Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

Replica


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

#101 TD.

TD.

    Respected Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2911 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 December 2005 - 07:57 AM

Devlin,
Excellent research. I will have to get a copy of this article. I may ask you for a copy if I cannot locate it in the near future. I knew more information would be forthcoming. This thread is becoming more educational by the day. Of course, George Numrich bought it all. Nobody else wanted it – including Maguire Industries. Those that cannot accept the succession of the Thompson Submachine Gun from Cleveland to West Hurley, New York must cringe at the thought of George Numrich owning most the Thompson prototypes, the Blish pistol, the original contract between the Auto-Ordnance Corporation, New York, New York and Colt, the original drawing/blueprints – the list can go on and on – simply stated - everything. There is nothing George Numrich has done with the Thompson since 1951 that indicates otherwise. The line of succession is complete.

Arthur,
All I can say about your post to Devlin is Milling and Machining sounds an awful lot like manufacturing to me. I think this issue is well settled.

  • 0

#102 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3456 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 December 2005 - 10:03 AM

TD,

Since no known Numrich "brand new receiver/frame" manufactured TSMG is known to exist prior to 1975, the "milling/machining" verbs are not action verbs. Show me one receiver with Numrich's Mamaroneck, New York address, the address of his N.A.C. operation at the time of these articles, or any previously rendered bar stock Colt/Savage/AO receiver that was not already roll stamped with the pre 1944 "Auto-Ordnance Corporation."

Since the fact that the Maguire family still owns the original "Auto-Ordnance Corporation" name, you have now rested your opinion of this non-existent post 1944 chain on your own imagination that Numrich was making brand new TSMG's in 1967. The terms "build" and "assembled," Helmer and Nonte's description of what Numrich was actually doing from 1951 to 1975 (Nonte's "assembled" description was used at least eight years after you credit Numrich with manufacturing TSMG's back in 1967), is not supposition, just fact. Any manufacturing/machining/milling means a "new" receiver. What happened to them?

Nonte got his information from Trast. The trusted employee of Numrich. Would not Trast know whether Numrich ever made any brand new TSMG's prior to 1975?

The charade is over. But don't feel bad, you still have the soothing words of Numrich to sustain you during those moments of despair and anxiety.

Maybe you could email Doug Richardson with your new improved interpretation on Helmer's thesis. See what he thinks. He understand what it is to make a receiver from scratch.

  • 0

#103 colt21a

colt21a

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3480 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:arizona desert.
  • Interests:Whatever we can do in Life

Posted 06 December 2005 - 11:02 AM

who care's what any of them spouted off.find the all elusive ex-employee who worked in the machine shop and madea receiver and marked it..surprising all the colt info and hidden drum's and document's and spare part's kit's and paperwork and photo's that have surfaced over the decade's..but not one employee left...

was it some secret society..once the receiver's are cast and ready..they rushed off to the gulag.never to be heard of or seen again??wink!

find the employee. maybe even stella from the front office had lunch with one of them..that will settle it.oh and having and seeing that one finished marked receiver.let alone a complete gun.

my theory: they finished off whatever was in the crate's...and later made the full and semi-auto's from then new receiver's.everybody know's what the n.a.c. thompson's are.

oh wait unless they all ended up buried in the pyramid's.. scorpion king tell all!!

take care,ron
  • 0

#104 John Jr

John Jr

    Long Time RKI Member

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

Posted 06 December 2005 - 11:21 AM

QUOTE (Arthur Fliegenheimer @ Dec 6 2005, 09:03 AM)
TD,

Since no known Numrich "brand new receiver/frame" manufactured TSMG is known to exist prior to 1975, the "milling/machining" verbs are not action verbs. Show me one receiver with Numrich's Mamaroneck, New York address, the address of his N.A.C. operation at the time of these articles, or any previously rendered bar stock Colt/Savage/AO receiver that was not already roll stamped with the pre 1944 "Auto-Ordnance Corporation."

Since the fact that the Maguire family still owns the original "Auto-Ordnance Corporation" name, you have now rested your opinion of this non-existent post 1944 chain on your own imagination that Numrich was making brand new TSMG's in 1967. The terms "build" and "assembled," Helmer and Nonte's description of what Numrich was actually doing from 1951 to 1975 (Nonte's "assembled" description was used at least eight years after you credit Numrich with manufacturing TSMG's back in 1967), is not supposition, just fact. Any manufacturing/machining/milling means a "new" receiver. What happened to them?

