Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

Replica


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
560 replies to this topic

#21 Zamm

Zamm

    Respected Member & Artist

  • Regular Group
  • 831 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Long Island, New York
  • Interests:Thompsons, and all their goodies!<br>Obsolete Victorian Photomechanical processes,<br>Etching, Engraving and all Printmaking,<br>Entomology, specializing in Coleoptera,<br>Arachnology, specializing in Theraphosidae.

Posted 03 December 2005 - 04:07 PM

QUOTE
So I'm guessing no one here really knows exactly how many angels can actually dance on the head of a pin then?

Depends on your religion,
could be 14 or 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,346 wink.gif
Z
  • 0

#22 TD.

TD.

    Respected Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2882 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 December 2005 - 04:11 PM

iagree.gif
  • 0

#23 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3453 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 December 2005 - 04:30 PM

QUOTE
I submit that even today $385,000 is a lot of money; imagine what it represented in 1949. I think is ridiculous to think Kilgore paid that type of money for a few crates of parts and old machinery? Given the money involved, I submit the legal department of one of these parties drafted a contract of sale. I expect it was a very simple contract assigning all rights to the Thompson Submachine Gun from McGuire Industries to Kilgore Manufacturing.
TD

Maguire was a noted charlatan and crooked businessman. Remember that he was indicted and convicted for war profiteering and forced to pay the U.S. Government $5 million in profits.

His business dealings after WWII were also suspect. The fact that he duped Kilgore would be a typical manner in which Maguire knew how to conduct business. If at any time this mysterious contract that Maguire signed over to Kilgore promising all the rights to the name, patents, trademarks, etc, from the original Auto Ordnance Corporation ever materializes, then you will have a basis for your apocryphal story. But since Maguire Industries never made any firearms, and was the only entity that was active at the time of the sale to Kilgore, then by virtue of your own reasoning, Numrich/Trask would have only been authorized to stamp "Auto-Ordnance Division of Maguire Industries" on their receivers.


QUOTE
Thompson stated, to wit: "Numrich states that, since his company holds the patents, trademarks, etc. on the Thompson SMG, it is doubtful if any other company could produce a Thompson of any kind.”
TD

Except that there were folks using the Thompson name on their submachine guns (the Egyptian TSMG made after 1951), not to mention that Replica Arms was using the exact stampings on their models before Numrich/Trask even got into production in 1975. I wonder why Numrich never sued any entity using the name he "knew" was rightfully exclusively his own?

And to take for granted that Numrich was being frank about what he thought he bought from Willis may be quaint but not prudent.

Who would have though Randy "Duke" Cunningham, one of only two Vietnam aces, would have taken $2.5 million in bribes?


QUOTE
It really doesn't make any difference how Roger Cox or other noted authors describe a West Hurley Thompson. We are not talking quality; we are talking ownership of the Thompson Submachine Gun and the continuing lineage of General Thompson's dream.
TD

You seem to dismiss quality from the discussion as if it were not part and parcel of the original concept and development of the firearm. If John T. Thompson were alive when Trask produced his version of the TSMG in 1975 you don't think he would sue to get his name off the weapon?

QUOTE
Don’t get hooked into the trap of following the corporation names. Corporation names and re-organizations are easily done.  Always follow the business enterprise and rights – this will lead you to the right place. 
TD

That is only relevant if that new business ever had the rights to the original business to begin with.
  • 0

#24 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 03 December 2005 - 04:32 PM

Headlines we'd all like to see........

"MAN EVISCERATED BY LONE GUNMAN"

The days of Al Capone and John Dillinger were brought to the forefront of modern times here yesterday when a man was shot to death on a lonely streetcorner by an apparent madman weilding a "THOMPSON" Sub-Machine Gun.

The deceased, Arthur Fliegenheimer from the town of COLT, was nearly cut in half from the cascade of .45 bullets from the deadly weapon. Police counted 100 shell casings at the scene.

The accused gunman, Michael Hammer, a private detective from WEST HURLEY, is being held without bail after being picked up near the area by Colt police.

