Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

S/n Listed As "destroyed", But I Own It


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 SIGNUTZ

SIGNUTZ

    Long Time Member

  • Regular Group
  • 11 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 February 2005 - 08:15 PM

.


Edited by SIGNUTZ, 28 July 2013 - 10:59 AM.

  • 0

#2 LIONHART

LIONHART

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 2785 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Thompsons of course. All Manufactures and Models.

Posted 01 February 2005 - 08:21 PM

Cox made many mistakes in his Book...Now, find yourself a proper Colt '21 Stock
  • 0

#3 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3453 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 February 2005 - 10:12 PM

First off, Cox was the only guy on the planet who thought enough about Colt TSMG's to devote a book on the subject. Naturally there would be mistakes in his book since thousands of people have since read it and could offer more expansive additional information. But I am not aware of any portion of his book or addendum list that makes mention of any serial number Colt TSMG that was destroyed.

Now the authors who followed Cox such as Hill, Richardson, Iannamico, and Herigstad, also committed factual errors, errors of omission, or just plain confusion over their misidentified cut lines under the photos in their respective publications.

But if your particular Colt TSMG was listed as destroyed, it would no doubt have been in Gordon Herigstad's compilation of serial numbers. The numbers he listed in your serial range of 1928 Navy's that were identified as "destroyed," or "possibly destroyed," such as 4994, 4225, and 4471 where either FBI TSMG"s or property of the U.S. Navy. How would a civilian get a hold of a transferable FBI TSMG?

If you could tell us exactly which serial number you have it would help solve the mystery and the error could be corrected.

  • 0

#4 SIGNUTZ

SIGNUTZ

    Long Time Member

  • Regular Group
  • 11 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 February 2005 - 10:37 PM

.


Edited by SIGNUTZ, 28 July 2013 - 10:59 AM.

  • 0

#5 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3453 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 February 2005 - 10:50 PM

Signutz,
Well then, that makes a lot more sense that the error was in Hill's book. Cox has that TSMG as being formally of the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department of Beaumont, Texas. Herigstad also has that info and that the PD traded it back in 1989 for a more modern weapon and that it was last advertised for sale back in 1996 by Long Mountain Outfitters located in Maine.

Hill's serial number listings in "The American Legend" is rampant with omissions and confusing dates of manufacture and shipping. Now we know the "destroyed" appellation status for #4659 can also be added to the swelling pile of inaccuracies found in the book.

I guess this is at odds with the seller stipulating his Colt TSMG was in a private collection for the last 40 years. GH could have his dates mixed up as well.

  • 0

#6 SIGNUTZ

SIGNUTZ

    Long Time Member

  • Regular Group
  • 11 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 February 2005 - 09:23 AM

.


Edited by SIGNUTZ, 28 July 2013 - 11:00 AM.

  • 0

#7 gijive

gijive

    Respected Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2402 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois
  • Interests:Thompson SMG, WWII, Firearms in general.

Posted 02 February 2005 - 09:45 AM

QUOTE (SIGNUTZ @ Feb 1 2005, 08:15 PM)
I have a mint condition '21/'28 TSMG that has a S/N in the 4000 range that Roger Cox's book lists as destroyed. All S/N's match on all of the parts (wood buttstock got replaced at some point with a non-Colt anchor marked one) and the gun was last held in a private collection for nearly forty years.

Arthur has already expounded very thoroughly on the status of your gun. My question, though, would be if Gordon Herigstad's information in his book is correct (and he is exceptionally thorough), then it would seem the person selling the gun made up a nice story to go with it to explain the "mint" condition. A former PD gun and one that has changed hands several times over the years would likely not be "mint." You may want to explore the possibility that the gun has been refinished. Especially, since it didn't come with an origiinal Colt buttstock,either. In other words, if the PD never shot the gun and kept it in the vault for years, hence the "mint" condition, how did they lose the buttstock and replace it with a WWII variety?

Just something to think about.
  • 0

#8 SIGNUTZ

SIGNUTZ

    Long Time Member

  • Regular Group
  • 11 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 February 2005 - 10:26 AM

.


Edited by SIGNUTZ, 28 July 2013 - 11:00 AM.

  • 0

#9 gijive

gijive

    Respected Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2402 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois
  • Interests:Thompson SMG, WWII, Firearms in general.

Posted 02 February 2005 - 11:03 AM

QUOTE (SIGNUTZ @ Feb 2 2005, 10:26 AM)
The thing is, this gun's finish is so perfect and the COLT color is 100% correct that it really does appear to be a true Colt Blue.

Signutz,

If your gun is original, that's great. If not, then I would enjoy it just the same. I am not such a purist that I would reject a refinished gun. If the gun needed refinishing, then as far as I'm concerned, it would still be a fine collectible, if every thing else is correct. If the finish is original then you are lucky to have such a fine gun.

