TSMG28

Vollon, Congratulations on your wonderful deal. Your Savage 1928 is a very special piece, and the price you paid for it is fantastic. http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/smile.gif http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/smile.gif You may want to take the advice of the others on this string and buy up more of the "Russian" Thompsons, even at the 800 USD price tag. They will not last for long, and once they are gone, we may never again see a stash of pristine TSMG's. BTW, I was unsuccessful connecting to the site you posted. Is the URL correct? Best wishes on you hunt for a drum. I have heard that they are difficult to locate in Europe. You may want to check Norway. Their military had some TSMG's and accessories that I understand they have been selling recently. Keep fighting the EU restrictions on firearms. It would be terrible if some of the oldest and finest gun manufacturers in the world could no longer sell creations to the EU public. Roger

The Thompson 21 actuators being sold by the gentleman in Sweden were manufacturered to original spec by Enfield in Britain (spec was one used only on early Colts according to Tracie). Therefore, they are not U.S. goods being re-imported. I suspect that is why he is not having much trouble getting them into the country. As to U.S. parts coming in, who knows. I have still not heard where all of the wonderful 1928 parts sets came from that IMA is selling. Conjecture is they may be the Russian Thompsons. Again, who knows..... Roger

Based on a number of past comments on this board and a discussion with Frank, there don't appear to have been any formal rules about US Property being added to weapons. It is my understanding that most of the 1928's manufacturered after Lend-Lease went into effect were marked US Model of 1928 A1 so that they could be supplied as part of Lend-Lease. Once the M1's and M1A1's came along, they only appear to have marked those that were definitely destined for Lend-Lease. Many weapons not marked made their way into other countries, so you get the kind of disparity that Waffen und Bier indicates. Not all Lend-Lease countries proof marked their weapons to the degree that countries like Britain did. Bottom line.....anything goes!

I still don't know what the V is for, but it apparently dates from 1941 or earlier. The picture Tracie has of one of the prototype 30-round mags has the V on the bottom front (see TCN #133 from Nov. 15, 2001). The prototype was made by welding parts of two 20-round mags together (Crosbys in his picture). I doubt that the V would have been added after the fact, though I haven't had a chance to ask Tracie about the lineage of this particular mag. Just another mystery of the Thompson..... http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/rolleyes.gif Roger

Mike, As you no doubt have already seen, a guy has had one of these with only one 30-round mag listed on Subguns since 10/3 for $1000. Obviously, no takers. If this or any of the other converion kits (e.g., Ciener) can be made to run, the two 30-round mags are a major plus. IMHO, nobody is interested in a Thompson .22 conversion if all you get is 10-round mags. The fun is over too quickly. Unless the mag ban sunsets next year, your two mags are somewhat valuable if you can get PK to make the kit run. Just my $0.02..... Roger

GIJive, Thanks. That duplicates what I was seeing. Ron A, I had looked through the posts on the current and former board and found nothing that addressed this issue. As my post stated, Doug's book does NOT answer this question. However, your comments encouraged me to dig deeper. I found that the issue was answered in an article Tracie wrote in the TCN #131 on 15 August 2001. Though Doug had not observed the variety of Aug. 24/24 mags, Tracie and Frank combined to clarify the issue. I guess I need to find a way to catalog all of the excellent TCN articles so that I can find them more quickly. The MSCO 24/24 patent date mags were the third run of XX mags, the first being the Colt blank mag and the second being the 24/24 with no special manufacturers markings. According to Tracie, the fourth run of XX mags is when MSCO made the date error and created the Aug. 20/24 mag. Roger

Sgt. Fox, I don't own an SA Thompson, so I don't know if the rules are different for them. There are plenty of other SA owners on this board that should be able to help. It sounds like Sgt has the right approach. With the FA guns, there seem to be two schools of thought on lubricating. One school follows the principle that if some is good, more is better. This group generally has oil dripping out of every seam and will occasionally get some sprayed in their face when shooting (some have even rated the relative tastes of the different lubricants). The second group supports covering all surfaces with a thin oil film, well oiling the breach oiler pads and leaving it at that. I generally fall in the second group, but have been known to apply a couple extra squirts of oil just because.... Roger

Come on guys...nobody's got any information on their patent date 24/24 mags??? Or perhaps nobody owns any of these??? I'm just trying to clarify a marking/manufacturing issue, and I don't own a very large representative sample. Thanks! Roger