The police are not cetain as to the motive behind the slaying but the accused was led away by police muttering the words "how's that for a replica!" Police remain baffeled as to Mr. Hammer's words.

Some bystanders, only moments before the gunfire errupted, claim they saw Mr. Fliegenheimer approach some children at the corner of the street and proceed to open the flaps of his Burberry raincoat while eliciting the words, "Hey, want to see a "REAL" Thompson?". Yet others claim they heard him say the word "Johnson" instead of "Thompson". Perhaps we will never learn the full reasons behind this unusual and deadly attack. cop.gif

laugh.gif wink.gif


Mike Hammer




  • 0

#25 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3453 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 December 2005 - 04:47 PM

Mike Hammer,

By your logic, if a guy was clubbed to death with a MGC TSMG then it would also not be a replica since it was used in a lethal fashion.

Better stick to measuring Zelda's charms.

  • 0

#26 TD.

TD.

    Respected Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2882 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 December 2005 - 05:27 PM

Agree - Maguire was a noted charlatan and crooked businessman. Remember that he was indicted and convicted for war profiteering and forced to pay the U.S. Government $5 million in profits.

No information anywhere to show Maguire duped Kilgore. It is interesting how you agree the sale took place but cannot cope with the fact Kilgore bought it all. I don’t need a contract to make a common sense deduction on a $389,000 business transaction. His business dealings after WWII were also suspect. The fact that he duped Kilgore would be a typical manner in which Maguire knew how to conduct business. If at any time this mysterious contract that Maguire signed over to Kilgore promising all the rights to the name, patents, trademarks, etc, ever materializes, then you will have a basis for your apocryphal story.

It is immaterial why George Numrich did or did not enforce the rights he acquired when he purchased the assets of the Auto-Ordnance Division of Maguire Industries. You or I have no information to suggest approval was not given by George Numrich or purchased by the parties you reference. Except that there were folks using the Thompson name on their submachine guns (the Egyptian TSMG made after 1951), not to mention that Replica Arms was using the exact stampings on their models before Numrich/Trask even got into production in 1975. I wonder why Numrich never sued any entity using the name he "knew" was rightfully exclusively his own?

Please show me any information that indicates George Numrich was anything less than a good businessman and aboveboard. And to take for granted that Numrich was being frank about what he thought he bought from Willis may be quaint but not prudent.

??? (It is a little early to be drinking by my clock!) Who would have though Randy "Duke" Cunningham, one of only two Vietnam aces, would have taken $2.5 million in bribes?

No. John T. Thompson’s last name was a business asset that could be bought and sold. Go back and review my post concerning the sale of the Auto-Ordnance Division to Kilgore Manufacturing, et al. You seem to dismiss quality from the discussion as if it were not part and parcel of the original concept and development of the firearm. If John T. Thompson were alive when Trask produced his version of the TSMG in 1975 you don't think he would sue to get his name off the weapon?

Given the original purchase price, the fact the seller (Maguire Industries) has never claimed any ownership rights in what was sold in 1949 and George Numrich’s uncontroverted statements, I think the rights issue is well settled. That is only relevant if that new business ever had the rights to the original business to begin with.

It is just too easy to get to the truth when using facts. Just think, a West Hurley Thompson is directly related to the beloved Colt Thompson. Hey, I’m OK with that biggrin.gif
  • 0

#27 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 03 December 2005 - 07:41 PM

A. F.: It's Velda... man, not Zelda, whoooo now you really upset her, I'm gonna have to calm her down, come here doll....OOh, that's it's baby.

The point that this private dick was tryin to make was that nobody gives a rats behind if it's Colt or West Hurley thats stamped on the side, it's still a THOMPSON!, and they both do what they were intended to do, nobody's lookin at the tiny little side engravings when there looking at the business end of these choppers.


Mike H.
  • 0

#28 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3453 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 December 2005 - 08:36 PM

M.H.

