Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 2 votes

Another Richard W. Urich 3 Digit M1 TSMG

Numrich/Trask/Kahr & Urich

  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#1 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3728 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 July 2013 - 09:40 AM

Model: M1 Thompson SMG, Urich Receiver, Full Auto, Class III, 45ACP

Model: M1 Thompson SMG (Urich Receiver), | Semi-Full Auto | Class III | Urich Receiver (SN: 8xx) w/ Savage Lower (SN: 593xxx) | .45 ACP Caliber | The Wood is "EXCELLENT CONDITION" | Oiler in Butt Stock | Firearm - Condition: "EXCELLENT" - (1980's) Built by Richard W. Urich of Allentown, Pennsylvania. All parts are Thompson except for the Urich receiver & RUNS FLAWLESSLY !!! | The Urich receiver, which in my opinion is finished much better than the WW II Model M-1’s | **

 

Urich made this receiver #823 and then stamped "AUTO-ORDNANCE CORPORATION BRIDGEPORT, CT U.S.A."  on the right side?

 

Here is a previous thread that mentions this  TSMG M1 #817 as being registered by Urich.   Was Ulrich manufacturing TSMG receivers, importing them, registering them, ....? 

 

http://www.machinegu...wtopic=15086

 

 

 

http://www.gunbroker...?Item=354393094

 

RichardWUrichreceiverTSMGM1_zps029dd197.

 

RichardWUrichreceiverTSMGright_zps423da5


Edited by Arthur Fliegenheimer, 17 July 2013 - 09:42 AM.

  • 0

#2 mgdave

mgdave

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 23 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 July 2013 - 02:59 PM

Urich was a class 2 and did a ton of rewelds prior to 1986.  .

Dave


Edited by mgdave, 17 July 2013 - 03:07 PM.

  • 0

#3 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3728 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 July 2013 - 04:04 PM

Dave,

 

Seller BCG_Gunnie  is touting this TSMG receiver as actually being manufactured from scratch  by Urich not just that he put together (reweld) a Savage/AO receiver

 

"The Urich receiver, which in my opinion is finished much better than the WW II Model M-1’s  **


  • 0

#4 reconbob

reconbob

    Technical Expert

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2627 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 July 2013 - 12:08 AM

  Yes, if I recall correctly Urich welded together as many torched receiver pieces as he

could get his hands on to get them registered before the cutoff. many were not even the

correct length - fronts and rears welded together with no middle, etc.. Get them papered and

correct them later.

   I believe Rich is a member and follower of this board so perhaps he will weigh in. There

is certainly nothing wrong trying to get guns papered before the ban...

   However, I would not say that a Urich receiver is "better" than original - thats just hype

by the seller. At best they would be quality rewelds.

 

Bob


  • 1

#5 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3728 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 July 2013 - 07:37 PM

  Yes, if I recall correctly Urich welded together as many torched receiver pieces as he

could get his hands on to get them registered before the cutoff. many were not even the

correct length - fronts and rears welded together with no middle, etc.. Get them papered and

correct them later.

  Bob

 

Bob,

The serial numbers on these TSMG M1s came from him or BATFE, yes?  Urich then used his own stamping tools to reproduce the "THOMPSON SUBMACHINE GUN .45 M1"  and  "AUTO-ORDNANCE CORPORATION BRIDGEPORT, CONNECTICUT U.S.A." ?

 

If so, this is interesting.


  • 0

#6 reconbob

reconbob

    Technical Expert

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2627 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 July 2013 - 09:52 PM

   I am certain here that the markings as seen in the photos are the original

markings on the rear sections that were welded. Back in the day there were

many rear sections of M1/M1A1 receivers that had been torch cut so that the

rear 4"-5" was intact which meant that the markings were also intact. I would

think that somewhere else on the receiver Urich put his markings - he would

be required to since, by re-welding he was the manufacturer, not Auto-Ordnance.

These markings are probably in small "print" somewhere else on the receiver.

I would think that he just used the "original" serial number that was on the rear

section. As a manufacturer he could select any number he wanted.

