AO 1928A1 on GB

[Bridgeport28A1]

Anyone have a Auto Ordnance (A.O.) trigger frame marked in a similar fashion with a prefix of No ? The trigger frame serial number orientation is also reversed from a A.O. frame I have.

 

http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g374/TW56/AO%2008564%20frame/pix680302296.jpg

[Bridgeport28A1]

I never noticed a dramatic difference between the drum slot fillets, or corner rounds on Savage

vs. Auto-Ord guns. I did just check 1/2dozen receivers and it does seem that the Savage fillets are a little

deeper.

I went and I looked at the photos in the auction again, and sadly, I think the seller knows exactly

what he's got and is doing his best to conceal it. Any photo that shows the mag cutout is either too

far away to see the detail, or cropped in such a way that you cannot see both corners of the cutout

at the same time. If you could see the front and the rear corners together it would be

very obvious that the rear one is square, and the front one is rounded and equally obvious that

something is wrong because Thompsons just don't look like that.

There is a BIG difference in the value of a repaired/welded receiver - the assumption being

that the gun was torched and rebuilt - and a true, original un-cut gun.

 

Bob

 

Bob, but both corners are visible in this photograph, the rear corner appears square and front corner rounded.

 

http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g374/TW56/AO%2008564%20frame/pix173205232.jpg

 

 

Photograph of the left side of the receiver doesn't allow a very good look at the serial number. The left side of the trigger frame has FULL AUTO on two lines when a A.O. frame should have it on one line.

 

 

This frame started out as a Savage trigger frame.

 

http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g374/TW56/AO%2008564%20frame/pix189013604.jpg

 

 

The receiver serial number begins with No (Large N small o). which is how an Auto Ordnance 1928A1 receiver should begin. It also does not have the word "of" between Model 1928A1 which is also correct for a A.O. marked receiver.

Edited December 22, 2013 by Bridgeport28A1

[reconbob]

I looked at all of the photos. The photo you show of the full mag cutout is taken from a distance

has poor lighting and has to be studied to draw a conclusion. The close up photo of the right side

showing mostly the forend is cropped so you can't see the mag cutout. The close up photo that started

all this showing the Ordnance wheel is cropped so you can't see the entire mag cutout. Most of the

photos have no magazine, but when its time to take a close up of the underside of the mag cutout,

the magazine goes back in. I am sticking to my belief that these photos were carefully taken and

selected to avoid showing an honest, detailed close up of the modified and incorrect mag cutout,

Your revelation that the trigger frame has been reworked to match it to the gun punches even

more holes in the claim that this is an "original" gun.

The more one looks at this gun the worse it gets.....

 

Bob

Edited December 22, 2013 by reconbob

[Kilroy]

Going off memory, I seem to think my Bridgeport '28a1 has the patents closer to there rear of the receiver? I could be wrong but I don't have access to mine to look at

Edit... Ok I found a picture of mine I had taken a while ago but it's not the best but I stand by my thought and think my patents are to the rear of the eceiver. Is that normal that these are in front and mines in the back?

 

 

Edited...

Deleted photo

Edited December 23, 2013 by Kilroy

[mnshooter]

 

I never noticed a dramatic difference between the drum slot fillets, or corner rounds on Savage

vs. Auto-Ord guns. I did just check 1/2dozen receivers and it does seem that the Savage fillets are a little

deeper.

I went and I looked at the photos in the auction again, and sadly, I think the seller knows exactly

what he's got and is doing his best to conceal it. Any photo that shows the mag cutout is either too

far away to see the detail, or cropped in such a way that you cannot see both corners of the cutout

at the same time. If you could see the front and the rear corners together it would be

very obvious that the rear one is square, and the front one is rounded and equally obvious that

something is wrong because Thompsons just don't look like that.

There is a BIG difference in the value of a repaired/welded receiver - the assumption being

that the gun was torched and rebuilt - and a true, original un-cut gun.

 

Bob

 

Bob, but both corners are visible in this photograph, the rear corner appears square and front corner rounded.

