AO 1928A1 on GB

[mnshooter]

 

.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.

Lunch Box Specials? Of course they happened, but to me this statement seemed to imply that it was done openly, thus the wartime production date. As far as not being a reweld, -looking forward to those inside photos.

 

"One piece at a time, and it didn't cost me a dime,

You'll know it's me when I come to the range,

It's a forty, fortyone, fortytwo, fortythree,

Auto Ordnance, Savage, welded up,

genuine (sort of) .45 Tommygun..."

 

"Original? Why, it's got more original parts than any three other Tommy Guns..."

Edited December 27, 2013 by mnshooter

[reconbob]

Two more things of general interest - one is an observation, one is a question. My observation

is that GIJive posted a close up photo of a correctly numbered receiver. Note the shape of

the 4 -the triangle formed by the legs of the 4 is closed:

 

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f392/reconbob/AO42700Receiver_zps9e10c480.jpg

 

Here is the photo of the number on the trigger frame on the Gunbroker gun. Note that the legs forming the triangle do not touch and it is open:

 

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f392/reconbob/pix680302296_zps9db827b3.jpg

 

This open 4 is what you get when you use a set of common hand stamps. This detail has come up before. The numbering dies used to number

Thompsons did not have the open 4. This number was hand stamped. (Yea I know, the guy did it himself in the factory before he took it out.)

If you zoom this picture from the auction it appears that the 4 is also open and certainly hand stamped:

 

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f392/reconbob/pix189013604_zps1a171c9c.jpg

 

 

 

Now, a question for GIJive and others - This picture (from American Thunder) show what I would expect an early M1928 front position

patent number block to look like - with the gap between the vertical rows:

 

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f392/reconbob/IMG_4217_zps2c9a95ef.jpg

 

This is what the patent number block looks like at the rear of a M1928A1:

 

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f392/reconbob/IMG_4218_zps5c951c73.jpg

 

And of course this is the patent number block on the Gunbroker gun:

 

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f392/reconbob/pix173205232_zpse3e114d4.jpg

 

Is this correct? Did some early Thompsons have this type of patent block at the front of the receiver?

 

Bob

Edited December 27, 2013 by reconbob

[gijive]

Bob,

 

If I remember correctly, the earliest Savage receivers with the New York, N.Y., address actually had the Patent Dates, like the Colt Guns. Next came the pattern seen in the book, then the Patent Numbers as shown on the gun in question. I thought by the time Auto-Ordnance opened their plant and started manufacturing the 1928 Model that the receiver markings were standardized with the Bridgeport, CT address in the middle and the Patent Numbers at the rear. On the gun in question, the left side markings, "U.S. Model 1928, No. A.O._________" looks correct, except for the serial number starting with 0. It appears that early A.O. receivers may have had the Patent Numbers in the middle and the company name at the rear. No A.O. receivers would have had the New York, N.Y. address, though.

 

Tom Davis is the expert on the early marked Savage receivers, he would know approximately when the changes occurred.

Edited December 27, 2013 by gijive

[bob241]

On page 339 of The Ultimate Thompson Book by Tracie L. Hill is a picture of inspection guage #27Y407-20 A.O.C. that was used to check the position and dimensions of drum magazine attachment slots in the upper receiver,it clearly shows the correct front and rear radius that the mag well should have.

Frank says receiver 08564 is not a reweld, if that is correct I would think Q.C. would have ordered this receiver scrapped and not allowed it to be finished into a complete upper receiver, and given SN 08564.

[ron_brock]

On page 339 of The Ultimate Thompson Book by Tracie L. Hill is a picture of inspection guage #27Y407-20 A.O.C. that was used to check the position and dimensions of drum magazine attachment slots in the upper receiver,it clearly shows the correct front and rear radius that the mag well should have.

Frank says receiver 08564 is not a reweld, if that is correct I would think Q.C. would have ordered this receiver scrapped and not allowed it to be finished into a complete upper receiver, and given SN 08564.

That's probably why it was allowed to go home..instead of the land of misfit Tommys

[reconbob]

I am willing to be corrected on this, but from the description in the auction the seller does not have

this gun in his possession - it will ship direct from the "customers inventory". I assume therefore that he has not

seen the gun and is relying only on the owners description. At the minimum we know that the mag cut out is wrong,

it is the only Thompson any of us have ever seen with the square corner,

we know that it is not the original finish - the original would be blued, we know that the serial numbers were hand

stamped and not done with a factory numbering die, and that the trigger frame is a Savage frame re-done with

an Auto-Ordnance number - upside down. It also has a to-good-to-be-true ordnance wheel, but no inspectors mark

Instead of viewing all of these flaws as clear evidence of a faked gun the seller is doubling down saying that these

flaws make the gun rarer.