I got F. Scott Fitzgerald's Zelda confused with Mickey Spillane's Velda. But let me Spillane it to you again. Even your drug induced alter ego Stacey Keach never saw the business end of a real McCoy TSMG so he probably couldn't care less who made it. But since the current NFA market seems to have propped up the WH version of the Thompson, perspective buyers might want to have more than a passing acquaintance with the genesis of the WH.

TD,

The Duke Cunningham reference was to illustrate that who would have thought an honorable guy like him would turn out to be the epitome of graft. I suggest that Numrich was not as ethical as you seem to recall or he would have insured that Trask stamped "Auto Ordnance Corporation of Maguire Industries" on his WH receivers, instead of the more cache loaded truncated name.

In your desperate effort to associate your beloved Numrich "Auto Ordnance Corporation" to the one that became extinct in 1944, you even disregard you own admission about the creation of an entirely different corporation that may or may not have been sold to Kilgore.

But perhaps the most glaring hole in your lineage tracing is your Kings new wardrobe avoidance of comparing the craftsmanship of the pre 1944 Thompson and the West Hurley version. It's a wonder why the Thompson name doesn't leap off of the Kahr receiver out of embarrassment.

If Maguire had not expired in 1966, but in 1976, he might well have had a bone to pick with Numrich/Trask when their WH TSMG rolled off the disassembly lines.

You also confuse General Thompson selling his name as a marketing tool to be emblazoned on his titular smg with what Numrich/Trask did to the reputation of that name. Forget Kahr for the time being. Marcellus did not want to enlist the help of Maguire, since he was no Thomas Ryan, but he was forced to abdicate control.

General Thompson was near death when this transaction occurred. Had WWII not guaranteed the TSMG's place in history, I wonder if he would have approved of Maguire's association with his namesake.

The only manufacturers of the TSMG we know for sure John Thompson was down with were Colt and Savage. His opinions on the Maguire AO produced TSMG's can only be speculative, but to guess about his opinions on WH and Kahr one would not require the services of a Kreskin.

You prefer to have faith in the arrangement conducted between Maguire and Kilgore where I prefer evidence. The fact that $365,000 changed hands is not proof of anything that would stand up in court, but it falls flat even in the court of public opinion as remarked by Cox, Herigstadt, Richardson and even Autoweapons.com. As for it passing the giggle test in historical circles, Helmer was nothing less than ambiguous as to the contract offered up to Kilgore by Maguire. And Helmer has never wavered from the replica appellation for the WH "Thompson."

  • 0

#29 treadhead

treadhead

    New Member

  • Regular Group
  • 11 posts

Posted 03 December 2005 - 08:47 PM

QUOTE (Mike Hammer @ Dec 3 2005, 07:41 PM)
A. F.: It's Velda... man, not Zelda, whoooo now you really upset her, I'm gonna have to calm her down, come here doll....OOh, that's it's baby.

The point that this private dick was tryin to make was that nobody gives a rats behind if it's Colt or West Hurley thats stamped on the side, it's still a THOMPSON!, and they both do what they were intended to do, nobody's lookin at the tiny little side engravings when there looking at the business end of these choppers.


Mike H.

Here's the way I look at the subject (Of replica's); late 19th century Colt '73 SAA's are out there for me to buy right now. If I want one for a shooter I'm still gonna pay 4-5 times what a very high quality Italian (Or American) REPLICA will cost me.

For a fraction of the cost I get to experience the feel, the smell, the sounds ect... of owning and shooting an original "peace-maker" (Or Schoefield, Thompson, MP-40 et al). What I "Lose" is the ability to look at the gun and wonder (And research) where it's been and who's used it over the decades (Alot of fun IMHO).

I think replica's are fine. A well maintained '21AC with provenance is awesome but, an NIB '78 WH/AO is AFFORDABLE (LOL) and will give me about 90% of the Thompson "Experience". I just won't be able to pretend (About the '78 WH) that my gun was at little bohemia (With the police) or guarding the door to some (Romantic) prohibition era warehouse. cool.gif
  • 0

#30 Whiskey Brother

Whiskey Brother

    Regular Member

  • Regular Group
  • 136 posts

Posted 03 December 2005 - 08:49 PM

Wow... There is quite a bit of history behind the Thompson and the Auto Ordnance Corporation that I didn't know about. You've sold me, the next book I intend to get is "The gun that made the 20's roar." and whatever other books I can find.

