Receiver date, but it has a disposition date of 9/10/1941 to the Gov't of Chile, therefore, it originally had a 7mm barrel. As it now has a .30-06 barrel, clearly marked with JA for Johnson Automatics, at sometime it was re-barrelled. Whether or not at a Johnson facility, that remains to be determined. However, as we have seen in the past, Garand barrels were often used, and they would have the  grooves for the M1 handguard clip.

As for the receiver grind marks and the receiver imprint, I am not seeing anything unusual or as a cause for concern.

Receiver's SN 0036, SN 0039,  SN 0067, SN 0104 all have very near similar receiver imprints that are close to the edge, and the first "O" in Johnson appears to be a 'reversed C', and the numeral one is a straight vertical imprint, I.E., "sans serif". It is not until SN 0349 that I begin to see the first letter 'O' in the "JOHNSON" imprint corrected and the numeral one changed to include the 'serifs'.

SN 0053 was first discussed on this forum in January 2006,

ArtR

[matconcrete 0]

Thanks guys, I knew you’d come through. Thanks, Phil 

[ArtR 0]

As a point of clarification, I selected and cropped copies of images of both SN 0053 and SN 0039 for comparison. [SN 0036, SN 0067, SN 0104  are similar.]

Later, as seen in SN 4129, (a sharper image),  MFG imprint spelling is corrected and format changed.

 

[WHIG 0]

Fascinating comparison. Thanks!

[matconcrete 0]

You brought out some very interesting comparisons, as just forward of lettering on some receivers they are “finished” with a machine and others look hand ground, irrespective of seriel number.

 

[ArtR 0]

While we do not have specific production procedures, we do know that the radiator was welded to the receiver, and more than probably, each weld was individually processed to smooth the weld. As evidenced by many 'photos', this appears this may have been a hand held process, leading to many questions about originality. The smoothed welded joints often appear crude to rough in many photographs of the JSAR, while in many of the photos of LMG's, the 'joint' is nearly  invisible.