Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Nac '28a1 For Sale


  • Please log in to reply
75 replies to this topic

#61 RichFitz

RichFitz

    New Member

  • Regular Group
  • 18 posts

Posted 30 June 2004 - 10:00 AM

QUOTE
RichFitz, That looks alot like this one someone sent me to put on my site a year or so ago


Same gun, same person. I posted some pics a few years ago as a good friend wanted to buy the gun from me and I wanted to know the value.

In addition to informing me of the unquieness of the piece (like the side keyhole charging slot) the board members correctly steered me into keeping the gun in my collection.

It is on Form 3 and NAC is listed as the manufacture, so we are guessing that it was an uncompleted/unregistered receiver inherited by NAC. The original owner bought it directly from NAC (I have the original Form 4) as it is seen in the photos. At the time of sale NAC gave no info on the piece but other board members said 6 or so guns were done like this as Demo pieces for NAC salesmen.

The pictures are quite old and taken with a bad digital camera. If members of this board are interested I will take some better pictuters this week.


  • 0

#62 21 smoker

21 smoker

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 1333 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West coast ,FL
  • Interests:collecting nfa, old cars, huntin` n fishin`, reloading ammo

    NRA CERTIFIED INSTRUCTOR
    MVPA RESTORATION MEMBER
    MARINE CORP LEAGUE PISTOL TEAM MEMBER

Posted 30 June 2004 - 03:44 PM

RichFitz,..of course we are interested in more pics...that is a very unique piece...thanks for sharing...have you ever shot it?....how does it run?...some test firing shots would also be cool,my .02, wink.gif
  • 0

#63 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3453 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 30 June 2004 - 04:56 PM

RF,
What is significant on this "NAC -45" is that Numrich either milled out the receiver, or it was never stamped to begin with, and marked "Caliber .45 Automatic Cartridge." Why he used the Colt spelling of "Calibre" instead of the Bridgeport/AO/Savage spelling of "Caliber" seems to signal a departure from his usual method of merely adding "NAC" to the receiver. Since this was obviously one of several "custom" editions of a Numrich TSMG, it arouses curiosity on how he would have marked the receivers of brand new semi and full auto versions of the "Thompson" if he had produced the West Hurley guns instead of Trask. It seemed Trask was content with the Bridgeport/AO/Savage spelling of "Caliber" as that is how he marked the WH guns.

  • 0

#64 TD.

TD.

    Respected Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2882 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 July 2004 - 06:22 AM

RichFitz – Thanks for the update on NAC – 45. So Numrich Arms Corporation is listed as the manufacturer. This may have been one of the receivers Numrich Arms Corporation found when it unpacked the crates or possibly a complete prototype M1 that Savage built when developing the M1 Thompson that never was serial numbered. The prototype theory could explain the Bridgeport and Calibre markings that Arthur picked up on. I wonder if it is the 45th NAC Thompson completed and sold by Numrich Arms Corporation. Hopefully, information about a few more NAC guns will be posted.

Full auto 45 – Thanks for the “big” picture. I now recall the earlier posts on this gun.

Arthur – The creating of a corporate entity to market the Thompson Submachine Gun and Semi-Automatic Carbines was both a business decision and a marketing decision. Since production was going to begin on new and old products, I assume a business decision was made to create a separate business to go fourth in this endeavor. The obvious reasons are tax purposes, liability concerns, insurance and what appears to be new owners (Trast and company). The point to follow in all of this is the Auto-Ordnance Corporation, West Hurley, New York was formed with all the proprietary and physical assets that Numrich Arms Corporation had purchased in 1951 from Fredrick Willis. This transfer of assets allowed the lineage to continue when Ira Trast came into the picture as the president of Auto-Ordnance Corporation, West Hurley, New York. I don’t know the details between Ira Trast and George Numrich on the sale and creation of the West Hurley Auto-Ordnance Corporation. I have always thought of them as joined at the hip so to speak since Trast was a long time employee of George Numrich. I also believe the West Hurley Auto-Ordnance Corporation was located on the same property as Numrich Arms Corporation in West Hurley, New York (seems like I read that somewhere but please correct me if I am wrong). I don’t think Trast, the West Hurley Auto-Ordnance Corporation or the subsequent sale to Kahr Arms have done anything to end the continuing lineage of what General Thompson started in Cleveland, OH. I don’t think too much detail has been written or recorded on these recent business decisions. I would guess in time all the information will come out.

However, let’s address a few more of your concerns. I can tell you are on the right path by your questions. As you can see, Trast and the West Hurley Auto-Ordnance Corporation did not have to make a deliberate path to the New York Auto-Ordnance Corporation. That path has always been clear. As the new president of a corporation that owned everything Numrich Arms Corporation once owned regarding the Thompson, Trast could have named this corporate entity anything he or the board wanted to. Staying with the old name was a brilliant marketing decision. What better advertisement than showcasing your proud heritage to the world. Of course, the location of the company had changed so the West Hurley address was put on the guns, literature and catalogs for all to see.

