gunhistorian

Agreed with the 11.4. the auction ended. the other guy refused to pay. this, as far as i am concerned, is now a private sale, subject to negotiations. if 11.4 won't do it, walk away. i think you are being more than fair.

There was a fellow selling "rare" Johnson M1941 rifles a number of years ago: usually "matching serial number" (the numbered parts matched the receiver s/n -- just ain't so!) or with Queen Wilhelmina crests on the receiver (again -- faked). I've seen the production log for the "no-letter-prefix" serial numbered receivers and there is NO example of any rifle being produced with parts bearing numbers that match the receiver. They just weren't produced this way -- the parts were numbered at the insistence of the Netherlands Purchasing Commission (I can't document this, but that is the prevalent theory). The Johnson rifle -- and light machine guns -- were specifically designed to have 100% interchangeable parts, I believe one of the first firearms to be designed from this standpoint. The other "myth" surrounding Johnson rifles is that they were produced in order of the serial number: In other words a "no-prefix s/n" was produced before an "A" prefix s/n. . .And a rifle with s/n 2085, for example, was produced before a rifle with s/n 3224. Both of these are generally incorrect assumptions. Thus, a rifle with s/n A5955 could have been produced earlier than a rifle with s/n 0597 (not true, in this example, but you get the idea). I'm not sure where these "urban legends" come from -- maybe simple "logic" -- but in the world of mass production of firearms, one should approach "logic" with caution. There are some rare Johnson rifles floating around and probably some that are waiting to be discovered: the paratroop take-down, for example. I don't know if it still exists. There are about 5 Johnson Auto-Carbines out there -- at least one might have a stock similar to that on the M1944 light machine gun. With the relatively limited number of Johnson rifles (and machine guns) produced, and the current collector's market for these firearms, one ought not to be on the lookout for one of these fake "rare" Johnsons. And, by the way, this opinion excludes preproduction prototypes, usually with the detachable clip magazine. These are extremely rare, like maybe 3 to 5 virtually hand-made in a tool room for purpose of using sort of as gages: one made to minimum specs, one to maximum, and one to "average".

Remember what Patton said about pearl-handle grips? LOL!

OCM: maybe the reason for the lack of sound was that newsreel cameras did not, at that time, have the ability to record sound and did not use "sound track" film. I don't know, as this isn't my "area of expertise" -- not sure what my area of expertise IS! LOL -- but that is a reasonable guess. . .Or maybe the officials didn't want the public to hear all the joking and laughing and stuff!

the 1911s on the running board of the car are cocked or at half-cock. neat!

Interesting! What is the tactical role for a smg in today's world? (By smg, I mean a select-fire, pistol-caliber weapon with a stock. . .just to define terms.) I'm thinking there are probably three primary "markets": military, police, and civilian (for range use and possibly home defense, though home defense with an mg doesn't seem realistically advisable in today's legal climate!) It would seem that a smg, for military purposes, is prettly well limited to special operations tactics and probably has to be suppressor-equipped. Maybe the CAR-15 (or whatever the military version is) with a suppressor has supplanted the role of the smg. I am not sure that the smg belongs in police arsenals. Again, probably the M-4 (?) version of the M-16 would suffice. . . Unless we go to the type of special operations conducted by police that allegedly takes place against "cartels" in Latin America. (Not a bad idea, IMHO!) I suspect that home defense by civilians is best served by a pump or semi-auto shotgun with a short, but legal, barrel length. Wonder what the results would be in a shoot-out (competition) between an M-4, an MP-5, and a TSMG or Reising -- in the hands of equally experienced shooters -- in both a plate shoot and a "Jungle Walk"? And would this really prove anything?

This is a need forum. While not every conceivable firearm or accessory can be addressed, I think it will be a helpful place as there are so many readers with a great deal of expertise and are willing to guide others. Fakes and repros are nothing new, but there are a lot of new "consumers" who don't remember the "fake" craze of the '60s and into the '70s with "cowboy guns" and -- particularly -- Lugers. Having said that, I DO have a very rare pistol once carried by John Wilkes Booth. . .it is an experimental "semi-auto" firing paper-wrapped bullets/gunpowder/ with the primer at the base of the paper. No ejection problems because there is no "case". Magazine -- fairly crude -- holds five rounds of this very rare ammo. This is available -- with five rounds of the ammo -- at a VERY reasonable price. Cash only, preferably small bills. LOL

The cut-away Thompson! Is that an original cut-away? Does it have to be registered? I realize that the cutting away of the receiver does not comply with the current law (or regulations) on what constitutes a DEWAT, but was wondering if it is considered a "live" m.g. or a deactivated weapon. Who did the cutting away? AO or one of the manufacturers? The military? Or simply someone else? Fascinating piece of work that really shows how the action works! Thanks for posting to all who shared their photos here!