  

Bob


  • 0

#7 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3728 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 July 2013 - 10:43 PM

Bob,

Apparently, Urich's own marking were stamped under the sight. However, his left side receiver stampings look different from the original AOC WWII  roll die in that the ".45" stamping on his receiver is much further apart from the word "CALIBER"  and the "M1" is much further away from the ".45".  With all the different parts, welding, refinishing, etc, I don't know how he could maintain any original markings.  I suppose he could have had receiver parts serial numbers 817 and 823, but with all the M1/M1A1 WWII TSMGs produced that is an odd coincidence to have those 3 digit ones.  


Edited by Arthur Fliegenheimer, 19 July 2013 - 09:34 AM.

  • 0

#8 anjong-ni

anjong-ni

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 445 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 20 July 2013 - 12:25 PM

Help me understand...before 1986, before the import of the Russian Thompsons, what was his source of all the cut-up receivers? In other words, in the context of the times, who would cut up a Thompson when all you had to do was register it for $200?....Phil


  • 0

#9 reconbob

reconbob

    Technical Expert

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2627 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 20 July 2013 - 02:16 PM

      Unfortunately, most of the time surplus or obsolete machine guns are destroyed to avoid the

expense of storing and securing them. Unlike Springfields, Garands, M-1 Carbines, etc. machine

guns cannot be sold to individuals. There is no CMP program for them. (Oh, if there only was!)

It would cost many, many thousands of dollars to store, secure, and guard a warehouse full of old

machine guns. Year after year. Always wondering if any would be stolen, pilfered, etc. So if a machine

gun was no longer in active use they would be marked for destruction.Now, if the guns were overseas

in the possession of other countries or arms dealers - different story. They would be sold and resold

down the line until they were useless.

WW2 and Korea era guns they were mostlyl torched or sheared into pieces and sold as scrap. And

sometimes the scrap became available.

    Back in the 1970's there was a guy that had 900 torched M1 and M1A1 Thompsons he wanted

welded and and machined and buit into guns, but it bever happened. These guns had been cut into

three pieces - thru the ejection port and in front of the rear sight.

    I used to buy torched Thompson receivers and trigger frames that had been torched while assembled.

There were no barrel pieces or front ends, and the parts had been stored outside in piles. I bought by the

pound and we used to move them around with a shovel. Some of the guns appeared to have been new

when torched.

    Back in the mid 1970's a request for quotation went out - there were 18,000 BAR's at a base down

in Georgia to be destroyed. Can you imagine? And the industrial mass-destruction techniques that ended

up being used to do it?

 

Bob


  • 1

#10 Paladin601

Paladin601

    RKI Member

  • Board Donor
  • 1199 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 July 2013 - 12:42 AM

It's sad, to see our tax dollar destroyed this way. I will never understand it, nor the gun buy backs
  • 0

#11 Z3BigDaddy

Z3BigDaddy

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3705 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:State of Jefferson
  • Interests:Shooting, Hunting, Metal Detecting, Gun Trad'n

Posted 21 July 2013 - 01:30 PM

Yabbut....  You can get fiiddy bucks at Walmart for Grandad's old Parker shotgun!

It's sad, to see our tax dollar destroyed this way. I will never understand it, nor the gun buy backs


  • 0

#12 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3728 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 30 July 2013 - 10:58 AM

Urich had to have made his own stamps to complete these assorted AOC/Savage receiver parts. Considering the various places on the receivers they were torch cut,  he had no other option after re-welding and refinishing, but to attempt to replicate the original WWII AOC/Savage markings.  Did the pre 1986 buyers know the extent to which these examples were  recreated by Urich?  While Urich stamped his name under the rear sight and registered these receivers with BATFE, It would be interesting to know how many of these  completed TSMGs he manufactured and sold before the 1986 deadline.  

 

Torch cut through markings.

 

M1THOMPSONPARTSKITM1A1rightrearmarkingsc

 

Demilled long receiver section.

 

DemilledTSMGM-1_zps810a0264.jpg

 

Defaced rear section.

 

M1THOMPSONPARTSKITM1A1rightrear_zpscbdc8

 

 

 

 


  • 1

#13 reconbob

reconbob

    Technical Expert

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2627 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 30 July 2013 - 10:48 PM

    Arthur - I do not know where the pieces Urich used were cut. As I mentioned, 40 years ago

it was common to find receivers that had been cut in such a way that the rear section was 4-5"

long and the markings were intact.I do not think that Urich did so many guns that he had trouble

finding 4-5" long rear sections. In the photos you posted I do not see any markings that do

not look original. What am I not noticing?