Nonte got his information from Trast. The trusted employee of Numrich. Would not Trast know whether Numrich ever made any brand new TSMG's prior to 1975?

The charade is over. But don't feel bad, you still have the soothing words of Numrich to sustain you during those moments of despair and anxiety.

Maybe you could email Doug Richardson with your new improved interpretation on Helmer's thesis. See what he thinks. He understand what it is to make a receiver from scratch.

Speaking of Richardson and Fakes, what were his plans in 1980? He was going to start making fake colts... ask him.


  • 0

#105 LIONHART

LIONHART

    Long Time RKI Member

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

Posted 06 December 2005 - 11:29 AM

The article in Gun Digest goes onto say;


QUOTE
There were eighty-six of them, including early prototypes


Keep in mind that it states the Sheik of Kuwait had purchased a 100 Thompson's. Where did the other 14 come from? And what about the various N.A.C. Marked Thompson's floating around that the Sheik didn't get? Did Numrich produce Export Only Receivers at that time?

QUOTE
These were made up primarily from parts, although the frames and receivers were milled at the Numrich Arms facility as needed


However, on page 112 the Author states;

QUOTE
But in 1975, George Numrich and his associate, Ira Trast, suddenly breathed new life into the venerable Tommygun. The Auto-Ordnance name was revived and the firm began to produce what came to be known as the 1927A1 Thompson semi-automatic rifle. The theory was that, since it was a ringer for the original automatic version-except for a longer barrel-it would be gobbled up by collectors as well as shooters. Instead of New York City, where the company originally did business, Auto-Ordnance was headquartered on Numrich's home ground in West Hurley, New York.

  • 0

#106 LIONHART

LIONHART

    Long Time RKI Member

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

Posted 06 December 2005 - 12:11 PM

American Survival Guide. June 1990, Vol. 12 Number 6, Page 24, "Auto-Ordnance Corp: Thompson 1927A-1" By Jim Benson.

QUOTE
At the beginning of World War 2 the U.S. and allied military forces took greater interest in the weapon, but the rather complex operation of the earlier models and mass production problems with them, particularly the 1928A1, led to redesigned and simplified versions for military use designated the M1 and M1A1 models. Auto-Ordnance Corporation of West Hurley, New York still produces several models of the Thompson guns in both full-auto and semauto versions in the original .45ACP caliber as well as a semiauto in .22 long rifle caliber. All of these guns, I was told by an Auto-Ordnance official, are made on the same tooling that has been used to produce the Thompson since the 1920's.


American Survival Guide. September 1992, VOL. 14 Number 9. Page 24, "American Historical Foundation: Tactical Thompson. Custom Built, limited edition 1927A-1 semiautomatic in tactical configuration" By Jim Benson.

QUOTE
The patent holder, Auto-Ordnance Corp. of West Hurley, New York, stilll makes several models of the Thompson, in full-automatic or semiautomatic firing modes.


FWIW...


popcorn.gif
  • 0

#107 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3456 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 December 2005 - 12:36 PM

QUOTE
Keep in mind that it states the Sheik of Kuwait had purchased a 100 Thompson's. Where did the other 14 come from? And what about the various N.A.C. Marked Thompson's floating around that the Sheik didn't get? Did Numrich produce Export Only Receivers at that time?
Devlin

The 86 TSMG's found in the crates were described as "complete" smg's, Helmer didn't say that 86 was the total number of receivers. The "floating N.A.C." marked receivers are positive proof that there were at least a few dozen more receivers in the crates than the ones attached to the completed 86 Thompson's.

The only known newly manufactured .45 ACP smg that had the name Thompson and "Auto-Ordnance Corp., Bridgeport, Connecticut, Reg. in U.S. Patent Office" stamped on the top of a new cylindrical receiver was the Egyptian TSMG. This is reported by Thomas Nelson in his "The World's Submachine Guns."

If Nelson could find this weapon, then he also knew of the Kuwait Numrich TSMG's and would have included them in the mix if they were actually newly manufactured.


