Melvin Maynard Johnson prototypes - Page 1

AR Sponsor:

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Melvin Maynard Johnson prototypes (Page 1 of 2)

Posted: 1/1/2012 3:39:00 AM EDT

The Johnson "Auto-Carbine"
http://milpas.cc/rifles/ZFiles/Semi-automatic%20Rifles/US/Johnson%20Carbine/Johnson%20Carbine.htm

Johnson M1941 Prototypes
http://milpas.cc/rifles/ZFiles/Semi-automatic%20Rifles/US/U.S.%20M%201941%20Johnson%20Semi-%20Automatic%20rifle/PROTOTYPE%20JOHNSON%20SEMI-AUTO.html

Posted: 1/1/2012 3:47:30 AM EDT

[#1]

I guess the world REALLY REALLY wasn't ready for the AR15/M16 in th early 40's.

Posted: 1/1/2012 4:22:18 AM EDT

[#2]

Maybe if he had put a rail and a light and a laser and a VFG and a key ring on it.............

Posted: 1/1/2012 4:24:32 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
Maybe if he had put a rail and a light and a laser and a VFG and a key ring on it.............

I doubt there was a whole lot of gun pimpage going on back then.

Posted: 1/1/2012 4:25:33 AM EDT

[#4]

Would of made Buck Rodgers proud!

Posted: 1/1/2012 4:51:41 AM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
Would of made Buck Rodgers proud!

I was thinking it could be used as is in Firefly or throw a coat of paint on it and put it in Star Wars.

Posted: 1/1/2012 6:07:35 AM EDT

[#6]

I think that would look good in Flat Dark Earth color, needs more flash hider and a better roll mark

Posted: 1/1/2012 6:25:52 AM EDT

[#7]

I had the chance to buy a Johnson automatic rifle some years ago for $450 - I was with my pregnant fiancee who nixed the purchase. I didn't know what I was looking at at the time - found it in an antique store, but I knew it was something special. Ironically my fiancee's name was Betsy. I've wanted a Johnson ever since. And no, we never did get married. (LOOOONG story which Olgunner knows well.) I want a Johnson so bad I can taste it.

Posted: 1/1/2012 7:26:57 AM EDT

[#8]

Melvin Johnson really liked those wierd looking tall front sights and potbelly magazines, didn't he.

Posted: 1/1/2012 7:34:18 AM EDT

[#9]

The nice thing about the rotary mag as opposed to the Garand system was 1.) it didn't use enbloc clips 2.) it could be topped up at any point during a firefight. What really blows my mind is the barrel actually moves under recoil and cocks the action, yet they are known for their accuracy. Definitely a strange bird. Would love to take one to a service match.

Posted: 1/1/2012 8:26:32 AM EDT

[#10]

Quite honestly, the only reason the Johnson was not adopted en-mass is the military was already committed to the Garand. If the Johnson came along first I think it is safe to say it would have been adopted - 10 round magazine that can be reloaded when partially empty, the ability to break down into a compact package, and a very accurate rifle from everyone I know who has shot one.

One of those "just not the right time" moments that happens to a lot of ingenius inventors.

Posted: 1/1/2012 9:02:16 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
Quite honestly, the only reason the Johnson was not adopted en-mass is the military was already committed to the Garand. If the Johnson came along first I think it is safe to say it would have been adopted - 10 round magazine that can be reloaded when partially empty, the ability to break down into a compact package, and a very accurate rifle from everyone I know who has shot one.

One of those "just not the right time" moments that happens to a lot of ingenius inventors.

I've heard the lack of a real bayonet was a problem tho.
And the LMG was superior to the BAR, but ordinance didn't want to change horses midstream.
You guys realize the USMC used his rifles and LMGs, right? The FSSF also used the LMG. The guys that were issued them supposedly loved 'em.

Posted: 1/1/2012 10:10:39 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
Quite honestly, the only reason the Johnson was not adopted en-mass is the military was already committed to the Garand. If the Johnson came along first I think it is safe to say it would have been adopted - 10 round magazine that can be reloaded when partially empty, the ability to break down into a compact package, and a very accurate rifle from everyone I know who has shot one.

One of those "just not the right time" moments that happens to a lot of ingenius inventors.

Hatcher's "Book of the Garand" talks about this. IIRCC the Garand was adopted in late 1935/early 1936 and the Johnson rifle wasn't demonstrated to the Army until 2 years later and was further refined until it was "perfected" as the Model 1941.

