Karatebear

Trying to pull barrel from parts kit nose stub, the barrel/nose had been soaking in gas for over 72hrs before my first attempt and the vise (Doug's barrel vise) won't tighten any further but it keeps slipping in the vise, I've tried using some kroil on it as well, I just can't get it to budge without slipping. Please advise.

There was clearly bias against the Thompson and in favor of the M3 in the beginning with it turning into a sales pitch for the KRISS towards the end. I am pretty sure everyone here is biased for the Thompson, myself included, though mines a 28a1. I personally would of liked to see a HK UMP 45 thrown in the mix.

I'd possibly be interested in the front end's if its a rem 870 12g

get a raptor grip and put on them and make a non nfa shorty, that is if the barrels are at least 14", OAL would be 26.5", I believe receiver would need to be originally pistol grip only, maybe not if it was nfa at one time, ask marty over at shockwave maybe? http://shockwavetechnologies.com/site/?page_id=88

: ( mine hasn't arrived yet, will call tomorrow, paid with USPS Postal M.O.

Glad to hear yours arrived yesterday, that means mine should be hear soon also, hopefully today.

http://www.reconord.com/ has a few posted on gunbroker as well http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=463137107 Recon ord is firm on their prices. I asked to lower the starting bid on a seymour he had listed but he wouldn't budge said the price was firm not as nice as the one over on david spiwak http://www.davidspiwak.com/50-rd_drum.html

I've been eyeing this one but recently got one from another forum member http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=463562888

When I spoke to last month I believe he said mid January was his return, I could be mistaken though.

I was aware of the size difference, I was just stating that if it's for a replica it really shouldn't make a difference, kahr carries the grips as well. Just an idea.

If it's going on a replica why not just use a new production kahr? http://www.auto-ordnance.com/Firearm-Parts/Thompson-T1-30-Gripmount.asp

^ this

got a quick reply to a question about 2 weeks ago. haven't placed an order, yet

will take $250 shipped from members here while there are still no bids on it http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=458348460 Thanks, Jason

i found some selectors on gunbroker http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=447774819 http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=457114315 http://www.tommygunner.com/pages/parts/ shows they have safety

Yeah, but to a real Thompson, WWII Savage, well the next best thing to a Colt that is IMHO. Not doing anything permanent of course. So what would the verdict be on removing the forward part of the mount that puts pressure on the barrel?

how would it affect removing the forward "tang" that is applying pressure on the barrel? I was thinking of getting a 3/4 one, but may get one of these instead to experiment. doesn't it apply unnecessary pressure to the barrel, wouldn't removal hypothetically improve accuracy? I'm thinking along the lines of ar15/m16 stoner type rifles where a free float handguard may improve accuracy over a non free float. I was actually thinking of mounting a quad rail to the mount for a more modern front end just to have around as a spare for fun, some of you may think I'm being heretic. But being the youngin' that I am, I was thinking more along the lines of "Not your fathers Thompson." Was thinking a Richardson mount rear sight with an eotech, a KAC quad rail full of accessories, because you know the Thompson isn't heavy enough as is, and a 45 can on the end, sometimes I just want to shoot in my backyard.

It's a WH, but it's Advertised as NEW http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=455966404 maybe this is the one?

bump

I'm sure someone like http://www.trosusa.com/ could make you a custom adapter so you wouldn't need to rethread your barrel or gunthreadadapters.com

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jw7BpDSMYOw

I'm sure you'd have a nice retainer with the $ saved

Did you see this one? http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=445518004 he had an 28a1 but it's too old to view anymore, the 28a1 sold for $2k

it seems it could be gray, I saw this auction too and thought it could be a suitable rebuild. legal and lawful are not the same, if it did constitute constructive intent it of course would be illegal, that's not to say it's not lawful USA v Miller suggests that since it is a "military" weapon it's ownership by a citizen is guaranteed by the 2nd amendment. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/307/174 Thomas Jefferson stated, "Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry." http://www.monticello.org/site/jefferson/tyranny-defined-which-legal-government-quotation The Laws of Nations states that when a "sovereignty" (that would be the US Government) is tyrannical, the "sovereigns" (that is the citizens) do not have to follow rule. http://www.constitution.org/vattel/vattel_01.htm Which brings me to NFA Items, it isn't so much that it violates the second amendment, but that is directly violates the Charters of Freedom, specifically Article I, Section 10 "No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility." It sets into place a system of "privilege" and I will have to research to find the SCOTUS case that says, you can't take a right, put a fee on it and call it a privilege. Lastly, in is to no effect whether something is legal/illegal, it's a matter of whether something is lawful/unlawful Marbury v. Madison "Thus, the particular phraseology of the Constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written Constitutions, that a law repugnant to the Constitution is void, and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument. The rule must be discharged." http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/5/137 And if you live in the US most states revised statutes will be similar to mine which is NRS 1.030  Application of common law in courts.  The common law of England, so far as it is not repugnant to or in conflict with the Constitution and laws of the United States, or the Constitution and laws of this State, shall be the rule of decision in all the courts of this State. anything other is by your consent. Statutes / Ordinances are not the "law" The Constitution is the "law" Article VI ... This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; ... http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html They may be "gray" area parts, but certainly something I'd consider getting Rant Over

IMO, get an ffl, pay the sot and get a 100% from philord. would be cheaper in the long run and would open doors to countless other possibilities.