As somebody who has seen a lot of movies and movies being made, the term "replica" to me will always be the non-firing dummy gun they throw around instead of the real deal. But as I've already mentioned, the English language is complex, and what means one thing to me may mean something different to someone else...


  • 0

#31 TD.

TD.

    Respected Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2882 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 December 2005 - 10:20 PM

Whiskey Brother – You will certainly enjoy William J. Helmer’s, The Gun that made the Twenties Roar – Recommended, actually mandatory, reading for everyone.

Arthur, I really do enjoy this. Let see, where to begin...


Thanks for the explanation. I missed this because I have never seen anything to suggest George Numrich was anything other than a honest businessman. But more importantly, it is The Auto-Ordnance DIVISION of Maguire Industries. Of course, after the purchase, he was free to choose what business name he wanted along with the markings that would grace the Thompsons he manufactured. My comment about early drinking was out of line – I apologize. The Duke Cunningham reference was to illustrate that who would have thought a honorable guy like him would turn out to be the epitome of graft. I suggest that Numrich was not as ethical as you seem to recall or he would have insured that Trask stamped "Auto Ordnance Corporation of Maguire Industries" on his WH receivers, instead of the more cache loaded truncated name.

Kilgore did not purchase a corporation. It purchased all the rights and assets of the Auto-Ordnance Division of Maguire Industries. The Auto-Ordnance Corporation, New York, New York ceased to exist upon the creation of Maguire Industries. Think about the Thompson Automatic Arms Corporation came into existence when the Russell Maguire era began and was phased out when no longer needed. Again, don’t follow the corporation, follow the business enterprise and rights. In your desperate effort to associate your beloved Numrich "Auto Ordnance Corporation" to the one that became extinct in 1944, you even disregard you own admission about the creation of an entirely different corporation that may or may not have been sold to Kilgore.

No one has ever suggested the WWII or West Hurley Thompsons were made to the same standards as the Colt Thompson. However, craftsmanship has nothing to do with lineage. But perhaps the most glaring hole in your lineage tracing is your Kings new wardrobe avoidance of comparing the craftsmanship of the pre 1944 Thompson and the West Hurley version. It's a wonder why the Thompson name doesn't leap off of the Kahr receiver out of embarrassment.

Again, Maguire Industries sold everything related to the Thompson Submachine Gun to Kilgore Industries in 1949. Maguire Industries was out of the gun business. If Maguire had not expired in 1966, but in 1976, he might well have had a bone to pick with Numrich/Trask when their WH TSMG rolled off the disassembly lines.

Irregardless of your opinion of quality, John T. Thompson did sell his name. George Numrich purchased the name and everything else from Fredrick Willis – end of story. Agree that Marcellus Thompson did not want to sell out to Russell Maguire - but it happened. You also confuse General Thompson selling his name as a marketing tool to be emblazoned on his titular smg with what Numrich/Trask did to the reputation of that name. Forget Kahr for the time being. Marcellus did not want to enlist the help of Maguire, since he was no Thomas Ryan, but he was forced to abdicate control.

Arthur, interesting topic for another thread. However, the facts are Maguire did become the President of Auto-Ordnance Corporation, New York, New York. General Thompson was near death when this transaction occurred. Had WWII not guaranteed the place in history for the TSMG, I wonder if he would have approved of Maguire's association with his namesake.