By that time production of the Rifle US Cal30M1 was well underway and the brass hats said even though it tested well it was not enough of an improvement to justify tooling up for a new weapon and scrapping the thousands of M1 rifles already completed.

The design had many good qualities like the magazine system, "quick change" barrel, but the receiver was long and it did not lend itself to bayonet fighting (which the old guys thought was still vital) and it was heavier as tested.

Had the two designs be in direct competition I still think it could have gone either way.

I've never owned a Johnson so I can't speak to the merits of it as a weapon but as you may discern from my handle I am rather partial to the M1.

George S. Patton said "“A good plan executed today is better than a perfect plan executed at some indefinite point in the future"

The US had already implemented that "Good Plan" and was committed to it.

I think the M1 proved itself to be a "Good" main battle rifle.

Posted: 1/1/2012 11:06:43 AM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:I want a Johnson so bad I can taste it.

Probably not the best way of stating it.

But yeah, I'd love to have one of those rifles, too.

Posted: 1/1/2012 11:24:17 AM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:

Quoted:I want a Johnson so bad I can taste it.

Probably not the best way of stating it.

But yeah, I'd love to have one of those rifles, too.

Posted: 1/1/2012 4:21:22 PM EDT

[#15]

FWIW, a photo was recently discovered showing the Johnson Rifle (not the MG) carried by a Marine on Guadalcanal, providing proof finally that the RIFLE was indeed fielded in the Pacific.

Posted: 1/1/2012 4:54:27 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
FWIW, a photo was recently discovered showing the Johnson Rifle (not the MG) carried by a Marine on Guadalcanal, providing proof finally that the RIFLE was indeed fielded in the Pacific.

The Dutch ordered a bunch of them, but got cut off before the order could be delivered, and the Marines picked up the order. Right off the top of my head, I want to say it was about 25,000 guns.

Posted: 1/1/2012 11:25:03 PM EDT

[#17]

That thing has got looks only a mother could love.

Posted: 1/2/2012 12:26:14 AM EDT

[#18]

Didn't some company do a run of refurbished Johnson rifles quite a few years back? Was it AIM that had em? Not a bad price either I think. I handled one at the Pomona GS many many moons ago. Man was it heavy and the proportions were crazy. Cool just the same though.

Posted: 1/2/2012 12:52:27 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Quite honestly, the only reason the Johnson was not adopted en-mass is the military was already committed to the Garand. If the Johnson came along first I think it is safe to say it would have been adopted - 10 round magazine that can be reloaded when partially empty, the ability to break down into a compact package, and a very accurate rifle from everyone I know who has shot one.

One of those "just not the right time" moments that happens to a lot of ingenius inventors.

Wasn't he also renowned as quite the prinkly pear and was very argumentative when changes were suggested?

Posted: 1/2/2012 3:23:21 AM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
FWIW, a photo was recently discovered showing the Johnson Rifle (not the MG) carried by a Marine on Guadalcanal, providing proof finally that the RIFLE was indeed fielded in the Pacific.

Probably a Paramarine. They were issued the Johnson, and fought at Edson's Ridge.

ETA-would like to see the pic

Posted: 1/2/2012 5:35:45 AM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Quite honestly, the only reason the Johnson was not adopted en-mass is the military was already committed to the Garand. If the Johnson came along first I think it is safe to say it would have been adopted - 10 round magazine that can be reloaded when partially empty, the ability to break down into a compact package, and a very accurate rifle from everyone I know who has shot one.

One of those "just not the right time" moments that happens to a lot of ingenius inventors.

Hatcher's "Book of the Garand" talks about this. IIRCC the Garand was adopted in late 1935/early 1936 and the Johnson rifle wasn't demonstrated to the Army until 2 years later and was further refined until it was "perfected" as the Model 1941.

By that time production of the Rifle US Cal30M1 was well underway and the brass hats said even though it tested well it was not enough of an improvement to justify tooling up for a new weapon and scrapping the thousands of M1 rifles already completed.

The design had many good qualities like the magazine system, "quick change" barrel, but the receiver was long and it did not lend itself to bayonet fighting (which the old guys thought was still vital) and it was heavier as tested.

Had the two designs be in direct competition I still think it could have gone either way.

I've never owned a Johnson so I can't speak to the merits of it as a weapon but as you may discern from my handle I am rather partial to the M1.

George S. Patton said "“A good plan executed today is better than a perfect plan executed at some indefinite point in the future"

The US had already implemented that "Good Plan" and was committed to it.

I think the M1 proved itself to be a "Good" main battle rifle.