 

Bob

[Devil Dog 1110]

Frank sent me an email that the Boards post's about this gun has raised some concerns with him about its' history.

He has posted additional photo's of this gun and its parts on the auctiion site.

While he doesn't feel like there is enough proof that this gun is a reweld he would welcome any evidence to the contrary.

He also said he will offer a money back gaurantee if the buyer is not happy with the fun.

Sounds fair to me.

If this gun is a reweld it still looks like a great gun that at the very least will make someone a good shooter.

 

[m3bobby]

Just a thought but could this be a later body? The rear sight looks blued so I was wondering if it may have had a 'L' battle sight fitted and someone has replaced it with a Lyman adjustable sight, then the serial number could have been A.O.108564 with the '1' removed.

[ron_brock]

Interesting to see the 8564 stamped on the front half of the mag well (is this normal?), not including the 0. I would be suspect that something happened here and the stamping was used for reassembly. The gun could have been repaired, dressed up, restamped with the ordnance mark and refinished. Parkerizing might hide discoloration from welding, bluing would not. The finish also helps to hide the original ground finish on the side of the receiver that could provide some clues if there was a difference in the topography of the surface finish.

 

Maybe it was a dewat that was cleaned up and repaired? They may have taken a small cut on the rear face with an endmill, one could check the dimension for the width of the magwell and compare to the print (a cleanup cut could explain the small radius or lack of one). The sharp corner on the rear of the magwell would act a stress riser and would not be good from a design standpoint, which is why these had radii to begin with. The 4 that is stamped looks to be an open 4 like on the trigger group. From this photo it seems there is something going on near the ejection port weld near the corner, but maybe that is lighting playing tricks in the photo.

 

Still a nice gun and I wouldn't mind having it, but the listing makes no comments that there are some doubts about the originality. As listed, it seems to be a very nice gun with loads of pictures. Certainly all my comments are speculation and we may never know what the real story is behind this gun. But I offer up some areas to look into to complement some of the comments Bob has already made.

 

- Ron

Edited December 27, 2013 by ron_brock

[reconbob]

The new pictures have removed any doubt - at least in my mind - that this receiver has been

welded and machined. The only original M1928A1 receiver I have in here now is torched, but it will

show clearly the necessary details. Here is an original extractor slot viewed from the side. Note the

sharp corners where the surfaces meet, and the smoothness of the slot itself:

 

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f392/reconbob/get-attachment4_zps12063fef.jpg

 

Here is the same photo but note where the point of the pen points to the corner where the extractor slot meets the ejection port:

 

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f392/reconbob/get-attachment5_zps3c213416.jpg

 

Now look at the same corner on the Gunbroker gun and note that it is not sharp and you can see the weld, the slot itself is not smooth, and there is discoloration

running at an angle down and to the left which is probably also the weld.

 

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f392/reconbob/pix660324065_zps6e72c54a.jpg

 

More evidence of the receiver being re-machined with incorrect cutters -

 

Here is the original receiver. The pen is pointing to the corner of the top of the bolt pocket. Note that it has a radius - it is not a sharp corner:

 

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f392/reconbob/get-attachment3_zpsb0571084.jpg

 

Now look at the same corner on the Gunbroker receiver - it has no radius because, just like the mag cut out, it was done with a standard off the shelf cutter that did not have

the correct radius:

 

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f392/reconbob/pix653918081_zpsa7d924fd.jpg

 

Here the pen is pointing to the round corner of the front of the bolt pocket. The correct radius for these corners is 1/8":

 

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f392/reconbob/get-attachment2_zpse8c6eb25.jpg

 

Here is the Gunbroker receiver. Its easy to see that the radius of the remachined corners is too big:

 

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f392/reconbob/pix653918081_zpsa7d924fd.jpg

 

There is no question that whoever did this work did a very good job, but I am sticking to my opinion that this is NOT an original production gun

that was sneaked out of the factory. It is a high quality reweld with incorrect/hand stamped serial numbers, incorrect non-original machine work,

and a fake ordnance wheel stamp. The reason that there are no inspectors marks is probably because they got welded over.

This reweld would be a good shooter and should be presented and valued as such, not presented and valued as a low

number original gun. That ship has sailed....

 

Bob

Edited December 28, 2013 by reconbob

[bob241]

Take a good look at the last picture reconbob posted, you will notice all the weld splatters around the front of the bolt cavity, and weld burns on the edge of the upper actuator slot.