QUOTE
All of these guns, I was told by an Auto-Ordnance official, are made on the same tooling that has been used to produce the Thompson since the 1920's.
Devlin

That official obviously never looked at any WH finished product or he would know that something happened to the machinery since its use in 1920, that was no longer exclusively used by Maguire by 1940, and how Numrich/Trask were using the Maguire machines in 1975.

QUOTE
The patent holder, Auto-Ordnance Corp. of West Hurley, New York, stilll makes several models of the Thompson, in full-automatic or semiautomatic firing modes.
Devlin

A familiar pattern and theme of the Numrich/Trask organization is to hammer home their contention that Numrich owned the rights to patents, logos and copy writes of the TSMG. Too bad these writers for these various publications never bothered to do anything but parrot what they were told. Had they done simple investigation, or even a phone call like the one G.I.Jive made to Helmer, they would have known better than make statements without employing the caveat "alleged" to own.
  • 0

#108 LIONHART

LIONHART

    Long Time RKI Member

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

Posted 06 December 2005 - 12:51 PM

QUOTE
The 86 TSMG's found in the crates were described as "complete" smg's, Helmer didn't say that 86 was the total number of receivers. The "floating N.A.C." marked receivers are positive proof that there were at least a few dozen more receivers in the crates than the ones attached to the completed 86 Thompson's.


Correct. Helmer didn't state that 86 was the total number. However, were the N.A.C. Thompsons manufactured from Receivers that hadn't been fully milled yet? Hence the N.A.C. Designation? IF these N.A.C. Thompson's were put togethers from left over inventory, why the N.A.C. Marking? And since Helmer didn't provide the total specific amount, the Gun Digest also refers to the 86 TSMG's, followed by that Numrich produced their own when needed, prior to reincarnation of "Auto-Ordnance" in 1975.

  • 0

#109 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3456 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 December 2005 - 01:06 PM

QUOTE
IF these N.A.C. Thompson's were put togethers from left over inventory, why the N.A.C. Marking
Devlin

You want a logical explanation for how or why Numrich operated his business and came up with after thought haphazardly stamped "N.A.C." letters and crooked serial numbers?

We know that he put his "N.A.C." on receivers that already had pre 1944 AO issued serial numbers. We also know he put his "N.A.C." on pre 1944 receivers sans factory numbers and stamped serial numbers on them he created by rolling a pair of dice.

  • 0

#110 dalbert

dalbert

    Website Owner

  • Admin
  • 4347 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 06 December 2005 - 01:09 PM

This thread has provided some very good reading. Arthur makes interesting points, but I agree with Tom that the timeline of AO can be traced from 1916 to the present day. He has presented valid arguments defending this position.

I also agree with Ron’s Numrich theory: “my theory: they finished off whatever was in the crate's...and later made the full and semi-auto's from then new receiver's.everybody know's what the n.a.c. thmpson's are.”

I believe there may have been some manufacturing of new receivers at Numrich prior to the 1970’s, although I cannot substantiate this yet. It is a hunch based on known orders that were fulfilled by N.A.C.

I disagree with Arthur on the following points in particular:

1. Patent Expirations: “…they (WH) were never authorized by the original Auto-Ord Company to do so, and waited for the the patents and copyrights to expire to use the logo and Thompson name…”

2. Manufacturing Definitions: “Up through the early 1970's, Numrich sold Thompson parts, guns were repaired, and complete guns were ASSEMBLED (not manufactured) for sale as the demand arouse.”


I will clarify the facts around point #1 to start. Thompson patents were valid for only 17 years. Most of them expired between 1935 and 1938. Some exceptions to this could have been the Model of 1928 actuator change, and the M1 Thompson. I do not know if specific patent applications were made for these two products, but if they were patented, the patents would probably have expired around 1943 and 1959, respectively. Only a potential M1 patent would have had any expiration conflict within the Numrich period.

I own original legal and patent office correspondence regarding perceived patent infringement issues in 1935 with the Thompson XX magazine and various aspects of the Thompson gun mechanism. These occurred in regards to the Hyde Model 35 Submachine Gun. The issues soon became irrelevant due to the various patent expirations, and the issues were either worked through with the patent office examiner to his satisfaction, or they expired.

The Thompson patents were not an issue to Numrich. They did not have to wait for them to expire. (The only exception to this might be an M1 patent, if it exists. Someone here may be able to provide an M1 patent number or numbers, should they exist.)