The Army just didn't have the money at the time.....mobilization for war didn't begin until 1940, changing standard rifles on the verge of war would have been a mess. Not to mention the Army had sunk a decade's worth of R&D into the M1 by the time Johnson came along. It would have even been worse if MacArthur hadn't killed .276 Pedersen and the military was changing calibers along with rifles.

Posted: 1/2/2012 6:48:59 AM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:
Didn't some company do a run of refurbished Johnson rifles quite a few years back? Was it AIM that had em? Not a bad price either I think. I handled one at the Pomona GS many many moons ago. Man was it heavy and the proportions were crazy. Cool just the same though.

In the early 1950's, a company called Winfield Arms Co marketed stock & sporterized Jonhsons.
I think it was Miltech that marketed a few a little while ago.

Posted: 1/2/2012 7:33:41 AM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Didn't some company do a run of refurbished Johnson rifles quite a few years back? Was it AIM that had em? Not a bad price either I think. I handled one at the Pomona GS many many moons ago. Man was it heavy and the proportions were crazy. Cool just the same though.

In the early 1950's, a company called Winfield Arms Co marketed stock & sporterized Jonhsons.
I think it was Miltech that marketed a few a little while ago.

Thats it Miltech! A quick Googlization reveals they are still around and show Johnsons(among others) available POR.

Posted: 1/2/2012 9:03:37 AM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Quite honestly, the only reason the Johnson was not adopted en-mass is the military was already committed to the Garand. If the Johnson came along first I think it is safe to say it would have been adopted - 10 round magazine that can be reloaded when partially empty, the ability to break down into a compact package, and a very accurate rifle from everyone I know who has shot one.

One of those "just not the right time" moments that happens to a lot of ingenius inventors.

Wasn't he also renowned as quite the prinkly pear and was very argumentative when changes were suggested?

Yes, Melvin Johnson was definitely a "prickly pear" by all accounts and I do not think that endeared him to the Ordnance Board. That, combined with the fact John Garand worked for the Ordnance board, was a likeable guy who knew how to take criticism (and really was a genius of design and manufacturing), and the fact the M1 Garand was a leap in technology that worked well and had all the bugs worked out ultimately guaranteed its success.

I have not personally shot rounds through a Johnson rifle, but my friend owns two, and I have gotten to handle his Johnson (oh dear lord, did I just say that???)

The balance and feel of the Garand is very good, if a bit hefty (but not out of line with other rifles of the time) but the balance and handling of the Johnson Rifle is even better. In addition, my friend said the short recoil action really makes for an easy recoil, not quite smooth but mostly a push, kind of the like the differenc between a .45 ACP and a .40 S&W - a push vs. a shove.

The Johnson really is neat with its potbelly rotary magazine, and you can give credit to Melvin Johnson for the 7 lug bolt that we all love on our AR-15 as as far as I know the Johnson rifle was the first one to use that.

I don't have the cash laying around, but if I did I would love to purchase one, they really are a neat piece of engineering and a neat piece of history.

Posted: 1/2/2012 9:36:36 AM EDT

[#25]

Posted: 1/2/2012 12:53:07 PM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
...I want a Johnson so bad I can taste it.

+ 1

Someone here on this board (maybe in this thread) bought two of them just a year or two ago...

BTW: I spent two years in the USMC and never heard of a 'paramarine'...WTF are/were they???

Posted: 1/2/2012 12:57:50 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:

Quoted:
...I want a Johnson so bad I can taste it.

+ 1

Someone here on this board (maybe in this thread) bought two of them just a year or two ago...

BTW: I spent two years in the USMC and never heard of a 'paramarine'...WTF are/were they???

Paramarines

Yea I know it's Wiki but I'm lazy.

And Guys, PLEASE stop wanting to taste Johnsons! I have a Beavis and Butthead sense of humor and I chuckle every time!

hehehehe He said Johnson!

Posted: 1/2/2012 1:43:53 PM EDT

[#28]

I guess I really should have thought that out a little more before I posted eh?

Hey, maybe that's why they aren't that popular - 2 guys at the range: "Hey Frank, lemme show you my Johnson."
Frank - "Say what?" Definitely an unfortunate choice of words. Lets refer to it from now on as an M1941 eh?

Posted: 1/2/2012 1:49:42 PM EDT

[#29]

What happens on the retro forum should stay in the retro forum.

Posted: 1/2/2012 4:04:15 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:

Quoted:
BTW: I spent two years in the USMC and never heard of a 'paramarine'...WTF are/were they???