Given the amount of money involved between two business entities is why I know a contract for sale was drafted and executed prior to payment. That is how incorporated businesses operate when making a business deal involving that much money – shareholder responsibilities and all. I am sure you understand. Again, we are talking about lineage, not quality or name calling. And it was Helmer that connected the dots so everyone could trace the lineage. This keeps these types of transactions out of the courts for the most part. You prefer to have faith in the arrangement conducted between Maguire and Kilgore where I prefer evidence. The fact that $365,000 changed hands is not proof of anything that would stand up in court, but it falls flat even in the court of public opinion as remarked by Cox, Herigstadt, Richardson and even Autoweapons.com. As for it passing the giggle test in historical circles, Helmer was nothing less than ambiguous as to the contract offered up to Kilgore by Maguire. And Helmer has never wavered from the replica appellation for the WH "Thompson."

I cannot believe you are citing Autoweapons.com as a historical reference in the history of the Thompson Submachine Gun. I think I will let the court of public opinion decide on the relevance of that citation.
  • 0

#32 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 03 December 2005 - 10:44 PM

A.F., Spillane it to me again....I'm rolling on that one, didn't know you actually had a sence of humor! We all ya love la baby. laugh.gif

Hammer
  • 0

#33 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3453 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 December 2005 - 11:44 PM

M.H.

I don't take anything seriously except German Shepherds. But I do like to keep the historical records straight concerning where the Auto Ordnance Corporation Thompson Submachine Gun ended and the facsimile Numrich/Trask WH "Thompson" began.


TD,

The quality of the product produced out of lineage may have nothing to do with human offspring, but inanimate objects don't have a helluva lot else to substantiate or endorse them.

I did make reference to "Auto Ordnance DIVISION of Maguire Industries" in my previous thread but inadvertently substituted CORPORATION for DIVISION in my subsequent thread. But to say that Numrich/Trask had the Okey Dokey to arbitrarily revert the name back to Auto Ordnance Corporation whenever they felt like it for their version of the Thompson is not only fraudulent but intended as subterfuge.

I suggest that all the bad press Maguire received in the 1950's and 60's had a deleterious effect on his name. Numrich/Trask pulled a fast PR maneuver when they decided to reinvent the Auto Ordnance Corporation out of hole cloth omitting Maguire's name.

You say:

"Given the original purchase price, the fact the seller (Maguire Industries) has never claimed any ownership rights in what was sold in 1949 and George Numrich’s uncontroverted statements, I think the rights issue is well settled."

and then you say:

"It is immaterial why George Numrich did or did not enforce the rights he acquired when he purchased the assets of the Auto-Ordnance Division of Maguire Industries."

Your ratiocination boldly says forget about the inconsistencies of Numrich not suing over the name, but pay closer attention at the Maguire family not suing over the name.

If Maguire had actually sold Auto Ordnance to Willis, why does the Maguire family still own AO to this day? The actual name may have been abandoned, but that does not mean that Numrich/Trask had any more legal claim on the name than anyone else who wanted to manufacture a .45 smg using that name.

Why does Helmer refer to the N.A.C. TSMG as follows:

"Numrich's "new" Thompson's are identical to earlier models and are made up largely from surplus parts, with the exception of frames and receivers. These are machined as needed in the company's shop and bear most of the ORIGINAL Auto Ordnance markings. The initials N.A.C. have been added to the markings."

If Maguire sold Kilgore the exact same company that produced the Thompson why would Helmer regard the Colt/Savage/AO receiver Auto Ordnance markings with the "original" disclaimer appellation giving way to the obvious implication that Numrich/Trask's "Auto Ordnance Corporation" markings are indeed not sanctioned or authorized by merely purchasing a bunch of crates

  • 0

#34 rhlowe

rhlowe

    Member

  • Regular Group
  • 36 posts

Posted 04 December 2005 - 06:40 AM

Arthur:

If all this is correct, this would make a WH 28 no different than a Richardson 80% receiver, correct? With the exception of the paper they are both replicas of the TSMG?

Thanks,
Richard
  • 0

#35 TD.

TD.

    Respected Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2882 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 04 December 2005 - 10:02 AM

Interesting – I would guess you have a book by the The Monks of New Skete on your bookshelf. I don't take anything seriously except German Shepherds.