I was just trying to suggest that guns with missing original parts (buttstock) and formerly used by police agencies are rarely in "mint" condition. I hope you are able to determine the origin and history of your gun to your satisfaction. Good luck!
  • 0

#10 philasteen

philasteen

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Board Donor
  • 1118 posts

Posted 02 February 2005 - 11:11 AM

Jerry Prasser at Recon Ord had Colt stocks not too long ago, but brace yourself for the price!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recon Ordnance Company - Jerry Prasser
Specialties: Class 3
P.O. Box 829
Fond du Lac, WI 54936
Phone: (920) 922-1515
FAX: (920) 922-0737
E-mail: reconordREMOVETHISSPAMGARD@aol.com
Homepage: N/A

  • 0

#11 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3453 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 February 2005 - 11:48 AM

Signut,
Indeed, some Remington butt stocks didn't leave the factory with an anchor, just as some Colt TSMG's left the factory without a "JHB" stamp. So you might still have an authentic Remington stock. Do the numbers on the butt plate match the butt stock? Are there any numbers marked on the slide? Is the slide latch nickel?

There is no public record of when this PD originally purchased this weapon from Auto-Ord. Judging by the other sales of Colt's in this serial range, even though they were not sold in any particular order, it seems likely it was sometime between 1928 and 1934. Since this Colt was in the PD's armory for 50 or 60 years, and only in private hands for 15, it could well be of original finish. Apparently this PD resisted the advances of Cox, Earl and other dealers combing Texas for TSMG's back in the 1960's and 1970's. But again, when an officer took this gun out (one of at least four Colt's the department owned and they may have owned WWII TSMG's as well) for shooting or cleaning, he could have substituted a butt stock from a Savage TSMG that was disassembled at the same time for the Colt one. The scenarios are endless.

This is why GH's accountability of where these Colt TSMG's (even if the book has less than 3000 of the 15,000 covered) have been over the last 80 odd years is very valuable. When a seller has a serial number that has been MIA since 1921/22, any story can be fabricated to suit the price tag. Had your seller checked these reference books before resorting to apocryphal hyperbole, he would have discovered that a Colt TSMG that was still the property of the original PD purchaser up till 15 years ago, is a better story.

G.I Jive raises the question as to whether a a TSMG owned by a PD for most of it's lifetime would be in a better preserved condition than a PD TSMG that was in the possession of several private parties since the 60's or 70's. I imagine that would depend on the individual PD and how much use the TSMG had back in the 1920's and 1930's when the weapon would have been handled the most.

Of course, depending on the PD"S chief's, any officer could have taken the weapon out of the vault for target practice at any time up to the point of sale. Judging by the look of the riot guns in PD cars, protecting the cosmetics of the weapon are not high priority. Civil servants that don't own their PD'S Colt TSMG were no doubt more inclined to be indifferent to kid glove treatment of the weapon than a private collector.

  • 0

#12 gijive

gijive

    Respected Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2402 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois
  • Interests:Thompson SMG, WWII, Firearms in general.

Posted 02 February 2005 - 12:19 PM

Signutz,

Arthur has provided you with good information. I don't have Gordon Herigstad's book in front of me to reference, but I wasn't aware when posting my response, that the agency that owned the guns also owned others. Arthur makes a good point about also owning later made Savage WWII production guns. The stock could have been easily switched, or, as he correctly points out, it could be an original Remingtom made stock without the anchor logo. An examination of the stock and serial number on the butt plate and stock, by someone knowledgable about the Colt/Remington buttstocks should be considered.
  • 0

#13 SIGNUTZ

SIGNUTZ

    Long Time Member

  • Regular Group
  • 11 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 February 2005 - 12:58 PM

.


Edited by SIGNUTZ, 28 July 2013 - 11:00 AM.

  • 0

#14 LIONHART

LIONHART

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 2785 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Thompsons of course. All Manufactures and Models.

Posted 02 February 2005 - 01:41 PM

Is there a way that you could post pics of this Gun? I can put them up here for you. My email: tsmg21a@aol.com
  • 0

#15 SIGNUTZ

SIGNUTZ

    Long Time Member

  • Regular Group
  • 11 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 February 2005 - 01:58 PM

.


Edited by SIGNUTZ, 28 July 2013 - 11:00 AM.

  • 0

#16 Sig

Sig

    Respected Member and Board Benefactor

  • Moderator
  • 1626 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 February 2005 - 09:33 PM

SIGNUTZ
I remember pca16 a member of this board having at one time original TSMG buttstocks available for sale.
I would try him if you are interested in finding an original.
you can email him through the members tab above
good luck

michael
  • 0

#17 LIONHART

LIONHART

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 2785 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Thompsons of course. All Manufactures and Models.

Posted 02 February 2005 - 09:37 PM

If the Colt '21 is in Mint Cond. why then, does it have WW2 Wood? Seems a little strange. I guess someone was awfully careful handling that Colt to replace it's Stocks!
  • 0