Any M1 patent that might exist would also have been irrelevant if Numrich acquired the rights to the company, which has been claimed in period references within this post. It was again stated in the January 1975 issue of American Firearms Industry Magazine in regards to Ira Trast being president of Auto-Ordnance Corporation, and the introduction of the 1927-A1 Semi-Auto, as follows: “Auto Ordnance Corp., the original manufacturer and designer of the Thompson Machine Gun was purchased many years ago, lock, stock and barrel by Mr. George Numrich, owner of the Numrich Arms Corp. At that time, Mr. Numrich’s purchase was complete with original tooling and prototypes, including all inventory and rights to the Corporation. Since then, Numrich Arms has been the official repair station for all Thompson Machine Guns throughout the world.” If the folks in West Hurley did not have the rights to the company, claiming so in the established magazine of the firearms industry might have been controversial.

Another point in regards to #1 above is that the main Thompson logo had a registered trademark. Trademarks of the time were issued for 20 years, and were renewable. The second Thompson bullet logo was probably trademarked in 1921 or 1922, and would have possibly been renewed in 1941 or 1942 by Maguire. If it were renewed then, it would have expired again in 1961 or 1962. I own some original trademark documents from 1926 and 1930 that relate to the Hyde Model 35 history, and are helpful in understanding trademark duration and use. For instance, the 1926 trademark paperwork I own, which is an ABC logo originally used for “American Blade Corporation” was used as a convenience for the Hyde Gun in the late 1930’s when it became referred to as the “ABC Automatic Hand Machine Gun.” In any case, if Numrich acquired all rights, then the trademark issue would not have mattered. Whether the Thompson logo trademark was renewed in 1941 or 1942 could also be a relevant point to research, as well as the status of the trademark today.

Now for point #2 regarding your opinion that no guns were “manufactured,” and they were only “assembled” at Numrich. Assembling is manufacturing. This may be a subtle nuance that you want to argue in the strictest sense, but I can assure you that our U.S. manufacturing metrics include an enormous amount of manufacturing which involves assembling of pre-fabricated parts of various origin. This leads to manufacturing efficiencies. Very few manufacturers actually make all the parts they use to assemble (manufacture) their products. In the case of Numrich, they would have wanted to use any receivers that existed, and may have also done some fabrication as part of their manufacturing process to fulfill orders.

Arthur, I do not know where you get “the fact that the Maguire family still owns the original "Auto-Ordnance Corporation" name.” I would welcome any background information that might exist to support this notion.

I hope my post inserts a bit more background information into this whole succession argument. Again, I believe the succession of the Thompson and AOC can be traced from 1916 to 2005.


David Albert
dalbert@sturmgewehr.com
  • 0

#111 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3456 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 December 2005 - 02:12 PM

QUOTE
Assembling is manufacturing. This may be a subtle nuance that you want to argue in the strictest sense, but I can assure you that our U.S. manufacturing metrics include an enormous amount of manufacturing which involves assembling of pre-fabricated parts of various origin.
Dalbert

The interchangeability of these two words in the Numrich instance is a distinction without a difference. Since Numrich did not produce a receiver that formally did not exist, one can easily conclude that there is no such thing as a Numrich receiver, the heart of the TSMG weapon, as constructed, created, fabricated, or initiated by Numrich until 1975.

This means that Numrich never exercised his perceived "right" to start up manufacture of a new "Thompson" under the name of the "new" Auto-Ordnance Corporation" until 1975. That means that there was a 31 year gap between the last original AO manufactured from the ground up TSMG and Numrich/Trast's version in 1975.

Whether he was waiting for patents to expire or not, the point is he waited. Why? Indecision regarding his purchase of the crated assets of Ordnance Division haunted him since 1951. In his own words he considered the Ordnance Division a hobby, not worthy of the same attention paid to his booming N.A.C. business.

He also waffled and eventually dismissed his plans to make the 1927A1 in 1969 for undisclosed reasons. It was left to Trast to resurrect that concept.