I cannot comment on this company, but want to mention that I've done the same thing with '97s that I've picked up at gun shows, using the repro bayonet attachment/heat shield that was available a few years ago from IMA. Haven't checked to see if these are still being sold by IMA, so am uncertain about their availability. If I recall correctly, the repro heat shields did not require the barrel to be "relieved" by a cut so that the shield screw would have a place to go through. I suspect this cut -- on original trench guns -- probably served to keep the shield from wobbling or twisting. The repro took a bayonet OK. Note that I fabricated these mostly for display guns and never shot the guns so can't comment on how well the heat shield stood up to recoil. As an aside, I also had one of the Chinese copies (Norinco?) and was very pleased with that. Not sure if they are still available. Makes kind of an interesting looking gun and either the Bullcreek or the Norinco should be OK for reenactors. NOTE: I forgot to look closely at the Bullcreek gun photo -- the Norinco doesn't come with a rear (stock) sling swivel. I'd think that those wanting a more authentic trench gun would want to have that rear swivel and I had neither the tools nor the talent to attempt to inlet the stock and install the swivel. (The heat shield should have a sling loop -- or whatever they are called.)

Nice poster! The war is over. Although I was out of the Corps by the time that esteemed outfit was sent in, I feel more bitterness and hostility to the anti-war protesters who defiled returning U.S. servicemen (and women) and those who fled to Canada (those draft dodgers who went to jail at least had the courage of their convictions). While both sides committed atrocities I don't harbor any ill-will to the vietnamese. I have heard only good things about their hospitality to "Americans". . . Interestingly, when a three-part article on Johnson rifles and machine guns appeared in the American Rifleman quite a few years ago, someone wrote a letter to the "Rifleman" mentioning that he was touring a small Vietnamese military museum and found what appeared to be a Johnson M1944 l.m.g. on display. While this is merely speculation, I suspect that a small shipment (maybe 600 mas o mano) of these weapons were shipped to the French and issued to either Moroccan or Algerian troops -- there is some evidence of this in a draft manuscript located at the Army Heritage Center (the draft was on the French Army during the Italian Campaign), the '44 JLMG manuals in French, and (if the letter-writer's observation is correct) the fact that Moroccan troops served during the French Indochina war. Just something for someone a lot younger to follow up on! LOL

Thanks, David. Will p.m. you this coming week (can send you a disc but have only WordPerfect as a word processor).

In a document I uncovered doing research on a book manuscript project, John Ball of Soley Armament (U.K.) wrote in the 1930s that he had sold a quantity of British (surplus) Lewis guns (aircraft model, I believe) to the Japanese -- probably the Japanese Navy. (He also wrote some very perceptive information on Japanese intentions -- better than some of the pre-war intelligence reports that I've seen!) Interestingly, Ball left his collection of stone age (and other ancient) weaponry to the Japanese Imperial Army Museum. As Ball died prior to 1941 -- but at a time of increasing hostility toward the Japanese in the U.K. -- I do not believe his collection ever made it to Japan, it being broken up and sold at auction prior to World War II. Anyway! I haven't seen "The Belgian Rattlesnake" book or any other "authoritative" source and was wondering if anyone has any info on whether the British Lewis guns ever made it to Japan and if any are still in existence. Because these were originally .303 British, I'd suspect they were either rebarrelled or rechambered to accept the 7.7-mm Japanese (rimmed?) round.

This really isn't Thompson related but since many of the folks on this board are weapons and history oriented as well as some very talented researchers and writers, I thought I'd post this here. I am just about finished with the third draft of a book manuscript on the private arms traffickers of the Inter-War era (about 1930-1939), focused primarily on American Armament Corporation and the Miranda brothers. Most of the material is "original". While not focused on the technical stuff, it gives a fairly broad view of the arms trafficking business in that era and includes some brief info on Bannerman, Sedgley, Fed Labs, Lake Erie, Soley Armament (U.K.),, the Hyde s.m.g. (Griffin & Howe), etc. Also covered is the Mirandas' venture into the amusement ride business (the Parachute Jump now at Coney Island), Brewster Aircraft, the "Tucker Tiger (or Turret)", Johnson Automatics, and Dardick's attempt to manufacture and market the Tround firing pistol/rifle combo. I need someone to help not only edit and possibly re-write, but to finish the final chapter and -- most importantly -- help me market the darned thing to a publisher. (I'm not a very good salesman!) Basically the deal is a 50-50 split on royalties (and ownership of the copyright) and -- if the darned thing is published -- your name as co-author). I've been at this project for over 10 years and am burned out -- as well as simply getting old (and maybe lazy). PM me if interested. Thanks, Bob

Sort of an interesting debate, but all smoke and little flame! First, I doubt that the original AOC had an "exclusive" contract with Colt in the common (maybe) use of the term. That is, I doubt that AOC was restrained by the contract from entering into contracts with other manufacturers but Colt was free to subcontract for parts. BTW, while this might be in Hill's book == my copy being destroyed by a now former spouse in a domestic dispute == who did the production engineering (if any) of the TSMG? Colt or AOC? I can't comment on Chasen but if my memory is correct == and at my age, that is doubtful == I seem to recall that Helmer in "The Gun That Made The 20s Roar" stated that some company (or individual) in West Virginia was contemplating production of Thompsons. Can't remember if they were to be semi-autos of FAs or both. He did not name the company. Obviously, Numrich acquired the parts from Kilgore -- BTW, a fairly well-known and connected member of a heavy ordnance company was probably then working for Kilgore -- which was apparently limited to a sale of assets and not of the corporate name and trademark. Some of this is "legal stuff", but it should be kept in mind that most transactions are governed by law and it sometimes helps to have a fundamental understanding of "law".

gjive: Many thanks for clarifying this. Great info!