Sig Posted March 28, 2004 Report Share Posted March 28, 2004 I recently acquired a December 1934 issue of American Rifleman. In it is an article on our favorite weapon, Thompsons! Thought I would share this for all to enjoy.. Not sure how long I am going to host the scans so if you want to keep them print or save the .jpg's now. One of these days I am going to learn photo shop techniques so these are not so monster sized. michael http://home.cogeco.ca/~msigillito/AMR1.jpg http://home.cogeco.ca/~msigillito/AMR2.jpg http://home.cogeco.ca/~msigillito/AMR3.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIONHART Posted March 28, 2004 Report Share Posted March 28, 2004 Sig, many thanks for sharing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter63a Posted March 28, 2004 Report Share Posted March 28, 2004 Thanks Sig! That is a great article!! http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/blink.gif http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/cool.gif Regards, Walter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sig Posted March 28, 2004 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2004 Add the irony of the fact that the NRA virtually helped craft the 1934 law that we all love er hate and that is published by the NRA in that very same year makes it all the more interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Fliegenheimer Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 Phil, I don't think anyone confused the C idesignation in AC for anything other than Cutts on the 1921/28 Colt's. But the overstamped "C" on previously marked Savage 1928A1's that were slated for police use would not necessarily coincide with "C" for "Cutts". Since the 1921-28 Colt's were not marked AC, why would the additon of a "Cutts" designation stamped on the receiver be required for the 1928 Savage model when all of them had Cutts to begin with? I think the "C" for commercial is still a good bet for those guns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gijive Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 PhilOhio, I agree with Arthur on this one. The 1928A1 Model, which your gun is a derivative of, was standard with the Cutts compensator. The 21A and AC designations hadn't been used since the 1930's catalogues. During WWII (and your is a WWII gun) the 1928 Model didn't come without a compensator. The exception would be a field expedient barrel change where a 1928 Model had to be pressed into service after 1942 and only an M1 style barrel was available. The 1928 miltary models sold to law enforcement as surplus, post WWII, would all have had compensators. The US and A1 designation were altered to differentiate the surplus guns sold to law enforcement from the US miltary models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron A Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 Great article - I grew up reading Phil Sharpe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD. Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 Arthur, I always thought the removal of the "U.S." and "1" in U.S. Model of 1928 A1 marking was just a way to show that these Thompsons were no longer property of the United States Government. I never thought the "C" stood for anything in particular. I do have real doubts the use of "C" is related to the Colt production Thompson. Could the "C" stand for "commercial" model or "civilian" model? I guess it is possible, however, it does not seem logical to me. I would think (my opinion only) if it stood for anything, Cutts Compensator would be the best guess. I do agree this flies in the face of logic in that all U.S. Model of 1928 A1 Thompsons were equipped with Cutts Compensators. It appears many Thompsons were marked this way when they left US Government service. I have never seen any documents detailing the procedures on how to remove and re-mark Thompsons being transferred out of US Government service. Obviously, this documentation could answer (or raise) many questions. This lack of documentation may just mean there was not a lot of thought given to this subject. Obviously, the removal of the "U.S." is a no brainer. I believe M1 and M1A1 were also given away/sold by the US Government. This model did not have a compensator. Maybe this was one way the government distinguished between these models as they were being offered for local government sale or give away programs. I know - that makes no sense. But let me add that I doubt very seriously anyone involved in this Thompson program would have thought his or her actions on marking these Thompsons would be the subject of debate in 2004. Just my thoughts.... Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gijive Posted March 29, 2004 Report Share Posted March 29, 2004 QUOTE (PhilOhio @ Mar 29 2004, 11:01 AM)Gijive, You are probably right. It sounds like you are saying what I theorized above; different useage of "C" at different times in different circumstances. The use of "C" in Numrich's sales brochure which I have from the '50s and '60s appears to be exactly the same as the (Colt?) useage to which Phil Sharpe seems to have referred in his 1934 article. PhilOhio, Yeah, that's what I was trying to get at. Who knows why Auto Ordnance stamped a C after the A on the late war, post WWII guns sold to law enforcement? I can understand removing the US designation indicating that the gun was no longer US property, but the C is open to speculation. I remember talking with Frank Iannamico a couple of years ago at the Thompson Show about this very subject. His extensive research could not come up any definitive documentation if I recall correctly. Perhaps the C did in fact mean with a compensator as was used to differentiate the Colt models. This would seen somewhat redundant, however, since virtually all of the post war AC marked models were originally 1928A1 models and the military A1 version came standard with the compensator. One of the mysteries of Thompson collecting that will probably never be answered to everyone's satisfaction. 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