The assumption in the other replies is that these are West Hurley drums. Given the quoted prices, I think that is a reasonable assumption and agree that the prices are a bit high. However, depending on the actual New York address and other markings, it is possible that at least the L drum is a pre-wwII. If that is true, $800 is a great price on the L-drum. I doubt there is a Colt C-drum in a pawn shop, but if it is, grab it for $1700. Roger

Craig101, I would be VERY careful concerning any M1 that was "cut for the drum". The M1 frame has a different profile than the 1928 frame. As I understand it, if you open up the M1 frame to take a drum, you will weaken it significantly. PK and others on this board can give you more details than I can, but proceed carefully! I have never heard of any M1 Thompsons being set up for the drum by the factory. Quite the contrary, the M1 was specifically designed to use only the box magazines, so I see no reason for the factory to have tried to modify them for using a drum.

Phil, Thanks! The best to you and yours. http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif Looking forward to a better year in 2004. With the NFM display and our TCA show there, it's looking up already! Are we going to have another 50-50? Administered by whom??? Safe holidays everyone!! http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/rolleyes.gif Roger

I was reading Doug's Box Magazine book last night, and he indicates that he was not certain who manufacturered the Aug. 24/24 patent date mags because the ones he has observed did not have any manufacurers marks. I do have two 24/24 mags with no marks as he indicated. However, I also have one that has MSCO stamped on the inside. The two 20/24 mags I own have the MSCO stamp, as well as the Colt blank mags http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/smile.gif . The copyright on Doug's wonderful book is 1995, so perhaps new information has come to light since then, but does anyone else on the board have Colt patent date 24/24 mags with MSCO stamped inside? Inquiring minds want to know...... Roger Herbst

billie32, I have the same proof mark on the nose piece of the 28 kit I got from IMA. Nobody has been able to identify it, though in a conversation I had with a British collector, he suggested that it may be a recent British proof of some kind. Don't necessarily go by the serial numbers on your trigger frames to match with the receiver nose piece. the two sets of parts are mix and match, so the ones you have don't necessarily go together. The trigger frame I got with mine was AO instead of Savage, but the serial number had been ground off and replaced by another number. I sent it back to IMA for exchange for one that had not been altered, but unfortunately the frame I got back was Savage instead of AO. I would rather have an AO frame. If anyone has an IMA trigger frame that is AO and would be willing to trade for a Savage, let me know. Another one of those Thompson mysteries..... Roger

Tiger Bay, What if TDF (or anyone else) had a C&R FFL? The transport documents are then not required. Does that change the game?

Tman, I thought the Ranger SXT's, though very similar to Black Talons, had been slightly redesigned since all of the uproar. Are you certain the projectile is the same? Roger

I agree with the comments expressed in the previous replies. I see no reason to ban someone for a difference of opinion or attitude. Banning should be reserved for those people who exhibit a pattern of intense flaming and/or vulgarity. As long as someone remains civil and just happens to have a differing opinion from others, I believe tolerance is the best approach. We can often gleen nuggets of truth or insight even from those that we dislike or disdain. Roger

John Jr, Thanks for posting this remembrance on the board. I too have visited the Arizona Memorial, and was both humbled and awed. It is truly a reverent place. I hope to visit again in the next few years. It is interesting that the anniversary fell this year on Sunday, just like that fateful day. I wonder how often that has happened in the past 62 years. Like others on the board, I still hope to visit Normandy some day, although I think I may lose it walking among the graves of so many of our brethren who gave their lives for our way of life. Always say thanks to a vet, any vet. But particularly say thanks to those who fought in Vietnam. Whether you agree or disagree with how that war was handled, the guys on the ground put themselves in harms way under some pretty ugly conditions, and generally were shunned when they returned. One of the favorite pieces I have in my collection is a sidearm carried by a Ranger friend of mine in Vietnam. It isn't worth much monetarily, but he sacrificed both of his legs bringing it and himself back home. Roger

Balder, The scenario laid out by PhiOhio and GIjive is the most likely. If Sgt's gun had gone to Britain like yours, it would have the Brit proof marks. Regards Roger