Russell Maguire’s son owns the Auto-Ordnance Corporation, New York, New York. I thought Russell Maguire changed the name of Auto-Ordnance Corporation to McGuire Industries, Inc when he relegated the tommy gun business to the Auto-Ordnance Division of McGuire Industries, Inc. That is interesting. Just out of curiosity, what does this corporation do? What is the corporate structure and purpose….and business plan? I assume this New York, New York corporation is not involved in the gun business since it sold off all the rights to the Thompson Submachine Gun years ago to Kilgore. As I stated earlier, I am not following the corporate entities. These are easy to create and change. I am following the Thompson Submachine Gun and all the rights that go with it that were sold off by McGuire to Kilgore in 1949 for a reported $385,000. I have no problem using the word “reported” for the selling price. What is uncontroverted is the sale.

Helmer’s book does show the continuing lineage from Cleveland to West Hurley. His reporting does not manufacture a problem that does not exist based on corporate names. As you know, it is from his book much of what I have written has been taken. I don’t see the word “replicas” in the Cox and Helmer books when referring to the Numrich Arms Corporation.

I can see you follow the lineage. I don’t think the corporate names really confuse anyone but only offer an excuse for those that do not want to accept the obvious. The real roadblock with the West Hurley Thompsons is clearly stated in the last sentence of one of your last posts. It has to do with the quality of the West Hurley Thompsons compared to the Colts and WW II Thompsons. I agree with you on this point. The West Hurley Thompsons are a disappointment in this area. However, considering what they originally retailed for, I am not too overbearing on this issue. I am grateful the Auto-Ordnance Corporation, West Hurley, New York gave us another approximate 4000 West Hurley Thompsons to play with. I would also like to know how many more NAC prefix and suffix Thompsons George and company built and sold, hence the real intent of this thread.

Any more NAC prefix or suffix Thompsons out there. We have compiled a lot of good information. Let’s add some more.
Thanks,


  • 0

#65 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3453 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 July 2004 - 04:55 PM

TD,
Would it make any difference in your mind that Roger Cox does refer to the WH “Thompson” as a “REPLICA?” Why would Cox, who makes a special note of thanks to Ira Trask in the preface of his book, then refer to the “Thompson’s” manufactured “under the name Auto Ordnance Corporation” as a “replica” five pages later? Wouldn’t Trask have taken umbrage to such a qualifying remark about the guns he was seven years into producing?

Now we know that Numrich sold the Kuwaitis 100 Thompson’s between 1951 and 1955. But then how could the Egyptians produce a .45-caliber “Thompson” with a cylindrical receiver marked “Auto-Ordnance Corp., Bridgeport, Connecticut," as described by Thomas Nelson in "The World's Submachine Guns," after Numrich had "control" of the company? Again, another instance where Numrich preferred to remain mute on matters concerning illegal appropriation of the company name he supposedly owned.

Also, all the information that Helmer obtained for his book about the hazy legitimate control over “Auto-Ordnance” since 1945 appear to consist of “seven letters from George Numrich Jr. written to Helmer, the Bob Zwirz ‘Don‘t Junk It; Shoot it!’ Gun World article of June, 1965. And an April, 1967 interview with Numrich, who apparently recounted the same info from the 1965 article. A 1958 Roger Marsh “American Rifleman” article about ”The Tommy Gun,” considers “the M1A1 as the last of the Thompson Submachine Guns.” Now, this was 17 years before the “new” WH guns made their appearance, but perhaps he would have the same sentiments as Cox about these “Thompson’s.”

Phil,
Your description of the West Hurley facility has considerably more than a simulacrum of reality. I visited that shack back in 1983. When I saw the conditions, I realized how the famed Thompson of John T, Marcellus, George Goll, Oscar Payne, Ted Eickhoff, and Tom F. Ryan, had been relegated to a hen house operation run by teenagers.

  • 0

#66 SecondAmend

SecondAmend

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 610 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 July 2004 - 05:12 PM

Arthur,

Rather than call any Thompson subgun a "replica", I prefer to think of the various Thompsons as having been from a "version", an "edition", or an "incarnation". No need to refer to "replicas" or "clones."

Thus, one can say, for example, in the M1 incarnation, the Thompson deleted the Blish lock. In another example, one can say, during production of the West Hurley version of the 1928 Thompson, the breech oiler was cost-reduced out of the assembly. In yet another example, in the 1919 edition of the Thompson subgun, no provision was made for a butt stock.