[Devil Dog 1110]

Frank has let me know that based on the information he has seen on this Board he has added a footnote to the description and no longer lists it as "original".

He can not delist it as there is no reserve on it and there are already bids.

I personally think he's doing the best he can with this listing.

 

Question- If this is a reweld why does the paperwork on this gun lists Auto Ordinance as the manufactor. Also it has transferred prior as a C&R. Is this just another NFA screw up?

[ron_brock]

 

 

Question- If this is a reweld why does the paperwork on this gun lists Auto Ordinance as the manufactor. Also it has transferred prior as a C&R. Is this just another NFA screw up?

A while back the ATF would take the form without much scrutiny. The side of the gun says Auto Ordnance so no issues there (back then). The system was abused and hence the long lead times to get some guns approved recently as the ATF cleans up the records (see Dolphinvet's recent experience posted on the forum). I know of several cases where further information had to be provided to prove the lineage of a gun being transferred. A while back, the gun would transfer as a C&R without any questions. Buyer and seller may be completely unaware of the gun's status due to the fine job rebuilding it.

 

The next transfer on this gun may face some fine tooth combing. Based on the appearance and the great job done on the repair, I would suspect that this gun would still pass as original unless detailed photos of the internals were requested and closely analyzed. Also depends on when the gun entered the registry.

 

- Ron

[Bridgeport28A1]

The person on the first NFA paperwork knows the answer but they probably are not going to talk about this Thompson.

 

Could it be another Urich Thompson?

 

http://www.machinegunboards.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=15604&hl=ulrich

[jim c 351]

Normally when a gun is heated to the point of welding, the steel will appear as two tone. Even when a master like PK reworks the Blish slots on a West Hurley this difference in color is apparent and this is just from silver soldering.

If we assume this gun has been welded to some degree then why doesn't it show. The likely answer is the receiver is neither blued or parkerized.

The receiver has probably been painted with one of those products that is sold by Brownells and other suppliers.

Should the day come when the poor unfortunate buyer decides to have the receiver either blued or parkerized the welds will be obvious.

And since we are talking about 20K it will probably be law suit time.

Jim C

[reconbob]

Wow. The seller is defiant to the bitter end. He now says that due to the comments of Thompson "experts" - note the

quotations - i.e. the zero in front of the serial number, the "exceptionally crisp ordnance mark" and the lack

of inspector marks that this has caused doubt that the gun is original. Huh? Its a REWELD. How do you know? You

look at the gun and you SEE the weld. You compare the machine work to original guns and its completely different

because they had to machine the weld.

I am sorry but this is not right. Yes, you cannot end the auction but you can post the truth that the gun is a REWELD,

tell all who bid that their bid will be waived if they want now that they know they are bidding on a REWELD, and

if everyone waives their bid start over with an honest description.

 

 

Bob

Edited December 28, 2013 by reconbob

[jim c 351]

I'm sure that Frank is a perfectly honest dealer and when he was referring to the Thompson "experts" comments he simply forgot to mention that the "experts" felt his gun had a welded receiver.

It probably never occurred to Frank that its theoretically possible to weld a C&R receiver.

And I will be the first to admit that once the receiver was painted it does look really nice.

Hopefully the lucky bidder will have a charitable attitude when he finds out his prized possession was misrepresented and not sue Frank out of existence.

We need all the honest dealers we can get.

Jim C

[mnshooter]

Even if Frank has shielded himself enough with the statement that it may not be original, to not mention the existence of welding and rework that has been so positively identified by Bob is just not right. An uninformed private seller might be given some slack; one of the more prolific dealer/ advertisers who mentions his reputation in many ads, no.

[Chief762]

I wonder what the serial number under the grip mount is...

[TD.]

My opinion on this Thompson is stated below. But first a few comments…

I have been away for the holidays with limited Internet connectivity. When I could get on the Internet I watched this thread with great interest. I now see that Frank’s disclaimer based on opinions from this Board includes his belief that this is “an exceptional quality gun.” I guess I would have to know his definition of “exceptional” and “quality” before commenting further but given the application of the “plain meaning rule” where I come from I hope he never has to litigate that statement.

Bob’s analysis is spot on. I know nothing about the types of cutters used to make Thompson guns but I can see a weld as well as anyone and understand the difference in the font style of the numbers, especially his comments on the number “4.” Would everyone that owns an Auto-Ordnance Bridgeport (AOB) with the number 4 in the serial number see if the number 4 matches the number 4 on gunbroker.com – and report back?