Paramarines

Yea I know it's Wiki but I'm lazy!

Thanks for the link! That was a bit before my time...I'm only 62!!!

Funny story...back in 1970, I reported to Base Motor Transport, Service Co, H&S Bn at Camp Pendleton, as a truck mechanic...My first weekend, I was doing laundry on a Fri night with a grizzled old redheaded Sergeant who had an accent you could cut with a knife...I could hardly understand him...He was cleaning a Springfield 03A3 while he waited for his laundry to finish ...He asked what my MOS was; I told him truck/auto mech...I asked him his, he said "Ray-dar battalion"...I was curious, and asked if the radar was self propelled or towed...he got pissed and said "Ray-dar, you dumb sh1t!!!"...It finally dawned on me he was saying "Raider battalion"...

Posted: 1/2/2012 4:20:22 PM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:
Didn't some company do a run of refurbished Johnson rifles quite a few years back? Was it AIM that had em? Not a bad price either I think. I handled one at the Pomona GS many many moons ago. Man was it heavy and the proportions were crazy. Cool just the same though.

Don't know about "a few years back",,,but George Numrich had bought up a ton of them back in the late 40s or early 50s.And parts were readily available from them for years. I Don't know what's left,but they still had a lot when I walked thru the warehouse in the late 80s early 90s.(yep,back when you were still allowed to)
One of the issues with the Johnson is the recoiling barrel. It didn't like getting sand in them.Same thinking goes for the USMC 1903A1 sniper rifle with the 8X Unertl.The recoil spring on the scope was ommitted.
ETA. I have fired a couple of these rifles,we have 3 total in our living history group. I personally don't like them. I'll take an M1 any day over the Johnson.

Posted: 1/3/2012 2:00:55 AM EDT

[#32]

A quick look at GB shows them(Johnson's) in the $6000 to $8500 BIN range. Whoa! What is interesting though is a listing for that cool looking front sight off a Johnson LMG. Don't see those often I bet!

Posted: 1/3/2012 2:10:44 AM EDT

[#33]

1941 Johnson Automatic Rifle WW2 .30-06 Semi Auto
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yifKfSfTro

Paramarine!
http://napoleonv.pl/opis/474608/paramarine.html

http://napoleonv.pl/opis/561303/johnson-rifles-and-machine-guns.html

Posted: 1/3/2012 1:09:06 PM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:

Quoted:
BTW: I spent two years in the USMC and never heard of a 'paramarine'...WTF are/were they???

Paramarines

Yea I know it's Wiki but I'm lazy!

Thanks for the link! That was a bit before my time...I'm only 62!!!

Funny story...back in 1970, I reported to Base Motor Transport, Service Co, H&S Bn at Camp Pendleton, as a truck mechanic...My first weekend, I was doing laundry on a Fri night with a grizzled old redheaded Sergeant who had an accent you could cut with a knife...I could hardly understand him...He was cleaning a Springfield 03A3 while he waited for his laundry to finish ...He asked what my MOS was; I told him truck/auto mech...I asked him his, he said "Ray-dar battalion"...I was curious, and asked if the radar was self propelled or towed...he got pissed and said "Ray-dar, you dumb sh1t!!!"...It finally dawned on me he was saying "Raider battalion"...

I highly doubt he meant "Raider" battalion. The 1st, 2nd, 3rd & 4th Marine Raider Battalions were disbanded on Jan 8th, 1944 along with the Paramarines and have never been recom misioned. He probably did mean "radar" as in "ground surveillance radar" commonly used by STA platoons and Recon Companies during Vietnam. We were still using them (radars) in the '80's in STA Plt's.

There's a lot of accurate history to be learned on the Paramarines and the Raiders in W.E.B. Griffins series "The Corps". Although the books are works of fiction, the historical information is accurate and he does a good job documenting both of these units great WWII history in his series. There's also a lot of great history here Marine Raider Assoc

Much of the Force Recon Co and MARSOC history and traditions are based on these two great historical units.

Posted: 1/3/2012 2:00:06 PM EDT

[#35]

A quick look at GB shows them(Johnson's) in the $6000 to $8500 BIN range.

Last funshow I went to had one for $4500. I know absolutely nothing about them but it looked pretty decent from the outside and was definately the least expensive weapon on the sellers table. Think I'd rather have a garand sniper in the crate for similar coins if I had unlimited funding.