   I cannot imagine Urich having engraving dies made to re-engrave receivers. This would

have been cost-prohibitive. This was in the pre-computer era, so CNC engraving is out. If this

was done maybe a pantograph? But welding, machining, and then re-engraving and matching

it up with exisiting engraving on both sides of a weld? No way.

   A close look at a receiver would show where it was welded and if the engraving needed

to be redone.

 

Bob

 

Bob


  • 0

#14 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3728 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 31 July 2013 - 01:03 PM

Bob,

Both the Urich M1 TSMG #817 & #823 are not original Savage/AOC  serial numbers. He definitely marked these receivers using his own stamps/dies/engraving. He either made up these TSMGs using torch cut pieces or unmarked Philly Ord/Richardson receivers. Board member LongRifle confirms this after speaking to Urich. Apparently Urich produced  100 or so completed TSMGs before the 1986 cut off.  Urich also duplicated the "GEG"  "U.S. PROPERTY"  & crossed cannons arsenal mark on #817 which he says is not a rewat receiver but either a PO or Richardson.

 

Now we know that there are Urich registered TSMGs with WWII Savage/AOC markings that are not original.  While BATFE has Urich as the manufacturer, how many owners/buyers believe these TSMGs to be of WWII production and not after market examples?  Urich didn't have any compunction using the THOMPSON name, AOC name, and other assorted WWII stamps on these receivers at a time when Trast was supposedly the only "official"  manufacturer of  functioning  semi auto or full auto TSMGs.

 

Posted 21 February 2013 - 05:53 PM

Thanks to all that have replied. I think we have an answer....

So, I actually spoke to the gentleman that made the receiver. First I apoligize, I did not initially post clearly some information. I just did not think it to be super important (newbie mistake). The manufacture on the ATF forms is R.W. Urich. of Allentown PA. That is stamped very clearly under the rear sight. The ATF forms very clearly disclose him as the manufacturer NOT Auto Ordnance or Savage.

So, again, my bad, I thought that had something to do with Rewatting

But, again, I physically spoke to R.W Urich today. He is a very nice person. Very much into WWII history and I cannot thank him enough for his time.

In short, he did indeed build about 100 Thompson receivers and register them back in the late 1970s and early 1980s using either rewelds (which this one is not), or Phila Ordnance or Richardson receivers.

He asked me to send some pics and he would look at his records and confirm which receiver he used.

So, clearly, this is NOT an original Savage AO #817
 
Identical Urich markings unique to his receivers.
 
Urich #817
 

UrichMTSGM1817_zpsb61a8c4f.jpg

 

Urich #823

 

urichM1left_zpsc8da6dcc.jpg


  • 1

#15 reconbob

reconbob

    Technical Expert

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2627 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 31 July 2013 - 03:58 PM

     Ok. I am thinking that he welded the serial numbers, smoothed them, and re-engraved

the serial numbers, but not the other markings. I agree that this is not right - to conceal

his markings under the rear sight (and I am surprised that he was allowed to do this since

regulations clearly state the markings must be visible).  And we are seeing a non-expert

(the seller) claim that the receiver is better than a a true, original receiver. I am also sure

that there are many out there who are unaware of the minutae of transfers, and forms, etc.

that think that their Urich receiver is original because the only markings they see on the

gun are original AUTO ORDNANCE markings.

    Do we know if the rear sights on these are riveted? In which case they cannot be removed

to check for markings underneath, or are they screwed on and can be removed to look.

    More fertile ground for caveat emptor...

 

Bob


  • 0

#16 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3728 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 31 July 2013 - 05:27 PM

Bob,

LongRfile cleared up the question of Urich's sight installation method as well.   ***Allen wrench not included.***

The Urich 100+  TSMGs warrants a mention in Hill/ Iannamico/Richardson  next Thompson editions.  Novice collectors would sure like the heads up on this TSMG that is not what it outwardly advertises to be.

 

Posted 17 February 2013 - 01:09 AM


Yes small allen heads holding site on.


I picked this up from David Spiwak. His best guess that it was a DEWAT at some point, and reactivated and registered. The reason that site has the allen heads is that the guy that registered it put his name under it. R.W. Urich. So that it is easily removable.