There is conjecture that these are the Russian guns that took a detour through Britain. However, if this is true, at least some of the parts spent some time in Britain before making it to the U.S. The 1928 trigger frame I got on my parts set had remnants of black paint in a few spots and had the original serial number removed and replace with a different number. The serial number change was common under the old deactivation process in Britain, and the Brits did paint a number of their weapsons black from time to time. We will probably never know where they really came from or how IMA got them back into the U.S. Let's all just take advantage of a good thing and stock up on nice parts. Roger

Cavediver, The value of your drum on condition (as always), function and which NY drum it is. There were five or six (memory fails me) New York drums, each with different characteristics and manufactured at different times between 1921 and 1941. The first three gen drums command a premium price. The later drums are still more valuable than a WWII drum, but not as much as the early "Colt" drums. If the refinishing was done well, it should not hurt the value too much, but that depends on what the buyer is looking for. An original finish NY L-drum through generation 3 is probably in the $1300-1800 range. Gen 4-6 is probably in the $1000-1500 range. That's my best approximation. I haven't been buying drums much lately, so I may be a bit off. PK, AIN'T IT THE TRUTH!!!

IF (and that's a big if) this is really an original blueprint and can be confirmed as such, the price may not seem as insane as it does a first glance. Just ask Tracie the price of some of his "original paperwork". I have seen document collectors pay huge sums for some documents just like we pay for Thompson-related items. Roger

PK can probably provide more engineering specifics than I can, but my recommendation is to stay very far away from these parts. Furthermore, I agree that any gun that has used them could have been subjected to significant receiver battering and could be weakened. Both the "speed" bolt (some metal removed) and Blish lock with its ears removed have been addressed many times on this forum, and I can't remember one positive thing ever being said about them. I can definitely tell you that Tracie Hill takes a dim view of these modifications. Roger

Doug, I work in Information Security, and as such I am paid to be paranoid. I realize that in today's electronic world, there is much more information than we are aware of or would like to admit about each and every one of us out there if someone really cares and knows how to look. I take the approach that there is no reason to create any more public information about myself than necessary. I generally agree with the other comments in this thread about anonymity, though I also realize there is a very low probability of someone tracking me through this site. I have had wonderful conversations with you a couple times on the phone and have purchased items from you. I realize that you have not been able to link my real name (Roger Herbst) to my pseudonym of TSMG28, and you give a good argument for being able to know who is involved in our small Thompson community. Thanks for raising this issue. It has been an interesting thread. Roger

USMC-2-USN, Great looking weapon. http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif It is definitely a keeper. It even has the paddle-style safety and selector (certainly appropriate given its probable date of manufacture, but not as commonly seen on M1A1's). The trigger frame appears to be of AO manufacture because the FULL AUTO is on one line. I agree with ThompsonCrazy that the no-crossbolt stock is also a nice feature. The sling is correct for this vintage/model weapon. I see nothing to question the credibility of the gentleman you bought this from. The crossbolts were added beginning in 1943 because of breakage at the attachment point to the frame. Many Thompsons (1928's, M1's and M1A1's) were retrofitted with the crossbolt stock to avoid problems. It appears yours didn't get that treatment. Keep it. Use it. Baby it a little. Get a copy of Frank's book to learn more about these special pieces of history. Roger

USMC 2-USN, Congratulations on your wonderful acquisition and welcome to the board. It sounds as though you have an excellent, original finish M1A1. The history of the weapon makes it all the more special, especially since you actually know the former owner. Documented history means a lot to those of us that are collectors. Do not concern yourself with the lack of US PROPERTY markings or the serial number on the trigger frame. According to Frank Iannamico's book American Thunder, there is no clear documention on why US PROPERTY was placed on some weapons and not on others. As was mentioned earlier in this post, the best guess is that the property markings were only placed on weapons that were destined for Lend-Lease. If the weapon was to be issued to U.S. personnel, technically there was no requirement for the US PROPERTY designation. None of the trigger frames manufacturered after January 1943 had serial numbers on them. There was a goverment directive on 7 January 1943 to only mark the receiver. The absence of the two markings only means you have a later manufacture M1A1 which was not destined for Lend-Lease. I have to agree with Chris (The1930sRust) that the price should be $10K range minimum. If you paid less, I would consider it a bargain. Hold onto it. The price is going nowhere but UP! We will anxiously await your pictures and as much of the history as you are willing to share. A word of warning that has been posted on this board many times -- Thompsonitis is a serious desease with no known cure. Once you start, it is almost impossible to stop! http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif Roger