 

http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g374/TW56/AO%2008564%20frame/pix173205232.jpg

 

 

Photograph of the left side of the receiver doesn't allow a very good look at the serial number. The left side of the trigger frame has FULL AUTO on two lines when a A.O. frame should have it on one line.

 

 

This frame started out as a Savage trigger frame.

 

http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g374/TW56/AO%2008564%20frame/pix189013604.jpg

 

 

The receiver serial number begins with No (Large N small o). which is how an Auto Ordnance 1928A1 receiver should begin. It also does not have the word "of" between Model 1928A1 which is also correct for a A.O. marked receiver.

 

Looking at the receiver directly in line with the "safe" arrowhead, there is a subtle irregular vertical pattern -about one half inch wide, -of what could be weld fill. At the same point on the other side, there would be no interference with the markings. Another weld, if done at the rear of the mag well, could account for the cleanup milling. Very good quality weld cleanup, if so.

Just my guess.

[Kilroy]

Ok, here are some better pictures of by Bridgeport '28a1. Like I said, my patent dates are closer to the rear of the receiver. My serial number on the control group has the top of the letters/numbers to the left side of the firearm (the side with the selector switches) and included a picture of my ordnance wheel and WB stamp which also shows the magazine corners and the 'FULL AUTO' on one line.

 

My main question is, was there a change in production or why are my patents to the rear vs. those are more forward? The other pictures I just included for reference.

 

http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa54/RedSpecialSS/IMG_1017_zps0f8183d2.jpg

 

http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa54/RedSpecialSS/IMG_1015_zps919c0c0e.jpg

[ThompsonCrazy]

Kilroy,

Mine is just like yours. Later production with battle L sight. 104k serial.

TC

 

http://i42.tinypic.com/14d1q9e.jpg

Edited December 23, 2013 by ThompsonCrazy

[ThompsonCrazy]

Looks like the welder was referencing a Savage. Savage trigger frame and Savage patent date orientation?

http://www.pdhsc.com/NFA1928A1.jpg

 

35k serial AOC with patent dates at the rear.

http://www.gunstar.co.uk/thompson-model-1928-a1-45-acp-submachine-guns-for-sale-in-gr/Other-Military-Guns/630229

 

27k AOC Serial. Take with a grain of salt since remanufactured but maybe a matching receiver.

http://www.machinegunboards.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=12750

 

I'll keep searching for an earlier AOC serial to see if the patent date block was further forward.

 

TC

Edited December 23, 2013 by ThompsonCrazy

[Bridgeport28A1]

An explanation for a 1928A1 receiver with the right side appearing to be Savage production and the left side to be A.O. production is……that A.O. used partially finished Savage receivers in their early production…..I consider that scenario unlikely.

 

I still don't like the zero in front of the 4 digit number. I am not aware of any other WW2 US military firearm that had a zero as the first digit in the serial number. The squared corner of the magazine well along with stamped numbers make me skeptical.

 

A FOIA may be the only way to solve the receiver marking mystery.

[765 21D]

Hi All,

 

Mary sent this 28A1 to Victor to bring it back to life

 

D

[Devil Dog 1110]

I emailed Frank for more info on this Thompson.

 

He said the owner told him that this gun was put together from parts- some of which were Savage-by an Auto Ordinance employee for himself to keep.

This is not a reweld.

The paperwork indicates this gun was made during WWII and it is C&R eligible.

Interesting piece of Thompson history if true.

 

DD

[reconbob]

None of this makes any sense and I don't believe any of it. I have in the shop right now a M1928A1

that is a real stinker of a reweld, yet the papers with it list it as manufactured by Auto-Ordnance WW2.

Prior to 1968 welded Thompsons were sold as non-firearms. If you unwelded/rewelded one into a

shooter and registered it in 1968 as an Auto-Ordnance gun (because that's what the receiver says)

its in the registry as a WW2 gun.