  • 0

#17 Sandman1957

Sandman1957

    Respected Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 1199 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Northern Neck VA
  • Interests:Submachinegun NFA collecting
    History
    Scuba Diving
    Hunting

Posted 01 August 2013 - 06:23 AM

Gents,

   Longrifle bought one of these a year ago from David Spiwak.  At first he thought it was original.  He did research on it including contacting Mr Urich, speaking with him and learning more about the gun.  Not sure that post is still on the board.  That was one of the reasons I had asked about posting information regarding remanufactured guns etc.  The typical response at the time was "this is an advanced collector site, we don't care about "non-thompsons" etc.   

   Not speaking for Longrifle or Mr Urich, best I remember was some were rewelds (Mr Urich would have to research serial number to find out exact), some were other's  80's recievers.  He had the "stampings" engraved on the guns.  Jerry Prasser / Recon Ord had info on the engraving (which may not be the exact technical term).  Bottom line Mr Urich used both rewelds and other partially finished recievers to make his guns.  They are susposed to be good shooters.

   I still encourage info regarding Urich guns, Pearls etc to be collected and made a "pinned" reference.

Cheers,

Sandman1957


  • 1

#18 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3728 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 August 2013 - 10:29 AM

Gents,

   Longrifle bought one of these a year ago from David Spiwak.  At first he thought it was original.  He did research on it including contacting Mr Urich, speaking with him and learning more about the gun.  Not sure that post is still on the board.  That was one of the reasons I had asked about posting information regarding remanufactured guns etc.  The typical response at the time was "this is an advanced collector site, we don't care about "non-thompsons" etc.   

Sandman1957

 

I linked LongRifle's thread in my original post.  Who chastised you about citing examples of  post 1944  manufactured Thompson smg  examples?  25+ years after Urich manufactured his TSMGs complete with replicated markings of original WWII Savage/AO TSMGs,  the Thompson smg collector  community is just now appreciating the true origin of the Urich Thompson. That his receiver markings have mislead collectors to believe they are original Savage/AO factory markings (and perhaps they even fooled the heads at West Hurley  back in the 70's and 80's) is indeed worthy of  inclusion in the story of the resurgence of the Thompson smg  manufacturing post WWII.


  • 0

#19 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3728 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 August 2013 - 02:20 PM

Gordon's  $4K replica  Colt 1921.  

 

http://www.subguns.c...query=retrieval

 

If  back in the 70's/80's Urich had the capability to replicate the Savage/AOC markings on his torch cut WWII or Philly Ord receivers in the way the Colt/AOC markings  are currently being used on dummy receivers,  Urich registered TSMG receivers might have been even more deceptive as to their original condition.  

 

GordonHPhiladelphiaOrdnanceReceiverColt1

 

GordonHPhiladelphiaOrdnanceReceiverColt1


  • 0

#20 LongRifle

LongRifle

    Long Time Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 19 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 August 2013 - 10:20 PM

Sorry guys, I have been offline for a while

 

Per Sandman, I did indeed speak to Mr Urich a couple of times and exchanged notes with him .

 

The guns he made were made from Phila Ord or Richardson receivers.   From my interaction with him, sounds like solely Phila Ord or Richardson.   He never mentioned rewelds to me as I recall.   

 

He found his bound book and my #817 was made on May 6th 1986, again from either a Phila or Richardson.   He did not cite which

 

A year after manufacture he was inspected by BATF compliance division and the data above was verified.  

 

Here is what is really interesting... he said the ONLY stampings HE put on the guns were the stampings under the site.  Serial company city state.  He actually commented that the gun has received quite a "face lift" since he made it (his words).    So I did not dig further but all the fluff on the sides may have been added by another Class 2 dealer that he sold a fair number of his guns to.   Just in case that data is wrong, I will not publish the name of that person / company. 

 

In the end, I picked up my gun for about 14k so I think I have a good runner for that price.   It did cause me a lot of angst however.  The gun was present as "original" when I bought it.   I kept asking the seller (before I bought it) why it was so cheap and he said it was because of the Urich stamps and "the way it was registered".  Seller still contended it was original.   He was willing to "make it right" once I unwound the mystery. 

 

NOT original, but a good runner.  


  • 0