Posted: 1/3/2012 4:11:01 PM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Didn't some company do a run of refurbished Johnson rifles quite a few years back? Was it AIM that had em? Not a bad price either I think. I handled one at the Pomona GS many many moons ago. Man was it heavy and the proportions were crazy. Cool just the same though.

In the early 1950's, a company called Winfield Arms Co marketed stock & sporterized Jonhsons.
I think it was Miltech that marketed a few a little while ago.

From 1955 Sports Afield Gun Annual.

Now off to the Time Machine with $68.50

Posted: 1/3/2012 5:08:04 PM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:
I highly doubt he meant "Raider" battalion. The 1st, 2nd, 3rd & 4th Marine Raider Battalions were disbanded on Jan 8th, 1944...

Well, let's see...If he was 20 in 1945 (and he could have enlisted earlier), that would have made him 45 in 1970...And although only an E5, that's not too unusual...I can recall a black lance corporal with three hash marks on his sleeve...So, it is possible...And he bore a striking resemblance to Yosemite Sam [redheaded]...The '30 & out' rule hadn't been implemented back then...He could have been putting his time in until retirement in a motortrash unit...

Besides, it makes a funny story...

BTW: My postmaster (who just died last year) was in Marine Bombing Squadron 611 back in WW II...B-25 Mitchells...I found his name at their web site...Interesting reading, if you're inclined...

Marine Bombing Squadrons of WW II

Posted: 1/3/2012 5:09:47 PM EDT

[#38]

I passed on one back in 89-90 for (IIRC) 450-500. I really wanted a Garand and just didn't have the coin for both (in true ARFCOM fashion). Oh well. They seem bigger than a Garand at any rate, even though the physical dementions aren't all that different. Now, I know, that if I went to the range and pulled out a big Johnson, I'd be the envy of all the other guys there.

ka

Posted: 1/5/2012 6:24:06 AM EDT

[#39]

U.S. MACHINE GUN JOHNSON T53 .30
Manufactured by Cranston Arms Co., Cranston, R.I. - Modified Johnson M1944 machine gun for "push through" type metallic link-belt feed. Equipped with monopod.

Markings:
Receiver: Patent #s/"JOHNSON AUTOMATICS"/CAL..30-06 MODEL 1941/MADE IN PROVIDENCE, R.I./T-53-1.

http://ww2.rediscov.com/spring/VFPCGI.exe?IDCFile=/spring/DETAILS.IDC,SPECIFIC=11497,DATABASE=objects,

Posted: 1/5/2012 12:11:33 PM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:
Someone here on this board (maybe in this thread) bought two of them just a year or two ago...

I have two M1941 Johnsons, but I don't think I'm the droid you're looking for. I've had the minty one since circa 1976 or 7 –– certainly before I joined the Army in 1979. I paid $700 for it with the original sling, bayonet and sheath. I left it with my alky uncle when I was in basic training and he lost the accessories.

The second one is technically a friends, I am holding it as security on a personal loan. It's not as nice as my original one.

Going price is now $3k for a sporterized Johnson or beater, on up. And there doesn't seem much of a limit on where "up" is.

All the military Johnsons had sights calibrated in Meters because they were made of the Netherlands East Indies and only taken over by the Marines, 1SSF, and OSS after completion. Those are the only units I know that used Johnsons, and the Marines the only ones the used the rifles. After the war, the rights to the LMG went to Israel which briefly manufactured a copy in 8mm (7.92 x 57).

BTW: I spent two years in the USMC and never heard of a 'paramarine'...WTF are/were they???

They were one of the WWII elements that were disbanded as Marine leaders have always felt that the whole corps was elite, and didn't want internal elites. At least as far back as the sixties there have been Marines who got jump qualified at Army schools, but they've been in jobs where they might need that –– ANGLICO and recon Marines, as far as I know. MARSOC has replaced the Force Reconnaissance companies, and the MSO's in MARSOC are jump qualified. In fact the cadre were from scout snipers and Force.

The Johnsons are great guns, just too late when the Army had already spent five years debugging another great gun, the M1. But the Johnson bolt wound up in the Army's issue gun in the M16.

I know that Johnson worked for Armalite, but I think it was after they copied his bolt design. The multilug bolt is one of many ways the Armalite design goal of a lighter weapon was met.

Posted: 1/5/2012 12:18:27 PM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:
It finally dawned on me he was saying "Raider battalion"...

There was some sentiment that MARSOC should have been called Marine Raiders. As you know, being a Marine, the Marines take their history more seriously than the other services and the Raider name wound up staying in the history books for the same main reason, anti-elitism, that it went there. "MARSOC" is a duty assignment. "Raider" is a personal boast. Or that's the story my Marine associates tell me.