QUOTE
Arthur, I do not know where you get “the fact that the Maguire family still owns the original "Auto-Ordnance Corporation" name.” I would welcome any background information that might exist to support this notion
Dalbert

I know your primary interest is in Thompson (not to mention West Hurley) media paraphernalia speculation, but I can't believe after publishing your list of firearm must reads you missed the paragraph in one of those very books, "The Thompson Submachine Gun" by Cox where he states:

"The original Auto Ordnance Corporation is still a valid New York chartered corporation. It was incorporated on August 25, 1916 and with the two name changes is still in business today (1982) in Dallas, Texas headed by Cary Maguire, the son of Russell, although far removed from firearms manufacture. The name was changed officially to Maguire Industries, Inc., on March 15, 1944 and again to Components Corporation of America on March 14, 1961."

So which ownership of that name is the legitimate party regardless of what they make? Kind of gets us back to those pesky crates in 1949 and what was really sold and was was not. Maguire never sold the name "Auto-Ordnance Corporation" to Kilgore. This name reverted back into the family Maguire Industries , Inc., business.

Kilgore bought crates and the newly created "Ordnance Division" name, if he purchased any name, from Maguire. Even Helmer and Nonte refer to the Numrich/Trast "Auto-Ordnance Corporation" as "NEW." If it was the same business as the one that ceased operation as a firearms manufacturer back in 1944, why would the sale seven years later to Numrich refer to the "same" legally transfered business name as "NEW," if it was the exact same entity it was prior to March, 1944?


  • 0

#112 dalbert

dalbert

    Website Owner

  • Admin
  • 4347 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 06 December 2005 - 04:29 PM

Arthur,

You stated…

"…I can't believe after publishing your list of firearm must reads you missed the paragraph in one of those very books, "The Thompson Submachine Gun" by Cox where he states:

"The original Auto Ordnance Corporation is still a valid New York chartered corporation. It was incorporated on August 25, 1916 and with the two name changes is still in business today (1982) in Dallas, Texas headed by Cary Maguire, the son of Russell, although far removed from firearms manufacture. The name was changed officially to Maguire Industries, Inc., on March 15, 1944 and again to Components Corporation of America on March 14, 1961."

Actually, I did not miss the paragraph you quoted in the Cox book. I recognize that a company that exists today, with a division in my wife's hometown, can trace its roots back to the creation of the Thompson. Companies change their names and products, they sell off divisions, and also change their business models completely during their histories, to adapt to market changes, stockholder votes, world events, etc. Your statement that "the Maguire family still owns the original "Auto-Ordnance Corporation" name” is incorrect. The Maguire family company is a different one now, born from Maguire Industries, which sold off its Auto-Ordnance assets in 1949. While they can still trace their lineage back through the early and WWII Thompson era to 1949, and on through today, they do not retain the Auto-Ordnance name. I did not reach the same conclusion you did when I read that paragraph in Cox's book.

Incidentally, since you like to quote the Cox book, you might want to take a look at the paragraph prior to the one you quoted about Components Corporation of America. In speaking about the guns and parts included in the crates that Numrich purchased in 1951, Cox states, "NAC also manufactured the Thompson from these spare parts and other parts they purchased around the world." It seems Cox understood in 1982 the meaning of "manufactured," and included the reference in his book on page 3.

It does not matter how long Numrich waited before he went into full scale production of the Thompson in any form. According to Cox, it appears Numrich was pretty active in selling Thompsons he found complete, or manufactured from the assets he received from Willis, reportedly 200 in the first 3 or 4 years. Numrich seized the purchase opportunity, sold existing completed Thompsons, manufactured some Thompsons, sold Thompson parts, and repaired Thompsons in the period prior to full production of the WH semi and full-auto weapons. During this time, the company also operated a very successful business selling parts of other guns, which was their primary focus. When the market was right, and they satisfied government concerns regarding a newly designed semi-auto Thompson, they began production of it.

David Albert
dalbert@sturmgewehr.com

  • 0

#113 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3456 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 December 2005 - 05:22 PM

QUOTE
Incidentally, since you like to quote the Cox book, you might want to take a look at the paragraph prior to the one you quoted about Components Corporation of America. In speaking about the guns and parts included in the crates that Numrich purchased in 1951, Cox states, "NAC also manufactured the Thompson from these spare parts and other parts they purchased around the world." It seems Cox understood in 1982 the meaning of "manufactured," and included the reference in his book on page 3.
Dalbert

Come on. If you are going to cite Cox at least do it precisely.