And this gun was assembled by an Auto-Ordnance employee to keep for himself? Oh sure. Let

Joe smuggle a gun out of the factory in violation of the M1934 firearms act. Right. I guess this happened

right after they made a special cutter to machine the mag cutout, used it on this one receiver, then

never used it again and this is the gun Joe sneaked out of the factory. Oh, and in 1944 Joe knew that

70 years later Thompsons would be worth big bucks so he welded up the serial number on the Savage

trigger frame and renumbered it upside down with an Auto-Ordnance prefix and number. Please. This is

getting embarrassing.

 

Bob

[mnshooter]

I think Bob nailed it 100%.

 

If it was not a reweld, any seller should have no problem showing photos of the entire mag well, and, in particular, the inside of the receiver.

 

To say nothing of the 1934 Act, -who also could believe any employee during wartime would be allowed to build any firearm, much less a Thompson, for his own use? Puleeze.

[Mike Hammer]

Another reason why not to buy a brokered gun. The broker is the one selling the gun to the public yet he doesn't actually have the gun in his possession and the gun is often misrepresented. No way to do business, no sir.

 

Mike Hammer

[Kilroy]

.To say nothing of the 1934 Act, -who also could believe any employee during wartime would be allowed to build any firearm, much less a Thompson, for his own use? Puleeze.

I've heard of this being fairly common to for employees to sneak out parts to gun to build it at home. Referred to as 'lunch box specials' since he part were snuck out one at a time in the lunch box. Every now and then a carbine or something will pop up with out a serial number and that is the explanation given. Or that it was a presentation piece.

[gijive]

All,

 

Here are some pictures of the correct markings on an AO made Thompson. Note rounded corners of magazine well, just as reconbob mentioned.

 

 

 

 

http://i414.photobucket.com/albums/pp227/Colt1928/AO42700Receiver.jpghttp://i414.photobucket.com/albums/pp227/Colt1928/AO42700GripFrame.jpghttp://i414.photobucket.com/albums/pp227/Colt1928/AO42700MagWell.jpgAll,

http://i414.photobucket.com/albums/pp227/Colt1928/AO42700ReceiverFront.jpgAll,

[Chief762]

Wow...I learned something about Thompsons today. Thanks, all!

Chief762

Edited December 26, 2013 by Chief762

[Bridgeport28A1]

I emailed Frank for more info on this Thompson.

 

He said the owner told him that this gun was put together from parts- some of which were Savage-by an Auto Ordinance employee for himself to keep.

This is not a reweld.

The paperwork indicates this gun was made during WWII and it is C&R eligible.

Interesting piece of Thompson history if true.

 

DD

 

This Thompson is a classic example unfortunately on why BATF is scrutinizing original manufacturing dates on C&R "eligible" Machineguns during transfers.

[Kilroy]

Do they all have the serial number under the fore grip bar?

[gijive]

Kilroy,

 

Yes, all 1928 Models made by Auto-Ordnance and Savage have the number in the grip mount area. The Savage guns just have the serial number without the "S" prefix, the A.O. guns are prefaced with the A.O., just like on the side of the receiver.

[Kilroy]

Interesting I didn't know that. Why would the serial number be in three places (the left side of the receiver, under the stock and grip)?

[The1930sRust]

Maybe even back then people were known to file them off? Secret hiding place...

[SecondAmend]

Isn't the finish on one of the St. Valentine's Day Massacre Thompsons messed up where acid was used by the police lab to raise the serial number which had been filed down?

[ron_brock]

Yes it is. While stamping the identification the force of the forming process changes the grain structure of the metal below. So even if the numbers were filed off or ground off shallow, the acid will etch the metal and reveal the difference in grain structure, thus revealing the numbers that were removed.

 

I love the discussion on this gun, AO 1928A1. Certainly opens your eyes on what to watch for on the internet.

 

- Ron

[gijive]

Yes, one of the SVDM guns had quite a bit of the finish ruined by the acid method of raising the ground off serial number. It could have been checked by removing the barrel, but was unfortunately done by the most expediant method available.