The Auto-Ordnance Corporation, New York, NY did end when it was re-organized into Maguire Industries. The Thompson business was relegated to a division of Maguire Industries named appropriately, the Auto-Ordnance Division of Maguire Industries. This division or part of Maguire Industries was later sold to Kilgore, who then sold it to Willis, who then sold it to George Numrich. The lineage is intact for all to see. But I do like to keep the historical records straight concerning where the Auto Ordnance Corporation Thompson Submachine Gun ended and the facsimile Numrich/Trask WH "Thompson" began.

Quality is not the issue in this post. It is the established lineage of the first prototype Thompson to the last West Hurley Thompson. I agree the quality of every West Hurley Thompson produced is not equal to what Colt, Auto-Ordnance (Bridgeport) and Savage Arms produced. However, I doubt that Colt could match the quality of the 1920 Colt Thompsons in the 1970’s. The quality of the product produced out of lineage may have nothing to do with human offspring, but inanimate objects don't have a helluva lot else to substantiate or endorse them.

Understand, however, the distinction is important. Numrich/Trask did not revert back to the Auto-Ordnance Corporation, New York, NY. They formed a new corporation from the assets purchased from the former Auto-Ordnance Division of Maguire Industries and named it the Auto-Ordnance Corporation, West Hurley, New York. I am sure this was marketing decision and a good one at that. No subterfuge, just good business sense since they are a successor to what General Thompson started in Cleveland. I did make reference to "Auto Ordnance DIVISION of Maguire Industries" in my previous thread but inadvertently substituted CORPORATION for DIVISION in my subsequent thread. But to say that Numrich/Trask had the Okey Dokey to arbitrarily revert the name back to Auto Ordnance Corporation whenever they felt like it for their version of the Thompson is not only fraudulent but intended as subterfuge.

Again, if you follow the corporations you will be misguided. See my posts above on this subject. I suggest that all the bad press Maguire received in the 1950's and 60's had a deleterious effect on his name. Numrich/Trask pulled a fast PR maneuver when they decided to reinvent the Auto Ordnance Corporation out of hole cloth omitting Maguire's name.

Again, I do not know if Numrich ever sued or was paid compensation for the use of any of the assets he purchased from Fredrick Willis – and neither does anyone else. What is known is George Numrich claimed all ownership rights to the Thompson Submachine Gun through his statements, business demeanor and his sales flyers, catalogs, products and advertisements. And he was right – Maguire Industries sold General Thompson’s name and everything else – George Numrich purchased it – lineage intact - end of story.
You say:

"Given the original purchase price, the fact the seller (Maguire Industries) has never claimed any ownership rights in what was sold in 1949 and George Numrich’s uncontroverted statements, I think the rights issue is well settled."

and then you say:

"It is immaterial why George Numrich did or did not enforce the rights he acquired when he purchased the assets of the Auto-Ordnance Division of Maguire Industries."

Your ratiocination boldly says forget about the inconsistencies of Numrich not suing over the name, but pay closer attention at the Maguire family not suing over the name.

The Maguire family may well own the Auto-Ordnance Corporation, New York, New York today. If true (which I doubt) it is really immaterial to the issue of lineage. Maguire Industries divested itself of the Thompson in a documented sale to Kilgore Manufacturing – end of story – the Maguire family and Maguire Industries is out of the Thompson business. Numrich and Trask to my knowledge have never claimed ownership right of the Auto-Ordnance Corporation, New York, New York. However, they rightfully did claim ownership rights to the Thompson Submachine Gun and later formed the Auto-Ordnance Corporation, West Hurley, New York. Again, look at all the facts. The lineage is intact. If Maguire had actually sold Auto Ordnance to Willis, why does the Maguire family still own AO to this day? The actual name may have been abandoned, but that does not mean that Numrich/Trask had any more legal claim on the name than anyone else who wanted to manufacture a .45 smg using that name.