"Numrich sold THE 200 hundred guns in three to four years (half of them to the ruler of Kuwait),"

Cox revised Helmer's 86 figure to 200. That ends the mystery where these other N.A.C. marked guns came from. The "The" Cox speaks of in this sentence were not newly made on a machine receivers (especially since Numrich had not even unpacked or set up any of these machines as they continued to lie dormant in a warehouse in the 1950's) but were fabricated before March of 1944.

"NAC also manufactured the Thompson FROM these spare parts and OTHER parts they purchased around the world. Early Numrich guns were PUT TOGETHER from PIECES, but a division of Numrich NOW (meaning 1982) manufacturers a semiautomatic and an automatic REPLICA of the Thompson under the name Auto Ordnance Corporation."

That paragraph should be self explanatory, but just to review, Cox refers several times in his book to the West Hurley as a replica. What other conclusion can you arrive at about the dubious lineage of the original Auto-Ordnance Corporation to the "new" AOC when Cox himself knows that what Numrich eventually manufactured from the ground up was not genuine, but merely a replica.

I think PhilOhio provides first hand experience with Numrich at the very time he was supposed to be manufacturing completely new Thompson's. If Numrich was in production (as he seems to ambiguously state in his cryptic "Gun Digest" Ray Bearse article), of new TSMG receivers in 1967 and not just assembling old parts, why would he not be able to accommodate Phil?


QUOTE
I also agree with Ron’s Numrich theory: “my theory: they finished off whatever was in the crate's...and later made the full and semi-auto's from then new receiver's.everybody know's what the n.a.c. thmpson's are.”


If you agree with Ron K. that Numrich never made any receivers until 1975, where in lies the disagreement on this aspect of Numrich?

But it is good to see you cite Cox as an expert in Thompson minutia.

  • 0

#114 John Jr

John Jr

    Long Time RKI Member

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

Posted 06 December 2005 - 07:14 PM

user posted image
wink.gif
  • 0

#115 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 06 December 2005 - 09:38 PM

A quick question,

Where are the original machines that Numrich purchased at this moment? Where these machines used
for the production of the Colt guns? Where they dedicated machines for the 21/28 Thompsons or just common heavy milling machines and such?
Just interested.
Thanks, I'm still getting an education from this thread, and Jr's graphics are killing me biggrin.gif
Z
  • 0

#116 TD.

TD.

    Respected Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2911 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 December 2005 - 10:54 PM

Wow – this thread has really grown. I always knew the mantra about the Thompson story ending in 1944 had too many inconsistencies to be true. I think it is great more board members have joined in. To briefly recap my position I am only addressing the issue of lineage or chain of succession. Simply stated, I believe you can easily trace the history of the Thompson Submachine Gun from Cleveland, Ohio to Numrich Arms Corporation and beyond. What this means to me is any Thompsons manufactured in this chain of succession can be directly linked to the original company and dream of John T. Thompson. It is not my point to debate quality or which Thompsons are the most historical. However, I encourage each member to take this thread in any direction in which you feel we will all benefit. I have truly enjoyed this discussion.

Thanks to gijive for reaffirming the information with William Helmer about what is printed in his book. (Is this a great board or what!) As Helmer reported, it is a fact in March 1944, the Auto-Ordnance Corporation under Russell Maguire was re-organized and a new parent company emerged named Maguire Industries, Inc. All assets pertaining to the Thompson Submachine gun became a division of the parent company, Maguire Industries. This division was named the Ordnance Division of Maguire Industries. The assets of this division were placed in storage and sat dormant for the next few years. In 1949, Kilgore Manufacturing, Westerville, Ohio, paid $385,00 to McGuire Industries for all the remaining assets of what now had become the Ordnance Division of Maguire Industries. Kilgore had the intention to resale the now former Ordnance Division to the Egyptian government because officials at Kilgore thought the Egyptian government wanted to manufacture the Thompson Submachine gun. This deal was done with future manufacturing as the stated pretext. Kilgore did not purchase a corporation. It purchased all the rights and assets of the Ordnance Division of Maguire Industries.