Along with the Marines' resistance to elitism, one of the things that killed the original Raiders was Evans Carlson being a Communist. One hell of a combat leader, but on the red side of pink. Of course, at the start of WWII a lot of people wanted to believe Communism was less of a monstrosity than Fascism. Hopium is not a new drug.

Posted: 1/5/2012 12:33:13 PM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:
A quick look at GB shows them(Johnson's) in the $6000 to $8500 BIN range. Whoa! What is interesting though is a listing for that cool looking front sight off a Johnson LMG. Don't see those often I bet!

If you look at the completed auctions, there and on gunauction.com (formerly auction arms), you'll see that only a minty original one gets bid up to $4 or $5k. Those two on GB for $6500 and $8500 have been there for months without drawing a serious bid.

Bout six months ago, someone had a semi Johnson LMG. It's an easy conversion if you have the LMG parts kit because the receivers always were the same. Ah, here it is at Guns America. I had thought it was on GB or Auction Arms (now Gunauction.com), I was wrong.

http://www.gunsamerica.com/984190500/Guns/Rifles/Military-Misc-Rifles-US/Johnson-Rifles/Johnson_1941_WWII_LMG_semi_auto_30_06.htm

Now that, I'd like to have. I just dropped some money on retro stuff and too much money on an HK416, so my "squandering on guns account" is depleted. There's a transferable 1941 LMG on the market but the guy wants $50k for it.

Posted: 1/5/2012 12:44:22 PM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:
U.S. MACHINE GUN JOHNSON T53 .30

Armeiro, my friend, you find the most interesting stuff.

Last time I was in the Springfield Armory Museum I do not recall seeing anything about this, but the stuff on the development of the 1950s-era weapons was weak (M60, M14). I wonder if the T53 would have sucked less than the M60. It took 35 years for the better MG from that test to be adopted. (FN MAG = M240).

Funny –– the M60 was an attempt to copy the FG42 and apply the belt feed of the MG42. They didn't understand that the FG42 was copied from the Lewis Gun in the first place. Meanwhile, the FN MAG was Dieudonné Saîve's attempt to adapt the belt feed of the MG42 to the BAR (which required inverting the BAR locking mechanism). Saive improved the gas system of the BAR, simplified the fiendish buffer, and actually improved the feed tray and mechanism. The Army didn't even copy the feed tray mechanism right. And in fact, one difference between world and USA FN-MAGs is that the US feed tray mechanism is messed up like an M60 one, and only closes with the bolt to the rear.

Posted: 1/6/2012 3:17:40 AM EDT

[#44]

RECORDS OF THE SPRINGFIELD ARMORY : Records of the Research and Engineering Division
"Code JA" (Johnson) Light Machine Gun Caliber .30 T48

Melvin Maynard Johnson with a M60?

http://ww2.rediscov.com/spring/VFPCGI.exe?IDCFile=/springar/details.IDC,SPECIFIC=21592,DATABASE=BIBLIO,

Posted: 1/6/2012 6:55:30 PM EDT

[#45]

Look at that pic of the receiver and consider the 'NEW' Monolithic AR15's with quick change barrels. I mean really, consider what we'd have now if this design had gone through the 40 year development phase that the AR went through.

ETA - you can flip up the buttpad to pull the recoil mechanism? I mean, really - this guy was a genius, and the AR15 and AR10 wouldn't have happened without him. Revolutionary ideas gents.

Posted: 1/7/2012 2:48:05 AM EDT

[#46]

M1941 Johnson semiauto rifle bolt

AR-15 E.Stoner bolt

"The bolt would lock into a breech collar screwed onto the barrel. This part of the Johnson rifle is very similar to the later AR-10/AR-15/M16 series. Notice the similarities to the AR10/AR15 bolt to breech lockup? Melvin Johnson worked for ArmaLite for a short time in the 50s.
I think the multi-lug system was already in the AR10 design when he arrived, but that doesn’t mean he wasn’t the source of inspiration."

http://www.practicallyshooting.com/m1941-johnson-semiauto-rifle-part-1-history/

AR-15

Posted: 1/7/2012 7:48:58 AM EDT

[#47]

Those last 2 sets of pics are awesome armeiro. The exploded rifle ones are neat to compare. Thank you for posting these.

ETA that link to the photo is priceless
"...Gun is atop a tarp, man is laying on another tarp. Man has the Marine Corps insignia tattooed on his left forearm."