The key word in this statement is “most.” The Auto-Ordnance Corporation, West Hurley, New York manufactured West Hurley Thompsons. Please note the difference in names. No sanction to use this name was needed because George owned all the rights – see above. The Gun that made the Twenties Roar by William J. Helmer was published in 1969 – this was several years before the Auto-Ordnance Corporation, West Hurley, New York was created out of the assets of the Auto-Ordnance Division of Maguire Industries purchased in 1951 by George Numrich. Everything written by Helmer’s supports the lineage of the Thompson from Cleveland to Hartford to Bridgeport to West Hurley, New York – end of story.

Why does Helmer refer to the N.A.C. TSMG as follows:

"Numrich's "new" Thompson's are identical to earlier models and are made up largely from surplus parts, with the exception of frames and receivers. These are machined as needed in the company's shop and bear most of the ORIGINAL Auto Ordnance markings. The initials N.A.C. have been added to the markings."

If Maguire sold Kilgore the exact same company that produced the Thompson why would Helmer regard the Colt/Savage/AO receiver Auto Ordnance markings with the "original" disclaimer appellation giving way to the obvious implication that Numrich/Trask's "Auto Ordnance Corporation" markings are indeed not sanctioned or authorized by merely purchasing a bunch of crates

Again, the issue is one of lineage, not quality of what was produced. The market place determines the price of the product and quality is certainly a consideration. I submit the West Hurley Thompsons would not be worth as much as the Colt Thompsons even if they had been produced with the same care and standards. The Colt name would always command a premium. However, regardless of what you think about the West Hurley Thompsons, the lineage between West Hurley Thompsons, the World War II Thompsons and the Colt Thompsons is a fact.
  • 0

#36 Sgt

Sgt

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2047 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eastern TN
  • Interests:Militaria, Chess, Tools, Sherlock Holmes, Printmaking, UFOs, Ghosts, Electronics, Comic Books, Long walks in the rain, with my Savage 1928a1. (just kidding on the last one; it doesn't have to be raining) -- Ralph

Posted 04 December 2005 - 10:17 AM

QUOTE

If all this is correct, this would make a WH 28 no different than a Richardson 80% receiver, correct? With the exception of the paper they are both replicas of the TSMG?

rhlowe--
I don't have any dog in this fight, but let me respond here. I also thought of the logic you bring up. I think it is a matter of semantics and context. If I were a coin collector and compared recently minted commemoratives with their original counterparts, I might call the commemoratives replicas, even though they are both legal tender. If I were some Joe, trying to get a Coke out of a machine, I would call anything that works as real.
  • 0

#37 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3453 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 04 December 2005 - 11:59 AM

QUOTE
Maguire Industries divested itself of the Thompson in a documented sale to Kilgore Manufacturing.

TD

Could you please refer me to this document that you use as documentation that stipulates incontrovertibly that Maguire sold Kilgore all names, trademarks and patents? Where did you find it? Helmer would probably be very grateful since he never saw it either and could only determine that Maguire sold crates. In fact, as far as the $385,000 sale figure, Helmer can only go so far as to say it was the "reported" price.

Helmer also says that Numrich picked up only the "crated" assets of Auto Ordnance. Unless Maguire/Kilgore/Willis slipped into those crates legal papers entitling the bearer of the crates rights to Thompson names, patents, and logos of "The Auto Ordnance Corporation Of New York, U.S.A." then there is a huge leap in faith that Trast ever had the legal right to use the full "Auto Ordnance Corporation" name with his city tacked on the end anymore than any other manufacturer of a "Thompson" type of firearm that wanted to place their own town or city as the suffix.

This is exactly the point that Doug Richardson makes with such authority and logic.


QUOTE
The Gun that made the Twenties Roar by William J. Helmer was published in 1969 – this was several years before the Auto-Ordnance Corporation, West Hurley, New York was created out of the assets of the Auto-Ordnance Division of Maguire Industries purchased in 1951 by George Numrich.


Several things on this paragraph leap off the page with inaccuracies. Helmer's book was reprinted with the additional information contained in a chapter 11 entitled "Thompson, Trast and Today" by George C. Norton Jr.