With that above statement of fact, you will now hear howling that William Helmer never directly stated that Maguire Industries sold the manufacturing rights of the Thompson to Kilgore so the Thompson story ends in 1944 (I really don’t understand why the date is not 1949 since Maguire Industries still owned the Thompson until it was sold to Kilgore – go figure). Of course, as we all know, during the time frame (1960’s) when Helmer was doing his research, letters and interview with George Numrich, Numrich was actively engaged in the business of manufacturing, building, servicing, and selling the Thompson – and he regularly advertised this fact. It is this point of ownership of rights, patents, trademarks, drawings, etc. that cause the purists to say George Numrich did not own the Thompson so the story ends in 1944. Fortunately, this issue of ownership did come up in other published stories about the Tommygun and Numrich Arms Corporation. George Numrich was interviewed for an article by Ray Bearse, titled, The Thompson Submachine Gun, Weapon of War and Peace, published in the 1967 edition of Gun Digest. At the end of the story, George Numrich, in a discussion with John T. Amber, Editor of Gun Digest, concerning the development of a new semi-auto Thompson by a company named Tri-State Tool and Die Company in Frostburg, MD, 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.” Again, George Numrich is active in the Thompson business and answers a direct question about ownership and rights with a statement his company owns it all. As we all know, this statement of ownership has never been refuted. In addition, there are other references to ownership that have been reported in this thread. Devlin joins in with quotations from two other periodicals, Gun Digest Book Of Assault Weapons and American Survival Guide, that also report George Numrich did have ownerships rights in the Thompson. Later, Dalbert, joins in with a quotation from the January 1975 issue of American Firearms Industry Magazine, to wit: “Auto Ordnance Corp., the original manufacturer and designer of the Thompson Machine Gun was purchased many years ago, lock, stock and barrel by Mr. George Numrich, owner of the Numrich Arms Corp. At that time, Mr. Numrich’s purchase was complete with original tooling and prototypes, including all inventory and rights to the Corporation. Since then, Numrich Arms has been the official repair station for all Thompson Machine Guns throughout the world.”

The howling then reverts to the old corporation changing names angle along with the patents and trade-marks howling - which Dalbert completely puts to rest. Now it is back to crying about the manufacturing of receivers or lack thereof, which, of course, has no bearing on lineage or the chain of succession with the Thompson. Dalbert also addressed this issue to the satisfaction of everyone.

The only thing left to conclude is the line of succession for the Thompson Submachine Gun can be easily traced from General Thompson in Cleveland, Ohio to George Numrich in West Hurley, New York and now to Kahr Arms. Again, don’t get caught up in the crying about quality or historical significance. Obviously the Warney & Swasey produced Thompsons, the single Colt production run and the Savage and Auto-Ordnance (Bridgeport) Thompson’s are much more historical than anything manufactured in West Hurley, New York. However, the NAC Thompsons and the later West Hurley Thompsons all descended from the same chain of succession and were actually manufactured on the much of the same equipment as the earlier Thompsons referenced above.

I personally take a much simpler approach to this issue. When I learned George Numrich ended up with the Blish pistol and the Persuader, I knew Russell Maguire and Maguire Industries were finished with the Thompson. You do not sell the basis of General Thompson’s dream and intend to retain any rights to this gun we have all come to treasure. I am just happy the deal with the Egyptians never materialized…as I am sure we all are.

This thread has been a lot of fun. I know some will never be convinced…and I am OK with that. However, I know everyone who has read and participated in this thread has a much better understanding in what transpired after Russell Maguire took his profits and disposed of the Thompson. And that makes it all worthwhile.


Thanks and Merry Christmas
  • 0

#117 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3456 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 December 2005 - 10:56 PM

Zamm,

The early Savage 1928's were initially built using the same tooling and equipment as Colt used. But Maguire purchased other second hand equipment that was either rebuilt or in need of being rebuilt to deal with the war time contracts. There was no way the machines that Colt solely relied on to turn out 15,000 TSMG's were going to produce two million TSMG's.

Maguire also relied on Pratt & Whitney profilers, milling, drilling, and filer machines, some of which dated back to either the Civil War or WWI.

But what Maguire did insist on was the manufacture of their own in house made tools as well as fixtures, jigs cutters and gages.

  • 0

#118 Arthur Fliegenheimer

Arthur Fliegenheimer

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3456 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 December 2005 - 11:48 PM

The information in your posts in this thread have not deviated from your original post. You made zero allowances for the checkmated theories you hold so dearly by no less than the man (Helmer) whom you were positive had witnessed the elusive document you admit is the keystone of your position.

