Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Congrats Jim!


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 Bob

Bob

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 697 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wa. and AZ.

Posted 21 June 2005 - 04:33 PM

I know you always tell me "ya didn't pay too much, ya just bought too early". The new owner did get a nice original gun.




Thompson Sold
  • 0

#2 philasteen

philasteen

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Board Donor
  • 1118 posts

Posted 21 June 2005 - 04:35 PM

Is that the original rear sight?

user posted image
  • 0

#3 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3453 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 June 2005 - 06:00 PM

The most "original" feature for this M1 TSMG is the absurd price if the buyer actually laid down for that $20K figure. Characterizing 250,000 AOC M1's as "rare", whether or not most were re stamped "A1" after the 320,000 serial number range, is a corruption of the word. The "M1" stamp is unusually faint and the unprotected Lyman sight looks like it was substituted for the protected rear sight yesterday, which is peculiar since an M1 in that serial number range would have had a protected sight. Since the inspector marks are not shown in the pics it is difficult to determine if the Du-Lite finish is "original." These marks should not be finished over.
  • 0

#4 Mike Hammer

Mike Hammer

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 768 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Louisiana
  • Interests:Travel, sun worshiper, margaritas, hot chicks, painting, scuba diving, movies, collecting movie memorabilia and autographs, guns, hot chicks, micro-beers, hot chicks, and did I say hot chicks?

Posted 21 June 2005 - 06:13 PM

Arthur is right, that is an absurdly inflated price, even in today's market. But hey, if the owner is pleased with what he got for that price, it's his money. laugh.gif

Mike Hammer


  • 0

#5 Cheesebeast

Cheesebeast

    Member

  • Regular Group
  • 55 posts

Posted 22 June 2005 - 03:37 PM

My M1 has an identical rear sight, and it has bright rivet heads on it. It is an original Dulite gun. The non-cross bolt reinforced stock is a reasonable indicator that this was probably what it was advertised to be. Could it be a parts puppy? Maybe. But probably not.

Cheese
  • 0

#6 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3453 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 June 2005 - 04:06 PM

Cheesebeast,

What is your M1's serial number and are the inspector initials stamp down to the bare metal? Judging whether this TSMG was ever refinished by the all too frequently substituted cross bolt/non cross bolt stock is certainly misleading just as the application or absence of paddle or pin type selectors. One would think the seller would depict photos in the ad of the tell tale markings that would be much more conclusive as to the "originality" of the finish.

  • 0

#7 jim

jim

    Regular Member

  • Regular Group
  • 160 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Northwest Washington state
  • Interests:Class 2 manufacturer but mostly deal in and do transfers of Class 3 stuff. Benchmark Barrels works under my FFL and manufactures match grade rifle barrels.

Posted 22 June 2005 - 05:28 PM

QUOTE (Bob @ Jun 21 2005, 04:33 PM)
I know you always tell me "ya didn't pay too much, ya just bought too early". The new owner did get a nice original gun.





Thanks Bob, the individual that bought my rare, original, non-rebuilt, excellent condition M1 was mighty thorough in his inspection of this M1. He is an experienced WWII machine gun collector. I dismantled it for him and he personally inspected each part to be sure it was what I claimed it to be.
I really didn't want to drop the price at all but he caught me at a weak moment during our numerous telephone conversations after his personal visit with my M1, so I knocked $500 off. I'm kind of sorry to see it go, I know I'm never going to find another like this one again. sad.gif

P.S.
Frank's book AMERICAN THUNDER/AMERICAN THUNDER II was a real asset in discovering the rarity of this gun. I would have had no idea of the rarity of the AOC M1's in the 320,000 serial number range that were not remarked M1A1 and the fact that this gun appears to have never been rebuilt was just "icing on the cake"! smile.gif
  • 0

#8 John Jr

John Jr

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 1956 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mena, Arkansas, USA
  • Interests:Plenty

Posted 22 June 2005 - 05:47 PM

QUOTE (jim @ Jun 22 2005, 04:28 PM)
QUOTE (Bob @ Jun 21 2005, 04:33 PM)
I know you always tell me "ya didn't pay too much, ya just bought too early". The new owner did get a nice original gun.





Thanks Bob, the individual that bought my rare, original, non-rebuilt, excellent condition M1 was mighty thorough in his inspection of this M1. He is an experienced WWII machine gun collector. I dismantled it for him and he personally inspected each part to be sure it was what I claimed it to be.
I really didn't want to drop the price at all but he caught me at a weak moment during our numerous telephone conversations after his personal visit with my M1, so I knocked $500 off. I'm kind of sorry to see it go, I know I'm never going to find another like this one again. sad.gif

P.S.
Frank's book AMERICAN THUNDER/AMERICAN THUNDER II was a real asset in discovering the rarity of this gun. I would have had no idea of the rarity of the AOC M1's in the 320,000 serial number range that were not remarked M1A1 and the fact that this gun appears to have never been rebuilt was just "icing on the cake"! smile.gif

Congrats Jim! Nice sale. Arthur Flemslinger can get stuffed. Hes just a purist colt prick anyway and could care less about the military series of Thompsons. rolleyes.gif

Collectors are finally figuring out what a collectable TSMG really is. Military stuff.

