Norm Posted November 7, 2003 Report Share Posted November 7, 2003 Hello all, I'm sure that this question has been asked before, but I will ask it again. Why did WH make the 27 magazine catch different from the 28 magazine catch? http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/huh.gif We all know that it is perfectly legal to put a 28 catch on a 27, so it could not have been a ruling by the ATF (it would seem.) Maybe it it was a marketing trick http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/dry.gif (to make people buy the "semi auto" magazines instead of using "full auto" magazines.) Does any one know the answer to this question? Or have opinions on why they did this? Thanks, Norm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiskey Brother Posted November 7, 2003 Report Share Posted November 7, 2003 There is no doubt that this has caused untold irritation, both with the owners of full auto Thompsons, as well as the new guys with the semi's. (Which would include me...) The guys with the full-auto's get PO'd because the semi owners usually modify the mags to fit their guns. This unfortunatly includes me. I modified ten XXX box mags back in '91 when I got my Thompson. I can already hear you full auto boys cringing and yellin' in anger. What can I say? I made the modification without thinking about changing the magazine catch. Sorry... But I might also add that those ten are all I need. I don't plan on selling my gun (ever), so what difference does it make? I might also add that I seem to be the only guy on the planet to get a semi-auto Thompson and never have the thing jam. As far as I'm concerned, I did the right thing when I dremeled my magazines... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waffen Und Bier Posted November 7, 2003 Report Share Posted November 7, 2003 ....and I modified my brand spankin' new in wrap GI M3 grease gun mags to fit my Powder Springs MAC 10 SMG. http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/ohmy.gif So what? They are my mags. If I want to paint them purple and orange, I'll do it. http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/tongue.gif There are millions.......... and millions of M3 grease gun mags out there for less than $10 a pop. Same with thirty round Thompson mags. One can go a bit far in "preserving history." Now for someone to do that to a minty patent date mag or a Colt C drum........ http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/blink.gif http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/unsure.gif http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/sad.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Crow Posted November 7, 2003 Report Share Posted November 7, 2003 The reason they are different is because they lowered the receivers on the semis by 0.10" to prevent them from being converted easily into FA. Thanks PK, I forgot, they ARE the same. I have a newer 27 that works flawless after reworking the mag catch. When I bought it I ordered a few extra xxx mags from the dealer not knowing about the catch mods. or the availability of the GI mags. Due to the education through this board a lot has changed with my views. Waffen, when I read your post and note of modifying a C, I think my heart skipped a few beats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PK. Posted November 7, 2003 Report Share Posted November 7, 2003 The magazine catches are not different for any model Thompson except the late M1A1 that eliminated the wide area required for the drum. They are all functionally the same for box magazines. That said, there is a difference in the process by which they were, and are, made and in the quality of the early (WWII and prior) and later production. Simply changing the stock catch on a 27a gun to a military surplus catch will not affect which magazines can be used. In order to use SMG magazines in a 27a gun, the magazine catch (either stock or mil surp) must be re- contoured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bisley45 Posted November 8, 2003 Report Share Posted November 8, 2003 Just my opinion but when West Hurly decided to modify the mags, (atrociously inconsistint ) instead of the mag catch so they could SELL you mags that worked in their gun at $$$ a pop where USGI mags were avalible from other places and WH wanted your Bottom Dollar; function be damned. just my .02 BB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiskey Brother Posted November 8, 2003 Report Share Posted November 8, 2003 Could the problem with the Semi's jamming be in the new magazine? All my modified magazines are GI XXX's and funtion flawlessly. My "L" drum runs without a hitch as well. In fact, I think I mentioned this before, but I was surprised when I first came to this board and read about all the semi's jamming. Mine has never jammed even with my shorter home-cast 200 grain semi-wad cutters. It seems to eat everything I feed it without a problem! You have to give the magazine a rap on your leg to seat the shorter bullets, but they feed flawlessly. It might even be problems with incorrectly modified magazines. Maybe the magazine catch holes are not dremeled correctly or something... 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