It's as if there are no intermittent posts picking apart your opinions that, by the way, are not shared by four well regarded authors and publishers of Thompson periodicals.

Now you propose that whomever was sold the Blish pistol must be the rightful heir to the Thompson legacy? You might as well have said whomever's foot fit John T. Thompson's silver slipper is the rightful heir.

Maguire did not sell Maguire Industries as we know his family maintained Auto-Ordnance Corporation. But TD persists in calling Ordnance Division the Auto-Ordnance Corporation.


QUOTE
I really don’t understand why the date is not 1949 since Maguire Industries still owned the Thompson until it was sold to Kilgore – go figure


The reason the February, 1944 date is significant is because that is the last year a TSMG rolled off any assembly line in the U.S. until Numrich/Trast version in 1944. March, 1944 is also very significant because it was the final appearance of the Auto-Ordnance Corporation as it existed from 1919 as a firearms manufacturing entity. Maguire created the name Ordnance Division to replace the AOC named firearm business. Although the Maguire family continued to own the AOC name after 1944, if not as a business to produce firearms, it was forever removed from legitimate use by another entity.

The 1949 date is merely the date Maguire transfered the Thompson PHYSICAL assets to Kilgore. AOC no longer existed by this time and, therefore, could not be part of any transaction.

Dalbert agreed with Ron K. about no Thompson receiver being built from the ground up until 1975. So on that score TD is correct.

The only thing we can honestly say, not imagine from the uncorroborated words of Numrich as reported during his PR blitz with firearm magazines, is that PHYSICAL assets were sold regarding the TSMG in 1949 for a reported $365,000. Helmer is not even sure of that figure.


QUOTE
Numrich Arms has been the official repair station for all Thompson Machine Guns throughout the world.”


Who is responsible for the above proclamation? The word that jumps out is "official." Who bestowed this title on Numrich? The author of the article? No. Numrich himself. Did he work on TSMG's? Of course. He had the parts that he did not even know he had inside the crates he bought from Willis. Was he the sole company who was permitted, allowed or granted an exclusive license to work on TSMG's? If so, it sure would be great to see this mythical document. Until it materializes, the notion Numrich got anything but crates is pure conjecture.

Mike Romanoff had a popular restaurant in Beverly Hills in the 1940's. He went around telling anyone who would listen that he was a descendant of the Russian royal family. Nobody challenged him because, well, they liked him and his food. Numrich's claims that he bought the rights to the Thompson name along with patents etc is similar to Mike in that no one ever challenged George because, well, they liked him and nobody at the time cared about such minutia since TSMG's were not collectible as they became later.



TD, unless you know the whereabouts of this document, it's OK if you don't follow up with another cut and paste response.

  • 0

#119 colt21a

colt21a

    Respected Member

  • Regular Group
  • 3480 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:arizona desert.
  • Interests:Whatever we can do in Life

Posted 07 December 2005 - 01:28 AM

alot of good info,also has anybody taken into consideration in all this somebody lied about part's of it. the price the machinery. how many crate's,how many gun's how many receiver's? and all these supposed right's.. and ownership...i think i read some fiction once. and somebody said it started with science.. anybody ever see that twilight zone episode "to serve man"

everybody thought the alien's wanted to help... it was a frickkin cook book!!

so just maybe everybody step back,some are right some might be wrong just maybe a little. and somebody in all this history of the thompson,pulled some fast one's in business along the way..

and please don't say,that could not happen then...everybody was honest.and wrote everything down!!!and documented it all....the freakin german's had stuff documented also. and stuff they burned and stuff they wanted nobody to find in the arm's business..

and i guess that little "irish incident" that marcelus was involved in was okay?? and also the few colt's that went out the back door with the lunch crew was honest.....PLEEZE the story will never be written still too many hole's and alot of the major player's are all deceased.

even the colt employee i knew who worked on them died in the 70's..

good luck in the search.just remember writer's make mistake's...owner's brag about what they can do.or what they own right's! to, patent's.and all of it.and yes some can blow up a story to a writer to make it sound good...

a legend in there time...............wink!!

oh! and good humor on some of the post's.have fun..and hope i did not offend anybody with the nekid picture of that lady with the 21a on the table..
  • 0

#120 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 07 December 2005 - 05:59 AM

Arthur,
Thanks. I've always wondered about the original tooling.
Z
  • 0