  • 0

#67 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3453 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 July 2004 - 05:34 PM

Second,
The term "replica" is not a derogatory expression. In fact, it can mean a copy or reproduction by the "original" artist. So if an artist can make a replica of their original painting, a gun produced 30 years from the time the name of the "Auto-Ordnance Corporation" was stamped on a receiver legally, it can't then be too much of a stretch to refer to the WH guns as such. It is certainly less inflammatory than the term "forgery." Consider that Cox didn't have any hesitation using the word to describe a gun produced by a man (Trask) he considered extremely helpful in the completion of his book.

The 1919 TSMG was a prototype. It didn't go into production. The M1/M1A1 was a Thompson variant, but one that was manifested out of expeditious cost-cutting. If some wish to anoint (erroneously) the Colt manufactured Thompson's as "replicas" to the 1919 model, then who can argue with the term being applied to the WH guns?

  • 0

#68 TD.

TD.

    Respected Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2882 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 July 2004 - 10:22 PM

PhilOhio - Thank you for sharing your visits with George Numrich and Ira Trast. This is one of your top ten posts (and you have had many good ones). This is very interesting reading and something I will save and refer to in the future. It is not to far off from what I envisioned, perhaps a little more rustic. I agree that no one really cared about the Thompson when George first acquired Auto-Ordnance from Willis - or for many years thereafter. Anyone that has been in business for themselves can appreciate the ups and downs of being a small businessman. First rule: your help gets paid first! Working for yourself and/or working for the public - you just don't understand what it is all about until you have done it. As I stated earlier, the quality issue with NAC and West Hurley Thompsons is something some people cannot accept and thus cause many of these manufactured problems to arise. I think everyone who likes the "tommy gun" - any version, model or variation - owes a great deal to George Numrich and Ira Trast. Thanks again Phil. Perhaps a thread for those who met George Numrich would be in order. I bet there are some good stories out there.

Colt1921A - Ron, you know everyone biggrin.gif Nice post. I also recognize Gordon for his book on Colt Thompsons. What a quest he is on. I can't believe everyone on this board does not have a copy. I can't wait for the next update.

Arthur - No, it really doesn't make any difference what Roger Cox calls West Hurley Thompsons. Again, we are not talking quality; we are talking ownership of the Thompson Submachine Gun and the continuing lineage of General Thompson's dream. I don't think Numrich Arms Corporation ever owned or claimed ownership of the Auto-Ordnance Corporation, New York, New York. What they did purchase, several owners down the chain, was the Auto-Ordnance Division of McGuire Industries, Inc. and all rights to the Thompson Submachine Gun. The Auto-Ordnance Corporation, New York, New York discarded the name Auto-Ordnance Corporation and became McGuire Industries, Incorporated. Please don't fall back into that trap of following the corporation names. Follow the business (or the Blish Pistol). You are now at the end of your journey. Some things may still be hazy to you, but these will clear up in time. Just knowing all these transfers were legitimate will keep you on the right path. It is great your concerns are now not over ownership and the continuing lineage, but on quality and names used to describe the NAC and West Hurley Thompsons. And that is all right. We probably agree on many of those issues.

I have always wondered about those 100 Kuwait Thompsons. This story goes hand in hand with how one account says Numrich Arms Corporation ended up with 86 complete guns/receivers when unpacking the assets of the former Auto-Ordnance Division of McGuire Industries, while another account says 200 complete guns/receivers were found. I would guess the prototypes would be included in those numbers. Perhaps the discrepancy is whether or not to count the Kuwait Thompsons. I just don’t know, but I would like to know more about those Kuwait Thompsons. As to Roger Marsh comments, he is right. The MIAI Thompson is the last production model of the Thompson Submachine Gun.

I doubt anyone knows the real story behind the cylindrical receiver in Egypt with the Bridgeport markings. However, how does a "crudely manufactured” receiver in a "small workshop in Egypt" concern George Numrich? I get the feeling George did not take many trips to Egypt. Maybe Numrich Arms Corporation sold the enterprising designer of this gun the Thompson barrel and magazine. Maybe the designer of this gun worked part-time for the Kilgore Manufacturing Company. I have heard of this Egyptian interest in the Thompson Submachine Gun somewhere before. Maybe this cylindrical receiver is why the deal fell through between Kilgore and the Egyptians. And by the time the Egyptians figured out what they made did not work, George was the proud owner of all the rights concerning the Thompson Submachine Gun – and would only deal with the Kuwaitis biggrin.gif Of course, it could have been just another in a long line of foreign copies of American guns where the markings are also copied. Yea, that would be my guess rolleyes.gif

Your comments about the hen house operations of Numrich Arms Corporation are simply wonderful. This statement, more so than any others, shows the world that you fully understand, but begrudgingly accept, the fact Numrich Arms Corporation was part of the continuing succession of General Thompson’s (and Marcellus, Goll, Payne, Eickhoff and Ryan) dream. This has made all this worthwhile.