Once again nice sale and we should start seeing the 1928 Savage and AOC guns in the upper 20's. If I had a 1928 for sale I would be asking 28+ for it.

Good job sir!!!




  • 0

#9 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3453 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 June 2005 - 08:14 PM

QUOTE
Collectors are finally figuring out what a collectible TSMG really is. Military stuff.
JJ

Hey JJ,
The Colt TSMG is the original "military" TSMG. It accompanied the Marines in Nicaragua in 1926 and the 1928 "U.S. Navy" Colt TSMG is self explanatory.

If a collector paid an extra $5K for an M1 TSMG sans an "A1" stamp then maybe Colt TSMG's without a "JHB" stamp are also going to command a premium. But considering the price, one might think that it was Gen. George S. Patton's personal weapon.

Her is Iannamico's reference to missing "A1" stamps from his book:

"A few Auto-Ordnance, Bridgeport manufactured M1 marked TSMG's were noted in the 320,000 range without the A1 suffix added. Oddly, in the prior serial number ranges virtually all the Auto Ordnance guns had the A1 suffix added by hand stamping, and all the guns after the 320,00 range had the A1 designation added. One possible explanation could be that there was a temporary shortage of M1A1 bolts during that period and the M1 bolts not used earlier were used in their place."

So how many is a "few" M1's in the 320,000 range that were un marked with the A1 designation? Probably more than the entire production run of Colt TSMG's.

  • 0

#10 John Jr

John Jr

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 1956 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mena, Arkansas, USA
  • Interests:Plenty

Posted 22 June 2005 - 11:00 PM

QUOTE (Arthur Fliegenheimer @ Jun 22 2005, 07:14 PM)
QUOTE
Collectors are finally figuring out what a collectible TSMG really is. Military stuff.


Hey JJ,
The Colt TSMG is the original "military" TSMG. It accompanied the Marines in Nicaragua in 1926 and the 1928 "U.S. Navy" Colt TSMG is self explanatory.


Missed the point again as usual.

THE SAVAGE AND AOC MILITARY GUNS ARE FAR MORE COLLECTALBE THAN cOLT STUFF.

Read the above line again....

THE SAVAGE AND AOC MILITARY GUNS ARE FAR MORE COLLECTALBE THAN cOLT STUFF.
THE SAVAGE AND AOC MILITARY GUNS ARE FAR MORE COLLECTALBE THAN cOLT STUFF.
THE SAVAGE AND AOC MILITARY GUNS ARE FAR MORE COLLECTALBE THAN cOLT STUFF.
THE SAVAGE AND AOC MILITARY GUNS ARE FAR MORE COLLECTALBE THAN cOLT STUFF.
THE SAVAGE AND AOC MILITARY GUNS ARE FAR MORE COLLECTALBE THAN cOLT STUFF.
THE SAVAGE AND AOC MILITARY GUNS ARE FAR MORE COLLECTALBE THAN cOLT STUFF.
THE SAVAGE AND AOC MILITARY GUNS ARE FAR MORE COLLECTALBE THAN cOLT STUFF.

Just in case you missed it....


  • 0

#11 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3453 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 June 2005 - 11:55 PM

JJ,
Repetition doesn't make it so. If the general NFA buying public agreed with you then WWII TSMG's would command way more than the Colt TSMG's. Not only are they not even close in value currently, they never were and will never be. The only fathomable reason why a WWII M1 TSMG might bring a $20K price, besides the NFA allure, is not because of the WWII heritage, but if it played a particular role in a particular battle and was thereby documented. WWII M1/M1A1 TSMG's are available in relatively large numbers (compared to 1928's) to accommodate interested buyers. Even after "Kelly's Heroes," "Private Ryan," and "Band of Brothers" show cased the M1/M1A1 TSMG their "collectability" was always subservient to the 1928. Does this $19,500 price for this all "original" M1 change that equation? Only in that Colt TSMG's can be advertised for $40K without accessories and use the sale price of Jim's M1 as a guide.

I was never dissing the "collectability" and overall historical significance of the WWII TSMG. My brief was with the "rare" appellation attached to an M1 TSMG without an "A1" stamping. I believe even you have remarked on this very board that the M1/M1A1 TSMG has little in common with the 1921/28 TSMG.

  • 0

#12 Cheesebeast

Cheesebeast

    Member

  • Regular Group
  • 55 posts

Posted 23 June 2005 - 09:00 AM

Howdy Arthur,

My M1 is in the 2xxx range. It was Savage made and it is an Amnesty gun. The proof marks are visible bare metal. The weapon's lower and upper receivers match in serial number and all the parts are Savage marked. The only odd thing is the foreend which has a "5" on it instead of an "S". I read somewhere (Frank's books?) that Stevens supplied some parts for Savage and their mark looks more like the number "5". That is supposition on my part.