Maguire did not sell the "Auto Ordnance Division of Maguire Industries" to anyone. That is for sure. "Maguire Industries Incorporated" was still attempting to make a go at it into the 1960's. The only thing that Maguire could possibly sell to Willis, since "Auto Ordnance Corporation of New York, U.S.A." was still maintained by the Maguire family, was an entity called "ORDNANCE DIVISION."
If we agree that anything other than the sale of crates ever transpired between Maguire and Kligore, then that anything could only be the name of 'ORDNANCE DIVISION" that contrary to its name, never in it's five year existence, before supposedly being sold to Kilgore, ever manufactured any ordnance or any TSMG's.

Now in 1975, Trast resurrects "ORDNANCE DIVISION" from it's 1944 slumber and waves a magic wand over it and it becomes the very familiar sounding "Auto Ordnance Corporation" (that was then, and still is, owned by the Maguire family) with the "West Hurley" now stigmatized identification tag stamped on the end.

If we agreed that Maguire sold Kilgore anything aside from crates, "ORDNANCE DIVISION" is the only possible legal name that Trast could use on his receivers.

  • 0

#38 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3453 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 04 December 2005 - 12:04 PM

QUOTE (rhlowe @ Dec 4 2005, 06:40 AM)
Arthur:

   If all this is correct, this would make a WH 28 no different than a Richardson 80% receiver, correct? With the exception of the paper they are both replicas of the TSMG?

Thanks,
Richard

Exactly! In Doug Richardson's own words he agrees with you 100%.

QUOTE
"I define a replica as being an admitted copy of an original. I manufacture replicas. I define a fake as a copy of an original which is intended to fool people into believing it is an original.  Therefore, every "Thompson" gun made by Numrich Arms and/or Kahr Arms is a fake"
D.R.
  • 0

#39 colt21a

colt21a

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3465 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:arizona desert.
  • Interests:Whatever we can do in Life

Posted 04 December 2005 - 12:48 PM

then what this all mean's is a wes-hurley is that, a colt is that and a kahr is this...

oh! and a doug gun is this..
and a group industrie's is this!and a ww2 auto-ord is that and a savage is this!

so if i get all this. there is over six type's of thompson..leave the chinese alone..

it's all fun. and really most unless they have the coveted colt!!care about it all..they want something to shoot.show the buddie's and the family...and normally want it cheeeep!!

i remember back around 1972 somebody saying to me wow you bought a {"gangster gun}before the term and hip hop was in vogue!

and i stated yep for $900.00 about three week's pay for me at the time..let's see a colt today at a conservative price of $20,000.00{ and i still think overpriced}i'd need to make over>$220,000.00 something's wrong here!!

and unless i'm really wrong,i'm sure not too many board member's here make that..yes maybe a few......

when all the big $$$$entered it all..it became a game of $$$ and history and tale's of old became that!! old newspaper's..sad!

take care,ron
  • 0

#40 John Jr

John Jr

    Long Time RKI Member

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

Posted 04 December 2005 - 12:59 PM

The Original Thompson Submachine Gun was #26 that the Auto Ordnance Company built. Every other TSMG was to be made using this one as the Original. Look at the first contract with colt's. Auto Ordnance bought and owned the machines they made the TSMG's on. The WW2 guns were made on the same equipment.

Colt's machined parts for the TSMG. They contracted (or AO did) with Lyman for the sights, Cutts for the Compensators, Remington for the barrels and the wood, etc....

Colt's did some machining and put the guns together out of the parts. Colt's has no real claim to fame on this weapon, as they didn't design it, they didn't think it up, they didn't even build all the parts that went into the gun. Regardless of what Hellmer or anybody else says they (colt's) were no better at machining and putting guns together than workers 20+ years later using the same machines.

I could care less about the "rights" to the AO/THOMPSON name after the war.

To sum it up:

Auto Ordnance #26 was the only gun that can be called "Original" in the realm of the TSMG.

The rest were just examples.... biggrin.gif
  • 0