Thanks – I have enjoyed the posts.


  • 0

#69 AZDoug

AZDoug

    Regular Member

  • Regular Group
  • 200 posts

Posted 07 July 2004 - 12:31 AM

QUOTE (Arthur Fliegenheimer @ Jul 1 2004, 02:55 PM)

Phil,
Your description of the West Hurley facility has considerably more than a simulacrum of reality. I visited that shack back in 1983. When I saw the conditions, I realized how the famed Thompson of John T, Marcellus, George Goll, Oscar Payne, Ted Eickhoff, and Tom F. Ryan, had been relegated to a hen house operation run by teenagers.

Actually, that shack, and the help, sounds a lot like JTT's AOC probaly was in the 1920's, when nobody wanted the gun, they most likely kept laying off help, and scrounged for orders. I don't think much has changed except the address.

Doug
  • 0

#70 TD.

TD.

    Respected Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2882 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 July 2004 - 09:05 PM

Doug,
That is an interesting observation and right on point. How about posting a few close up pictures of the the markings on NAC 15. It is definately an uniquely marked Thompson.

I will do a tally of everything that was reported in few days. However, as I bring this old thread back to the top of the board, does anyone have a NAC Thompson they would like to share information about. Each new gun tells us something. The early NACs probably number under 100. Let's see if we can add more to this continuing story of John Thompson's dream.
Thanks

  • 0

#71 AZDoug

AZDoug

    Regular Member

  • Regular Group
  • 200 posts

Posted 11 July 2004 - 09:30 PM

I have posted NAC15 pics here. I would look under the other NAC thread from a few months back.

Doug
  • 0

#72 ACARLG

ACARLG

    RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 225 posts

Posted 10 September 2009 - 11:46 PM

Delaware State Police, Wilmington riots, April 1968

from www.delawaretrooper.com
  • 0

#73 ACARLG

ACARLG

    RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 225 posts

Posted 10 September 2009 - 11:48 PM

Delaware State Police, April 1968, Wilmington riots


www.delawaretrooper.com
  • 0

#74 AdvancedArms

AdvancedArms

    Member

  • Regular Group
  • 47 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittston, PA

Posted 11 September 2009 - 12:22 AM

I may as well add to the record.


I have a NAC suffix gun.


Savage - Late 41 / Early 42.

RLB, GEG, and Ordnance marked.

Matching lower.

NAC suffix on upper and lower.

Original finish.



It became a PD gun in 1964 and was sold to an individual in 1989.




Had a crossbolt stock, "M" grip, "M" forend, a few AOC parts in the lower, and blued bolt.


I have been able to aquire and install all the correct Savage/Stevens parts, including non-crossbolt Savage stock.
She is back to original factory config and glory and she runs like a top.

I just suprised her is a excellent condition Bridgeport address drum.

Edited by AdvancedArms, 11 September 2009 - 12:22 AM.

  • 0

#75 TD.

TD.

    Respected Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2882 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 September 2009 - 09:48 AM

ACARLG,
Very nice pictures - thanks for posting.

Advanced Arms,
It sounds like you have an imported Thompson that was at some point in time sold by Numrich Arms Corporation, probably to the Police Department (only a guess on my part). Does it have the Bridgeport address or New York address? Is the serial number under 100,000?

This is an old thread that I had forgotten about. I used to enjoy bantering with Arthur about the succession of the Thompson gun and the NAC Thompson's. It was this Board and threads like this (See the REPLICA thread) that led me to research the Thompson from the 1949 to 1951 time frame. Very little was known or had been written about the sale of the Thompson by Maguire Industries, the Frederic Willis connection and the purchase by George Numrich that spurred an IRS ATTD investigation. The results of my efforts can be read in The Ultimate Thompson Book, by Tracie Hill and many other contributing authors.

Question: Does anyone know RichFitz? Or how to get in touch with him? I have a few items about NAC 45 I would like to discuss. If anyone can help, I would be most grateful.

Thanks!

  • 0

#76 AdvancedArms

AdvancedArms

    Member

  • Regular Group
  • 47 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittston, PA

Posted 12 September 2009 - 11:13 PM

QUOTE (TD. @ Sep 12 2009, 10:48 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
ACARLG,
Very nice pictures - thanks for posting.

Advanced Arms,
It sounds like you have an imported Thompson that was at some point in time sold by Numrich Arms Corporation, probably to the Police Department (only a guess on my part). Does it have the Bridgeport address or New York address? Is the serial number under 100,000?

Thanks!




It is a Bridgeport address Savage.

The serial # is S340XXX
  • 0