I know the provenance (sp?) of my M1. I removed the non-cross bolt stock on the weapon and found an extra serial number on the lower receiver. It matches the other serial numbers, but it's location is in the same place that the serial numbers were on the 1928s. The stock of my M1 had been on there for a long time, as the wood swelled and the serial number was impressed into the stock. The early manufacture of my M1 would probably explain this "holdover" procedure.

The lower has paddles, not pins incidentally.

The rivets on the rear sight are "bright". They may not have taken bluing well or the rear sight was added after the receiver was blued. I don't remember ever seeing pictures of a rack of thompson receivers coming out of the bluing tank. That would tell if the sights were added prior or after bluing.

I am not a Thompson expert nor do I play one on television. Most of this stuff is minutae to me.

Cheers,
Cheesebeast

  • 0

#13 gijive

gijive

    Respected Member

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

Posted 23 June 2005 - 09:59 AM

QUOTE (Cheesebeast @ Jun 23 2005, 09:00 AM)
The only odd thing is the foreend which has a "5" on it instead of an "S".  I read somewhere (Frank's books?) that Stevens supplied some parts for Savage and their mark looks more like the number "5". 

I know the provenance (sp?) of my M1.  I removed the non-cross bolt stock on the weapon and found an extra serial number on the lower receiver.  It matches the other serial numbers, but it's location is in the same place that the serial numbers were on the 1928s.  The stock of my M1 had been on there for a long time, as the wood swelled and the serial number was impressed into the stock.  The early manufacture of my M1 would probably explain this "holdover" procedure.

Cheesebeast,

Your are correct the square looking "S" is Stevens manufacture, a sister company of savage Arms.

The M1/M1A1 series of guns did not have the serial number roll stamped under the butt stock. Early guns had the serial number stamped on the bottom of the trigger guard where it meets the rear wood grip. This procedure was discontinued and the majority of M1/M1A1 Thompsons do not have a serial number on the grip frame. Some M1's have been observed with a serial number stamped under the butt stock, but this could have been done during a rebuild or at a unit armorer's level for whatever reason.

It was not a "holdover" from the 1928 production and was not done during the manufacturing process.
  • 0

#14 Cheesebeast

Cheesebeast

    Member

  • Regular Group
  • 55 posts

Posted 23 June 2005 - 11:35 AM

Howdy GI,

My M1 has a serial number on the trigger guard and a serial number (both match) under the buttstock. Why? I dunno. It is an early M1. I suspected that as the position was the same for the 1928 it was holdover procedure on the early M1s.

Thanks,
Cheese
  • 0

#15 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3453 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 June 2005 - 11:43 AM

Cheesebeast,

Your Savage 2000 serial range M1 appears to be equipped exactly as one would expect. As G.I. Jive said, the added serial number under the stock is peculiar. It may have been added during a rebuild, but I can't fathom why an additional serial number would be needed when their was an existing factory number already on the trigger guard. Since the rebuild marks are applied to the stock, it is not always a sure fire way to determine if a TSMG was rebuilt since there are tons of non cross-bolt stocks floating around. It wouldn't take 25 or 50 years for the serial number to be impressed onto the wood. That could happen in single digit years depending on how the weapon was stored.

But your bare metal proof stampings seem to indicate a non rebuild. I suppose those could be altered as well by scraping down the initials, but why would someone go through the trouble when this sort of minutia was dismissed by an indifferent market buying these items. Since the receiver underneath the rear sight would be blued, and the blued sight and rivets added later, the bright rivets on your correct Lyman unprotected sight is odd.

But it does sound like your Savage M1 finish and markings is almost a xeroxed description of Jim's AO TSMG, only in a much lower serial number.

I think Frank needs to shed some light on the bright sight rivets and the extra serial number underneath the frame. It doesn't make sense that the only unfinished external parts of a military TSMG were the rivets. If the Colt and Savage 1928 rivets were finished at the factory, why wouldn't Savage/AO M1/M1A1 rivets also be finished? Who needs the reflective properties in combat? Again if someone were after subterfuge, omitting the bluing from the glaringly exposed sight rivets seems too obvious.

Perhaps the sight was bent at some point and replaced with the same type Lyman. That would account for the unfinished rivets and also the lack of a general rebuild. Those sights did bend easily which is why they were substituted for the non Lyman ears version.

  • 0

#16 Cheesebeast

Cheesebeast

    Member

  • Regular Group
  • 55 posts

Posted 23 June 2005 - 02:32 PM

Howdy Arthur,

It certainly is possible the sight was replaced. I can imagine it snagged pretty easily. On your Colt how are the rivets finished? Cold blued or painted?

Unfortunately I only have a sample of one to go by, so I can't really add much meaningful input on this stuff.

I suppose I could tell my wife I need to buy a few more Thompsons for statistical reasons...

Cheers,
Cheesebeast
  • 0