I have never seen a production Thompson gun with the serial number that begins with the number “0.” I have seen a 1940’s military document that refers to an AOB Thompson gun in the 8,000 serial number range. There is no reference to a zero in front of the serial number.

The right side receiver markings were of particular interest to me. Note how the AOB address markings are at the rear of receiver (under the rear sight) and the patent markings/numbers are toward the front of the receiver (barrel). I have never seen this placement on an AOB Thompson – early, late or middle serial number range. Would those with an AOB Thompson check the right side of your Thompson receivers and let us know if you have an AOB Thompson that matches the right side of the Thompson featured on gunbroker.com. It is certainly possible but I would bet the great great majority of you will find the patent markings/numbers at the rear of the receiver (under the rear sight) and the AOB address toward the front of the receiver (barrel). I just want to find one that matches the Thompson gun on gunbroker.com!

There is a production Thompson gun whose right side receiver markings are identical to the gun on gunbroker.com. It is of Savage manufacture. When Savage changed the Auto-Ordnance Corporation address from New York to Bridgeport (around the 80,000 serial number range), the first Savage guns with the AOB address markings are just like the gun on gunbroker.com. I have always referred to the Savage receivers with the AOB address as the third major variation in Savage receivers. Without giving it much thought I just called the different placement of the Bridgeport address and patent numbers like seen on the gunbroker.com Thompson a small variation within the third major variation of Savage receivers. I don’t know how many Thompsons Savage manufactured with this address and patent number placement but it was over 10,000, maybe 20,000 or 30,0000. Will those on the Board with Savage Thompsons, especially those with serial numbers in the 80,000 to 125,000 serial number range check the placement of the address and patent numbers and report back. It is a small serial number block; perhaps we can narrow it down.

Several Board members commented on the below items:

The frame is definitely of Savage manufacture. A Savage frame with an AOB serial number is big red flag to just a novice Thompson enthusiast. Whoever marked it with the AOB serial number prefix included the marking “No” as found on the receiver. I don’t own an AOB Thompson. May I suggest that those on the Board that do check the frame number and see if the factory applied numbering begins with a “No” and report back their findings (with pictures, if possible). While not conclusive, my picture file indicates AOB only stamped the AO prefix and then the number.

Whoever put this Thompson together also did not know about the WB markings usually found on the left side of the frame. Does anyone have a 1928 AOB Thompson without the WB markings?

Based on all the informative posts and what I have stated above, I believe the AOB curio & relic Thompson gun that is currently for sale on gunbroker.com is actually (or originally) of Savage manufacture. I welcome any and all information that contradicts what I have stated as this is a learning process for all of us. Unfortunately, it may be an expensive learning process for the buyer of this “exceptional quality gun.”

[Kilroy]

The frame is definitely of Savage manufacture. A Savage frame with an AOB serial number is big red flag to just a novice Thompson enthusiast. Whoever marked it with the AOB serial number prefix included the marking “No” as found on the receiver. I don’t own an AOB Thompson. May I suggest that those on the Board that do check the frame number and see if the factory applied numbering begins with a “No” and report back their findings (with pictures, if possible). While not conclusive, my picture file indicates AOB only stamped the AO prefix and then the number.

 

A picture of the left side of my AO Thompson is on page 2 of this thread (includes the ordnance and WB stamp). For the serial number below the butt stock there is no "No.". It reads AO97XXX.

 

Not the best picture, but hope it helps.

 

http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa54/RedSpecialSS/B074B3D1-738B-4276-B88F-1BC2E3986227_zpstxyzwyvv.jpg

[Bridgeport28A1]

Current Bid $21,025.00 No Reserve! http://www.gunbroker.com/image/questionmarkblue12x12.gif Started at $0.01 Buy Now! Price was $28,000.00 http://www.gunbroker.com/image/questionmarkblue12x12.gif Quantity 1 # of bids 29 Time left Listing has Ended
Location Jasper, MO 64755 Start 12/19/2013 8:00:00 PM ET (This is a 14 day auction) http://www.gunbroker.com/image/StateFlags/MO.gif Ends On or After 1/2/2014 8:16:42 PM ET

 

Seller

frankgoepfert A+(1912) http://www.gunbroker.com/image/questionmarkblue12x12.gif

Winning Bidder Sellout19 A+(2)

Edited January 3, 2014 by Bridgeport28A1

[The1930sRust]

He needs an invite to the Board....

[mnshooter]

He needs an invite to the Board....

Sellout, or Frank?

[The1930sRust]

Hmmmmm.