TSMG Movie Buff Posted January 27, 2019 Report Share Posted January 27, 2019 I recently purchased a surplus M1928A1 Lyman adjustable rear sight base from Apex gun parts. I can't use it until I remove its damaged rivets. What's the best method for getting them out? Punch? Drill? Something else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reconbob Posted January 27, 2019 Report Share Posted January 27, 2019 Drive them out with a starting punch from the top down. Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john Posted January 27, 2019 Report Share Posted January 27, 2019 Bob, I believe they are about 1/8th inch, or a tad smaller, correct?I bought a dozen rivets from you years ago but haven't used any yet ( although sent a few to Peter Laidler for a sight replacement he did once).Don't know if you still sell those but might need a few more this summer?john Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reconbob Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 If I recall the diameter of the shaft of the rivet is 0.120". And I do still havethem, mild steel with full anneal and black oxide finish. Bob 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timkel Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 I used a punch and was able to reuse the original rivets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lightguy Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 I used a punch and was able to reuse the original rivets. Interesting.I assume you punched them from the top down and the "shop"(bucked) head deformed enough for the rivets to pass down through the hole ?Re-inserted the deformed rivet then bucked them again ? I'm debating on replacing the standard bent L sight with a ladder sight on my 1928 savage.Have been told to leave it alone but the ladder looks "sexy" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lightguy Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 If I recall the diameter of the shaft of the rivet is 0.120". And I do still havethem, mild steel with full anneal and black oxide finish. Bob How much are they ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timkel Posted January 28, 2019 Report Share Posted January 28, 2019 I used a punch and was able to reuse the original rivets. Interesting.I assume you punched them from the top down and the "shop"(bucked) head deformed enough for the rivets to pass down through the hole ?Re-inserted the deformed rivet then bucked them again ? I'm debating on replacing the standard bent L sight with a ladder sight on my 1928 savage.Have been told to leave it alone but the ladder looks "sexy" Correct.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emmagee1917 Posted January 29, 2019 Report Share Posted January 29, 2019 The Thompson really isn't " worthy " of a ladder type sight . No disrespect , but it is neither accurate enough nor long range enough for it to be needed .I removed my front sight ( it hit to one side ) and pressed it halfway on , then shot it and rotated the sight to hit POA , pressed it all the way on , drilled the pin hole and had the windage done .I then worked on the elevation by measurements and math to see where the rear sight needed to be . I then used clamps to secure the base ( did not want to loosen the rivets ) and an assortment of hammers , punches , screwdrivers and prybars to change the bend of the rear leaf at the bottom so as to move the top the distance needed .It now shoots perfectly to it's POA and can easily keep up with my ladder sighted guns .Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin601 Posted January 29, 2019 Report Share Posted January 29, 2019 Punch them out. If you try to drill them, they may spin and enlarge the hole 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmadzela Posted December 4, 2020 Report Share Posted December 4, 2020 With a surplus M1928A1 Lyman rear sight -- to put one on a 1970s production West Hurley -- you need to gracefully punch from the top down through the receiver the 4 "pins"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colt21a Posted December 5, 2020 Report Share Posted December 5, 2020 a Opinion here all you Thompson lovers was this messed with.{I know the answer}and after some remarks i will tell you the gun.RON K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gio Posted December 6, 2020 Report Share Posted December 6, 2020 Colt21aLooks to me and Im on my cell as if the rivets are put in backwards. Also may be wrong rivets. The ones I got from Doug are blued. I made a tool that goes in the receiver that holds the rivets up so you can spread from top. Frank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colt21a Posted December 6, 2020 Report Share Posted December 6, 2020 That is gun #167 when in the possession of the third owner. That was said to be best gun in country i went to see it when the third owner had it probably before anyone else saw it. And i kept saying it has maybe been restored? Many said no way. who could have done it. If not why would rear site look like that if not taken off gun. Nobody has explained that yet. it also had some spots of patina in certain spots in finish. and i brought that up and they said nope leaving that alone. remember this was well over 40 years ago now. The gun at that Time was $10,000.00 I offered to buy it because of documentation and early 3 digit gun since had #98 #274 and another Gordon had reported half of my Thompson numbers in his book. This one always bothered me a unanswered question.... RON K. And if it was restored and found out later why hide that fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD. Posted December 6, 2020 Report Share Posted December 6, 2020 I know the owner (who would be the second owner) that obtained NO 167 from the Smyth family. It has never been restored. Too many very knowledgeable people have inspected this Colt's and agree it is all original and does not appear to have ever been fired. The second owner took very good care of NO 167. I have heard that one of the owners (now deceased) after it left the collection of the second owner was not as careful with NO 167 as he should have been. That said, the number of owners is very small. If NO 167 would have been restored after it left the Smyth family, we would know about it. The second owner has since viewed NO 167 in the current owners collection and has no doubts as to its originality. I find it curious why you continue to post this garbage about NO 167 being restored. But I find most of your posts curious and generally unsupported! NO 167 is a very beautiful Colt's, probably one of the best five in the world, with impeccable provenance (that is probably the best in the world). Colt's for Colt's, I would like to see NO 167 side by side with NO 3186. That would be a spectacular viewing experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colt21a Posted December 6, 2020 Report Share Posted December 6, 2020 Post Garbage no it was a question I knew Jim Falter and saw the gun in Ohio when he bought it.and new he sold 1504 that he got from Curtis Earl for 5 grand and ponied up another 5000 to buy it from the grandson or whomever. so i guess i was fed a line of lies from the owner. i guess he never flew up from Ohio and bought a new in Rusco case C drum from me in the early mid 70's either and i dreamed that up.Don't act like you are the only one because you did a book to know anything Thompson.. and when i was at Falters i had questions about the gun because i planned on buying it and when i asked to take it apart and check it he refused. And i asked about the rivet and cond of the site. Since Colts are all blue underneath and if you restore one right the rear site gets removed..as everybody knows that right? And yes i am aware 3 owners of it are now gone. Just like Earl who i discussed it with. And he pulled out his L.A. 1921ac new in case which it was not and restored back in 1999 and admitted it being done by a shop in California.Not slamming the gun. And yeah you find all my posts i guess curious, Because nobody is allowed to ask or say what they might know.I can posts hundreds of deal's And also b.s. lies over the decades from Thompson guys....Should we have a shit fest and expose it all here.Ron did that!Joe Stein did this what did Roger know and when did he know it.I considered all Thompson guys for their word and worth. too bad i upset the precious apple cart on #167 because the high order of other collectors gazed upon it.it was alwaysa great gun when i first handled it and yeah after seeing a thousand others around the U.S. and Greece and South America and in police depts and Marine depots. and owning well over a 100 plus, yeah i think i can ask a simple question. I never had a beef with you ever.all you had to do was say good question..the rest of the crew can pile on now. RON K.And yeah i already had my coffee and the SAR show Fiasco. no fault of the Sheas or Templetons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD. Posted December 6, 2020 Report Share Posted December 6, 2020 Ron,It was not a good question. It was a question you have asked over and over again on this forum. And the answer is always the same. NO 167 is in original condition and most likely unfired. If the Smyth family did not have NO 167 "restored" and Jim Falter did not have NO 167 "restored," then who? Jim Falter would not have purchased NO 167 at any price if he thought it was not original. Jim Falter owned enough Colt's to know a restored Thompson. Jim Falter has seen NO 167 with its current owner and states unequivocally that it is almost the same as when he owned it. Unfortunately, one former owner was not as careful with NO 167 as Jim. If Jim Falter does not think it has been "restored" and the current owner (who owns and has owned a great number of Colt's) does not think it has been restored, I am good with that. Period. No beef. Just an honest observation. No piling on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colt21a Posted December 6, 2020 Report Share Posted December 6, 2020 Okay coffee and all i accept that that is why i wanted to buy the darn thing and all i did was sell Jim a darn C Drum.and yes it was not taken care of to a point. and the rivet rear site always bothered me. But any collector will envy the paperwork. Now i am at peace.thanks for that RON K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mnshooter Posted December 7, 2020 Report Share Posted December 7, 2020 Colt's for Colt's, I would like to see NO 167 side by side with NO 3186. Me too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inertord Posted December 7, 2020 Report Share Posted December 7, 2020 a Opinion here all you Thompson lovers was this messed with.{I know the answer}and after some remarks i will tell you the gun.RON K.What is amazing is that Colt installed 1499 other TSMG Sights that didn’t look like the one in the photos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halftrack Posted December 7, 2020 Report Share Posted December 7, 2020 a Opinion here all you Thompson lovers was this messed with.{I know the answer}and after some remarks i will tell you the gun.RON K.What is amazing is that Colt installed 1499 other TSMG Sights that didnt look like the one in the photosUnless you had every Colt example ever made to compare it to, then you cannot honestly say they never did it like that. Just saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colt21a Posted December 7, 2020 Report Share Posted December 7, 2020 Yes 14,999 of The others. And they never got to produce the second 15,000 that Thompson wanted to order. I had that letter and sold that to somebody on the forum awhile back. I am sure somebody can post a copy of that one here. A interesting letter.I am done with rear Lyman sites and rivets. Too much fun to have with all the rest. Whatever happened to Rogers face cover book gun. I was offered that around 23 years ago from a guy in Kentucky who had it.and lost touch. And it did not look like the cover gun at all. Pictures can do wonders.#5290 I had #5294 and that was a nice used Police gun.Had proud owners.R.K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1921A Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 (edited) I remember looking at 167 when Jim bought it. The rivets looked right to me. They werent blued but they had the same tool marks on the rivets as all my Colt guns. Low numbered guns seem to have some variations in features. I doubt 167 is the only early gun with sight rivets left in the white. Im pretty sure one of the Baldwin Felts guns I owned was like that. Another member here owns it now maybe he will see this post. That gun also had another distinctive feature Ive never seen on any other Colt gun, the receiver nose edges were not chamfered. Theres still a lot we dont know about these guns and the production methods. Greg Fox Edited December 9, 2020 by 1921A 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colt21a Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 While in the hardware store rack for decades. with the Lyman unfolded and ready to aim. It braced against a file.And the legend was born. The Rivet X file is closed.R.K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now