GonePostal Posted January 10, 2009 Report Share Posted January 10, 2009 Have a friend looking to market said TSMG possibly and would like learned opinion on current selling price for this beautiful firearm. Upper and lower match. Bridgeport 50rd drum and some sticks and repro case included. Only mark a slight scratch (shown in pic) behind & below ejector. It'd be neat to know what if any detail is behind the history of this firearm. Thanks in advance, GP http://i44.tinypic.com/20awgex.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philasteen Posted January 10, 2009 Report Share Posted January 10, 2009 Has it been refinished? Looks it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD. Posted January 10, 2009 Report Share Posted January 10, 2009 It is not listed in Gordon's book. Do you know where your friend purchased it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gijive Posted January 10, 2009 Report Share Posted January 10, 2009 Nice looking gun! Doesn't look refinished to me, looks like the original Colt blue. If it's not in Gordon's book, I know that he would be interested in learning its origin. Ask your friend where, when and from whom he purchased it, maybe then someone can give some insight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GonePostal Posted January 10, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 10, 2009 Additional pictures. Know enough to be dangerous and to spot a refinish, this is all original Colt blue here folks. Additionally I find it odd that this one escaped a listing in the book. Wish there was a way to determine some facts on it's origin. I'll be checking on where and how it was obtained but I can tell you it was years ago as it's been sitting idle and unfired in the doc's vault for a good while now. http://i41.tinypic.com/29z4dua.jpg http://i41.tinypic.com/2mq4uic.jpg http://i41.tinypic.com/6zroya.jpg http://i42.tinypic.com/eqcu34.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billatlanta Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 GonePostal -- message & email sent. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deathompson Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 Has it been refinished? Looks it. On what do you base this opinion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reconbob Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 (edited) If anything these photos make the gun look like its been reblued. I am not saying this frivolously. - it could be a trick of the lighting, but the gun looks too shiny. The original Colt finish was not a mirror finish but a brushed or satin type finish - The engraving does not look crisp and consistent - there are places where the lettering varies in terms of depth or the boldness or faintness of the letters. This is true for the left side Colt markings and also the right side patent numbers - The inspectors mark (JHD) looks especially faint and buffed out and the bullet logo also looks buffed. Again, this could be the lighting and the photos, but to me this is not a "lock" that its an original, unaltered gun. The engraving should be consistent in depth and appearance, and its not. The hand stamps - the JHD and the 28 overstamp will have raised the steel (even if very slightly) as the hand stamp causes the surface to deform around the letters of the stamp. None of this is evident in the photos. The fact that this gun was allegedly in a safe for many years is irrelevant. I would like others to weigh in on this, and if closer/better photos can refute the observations I made above that would be of value to any of us trying to identify an unaltered gun. Bob Edited January 14, 2009 by reconbob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philasteen Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 deathompson, I was only going off the one photo but Reconbob raised the two things that caught me eye in the photo: letters not crisp and finish color looking atypical. The latter is easy to chalk up to the photography but as to the former we need more pics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deathompson Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 deathompson, I was only going off the one photo but Reconbob raised the two things that caught me eye in the photo: letters not crisp and finish color looking atypical. The latter is easy to chalk up to the photography but as to the former we need more pics. Good eyes I agree... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gijive Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 (edited) - it could be a trick of the lighting, but the gun looks too shiny. The original Colt finish was not a mirror finish but a brushed or satin type finish - The engraving does not look crisp and consistent - there are places where the lettering varies in terms of depth or the boldness or faintness of the letters. This is true for the left side Colt markings and also the right side patent numbers Bob, The lighting on the photo looks to be tungsten light without a flash (notice the yellowish cast on the highlighting of the front grip and shadowing arounding the trigger guard), this might be causing the surface to appear to be a deeper blue than a flash would capture. * (Edit) Actually what I meant to say was a softer blue with less a less sharp reflection than a flash would produce. This may be what is causing the polished finish you describe. Look at the photo of the serial number on the grip frame. Close examination shows the grain in the finish from hand polishing, consistent with original finish guns. As for the inconsistent engraving you mention, I have a gun in the same general serial number range that has somewhat inconsistent depth to the engraving on the patent dates, just like the gun pictured. The gun is original finish, I know the history and know where it has been all these years, I don't know if this is an anomaly on later serial numbered guns or not; I previously had a Colt gun in the 5,000 serial number range that didn't exhinbit the engraving depth inconsistency on most of the lettering but had a very light strike on the "E" in New York on the right side of the gun. The JHB stamps are very light on Colt guns and can vary in stamping depth. I do agree that the U.S. Navy stamp does look like the lettering is filled with blue, but this could just be a result of the angle of light casting shadows into the depression. I still believe the gun exhibits all the traits of being original finish. Of course, I wouldn't take that to the bank from photographs and if I was considering purchase I would certainly examine it in person. Edited January 15, 2009 by gijive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Fliegenheimer Posted January 15, 2009 Report Share Posted January 15, 2009 If anything these photos make the gun look like its been reblued. I am not saying this frivolously. - it could be a trick of the lighting, but the gun looks too shiny. The original Colt finish was not a mirror finish but a brushed or satin type finish - The engraving does not look crisp and consistent - there are places where the lettering varies in terms of depth or the boldness or faintness of the letters. This is true for the left side Colt markings and also the right side patent numbers - The inspectors mark (JHD) looks especially faint and buffed out and the bullet logo also looks buffed. Again, this could be the lighting and the photos, but to me this is not a "lock" that its an original, unaltered gun. The engraving should be consistent in depth and appearance, and its not. The hand stamps - the JHD and the 28 overstamp will have raised the steel (even if very slightly) as the hand stamp causes the surface to deform around the letters of the stamp. None of this is evident in the photos. The fact that this gun was allegedly in a safe for many years is irrelevant. I would like others to weigh in on this, and if closer/better photos can refute the observations I made above that would be of value to any of us trying to identify an unaltered gun. Bob If you look at Colt TSMG 1921A #338 featured in the 1992 Rimfire video, you can plainly see that the receiver's finish is indeed reflecting the guy's hands when he is disassembling and assembling it. This particular Colt has an incredibly well-documented history dating from June, 1921 up to the Rimfire video and beyond. I present this specimen as a neutral source (thereby excluding the famous #167) for the factory finish on the Colt TSMG. Whether you want to call this finish satin or brushed, it is not a dull finish and does have the reflective characteristic of a polished finish. If shininess were a disqualification for an original Colt finish then collectors are in real trouble. As to the originality of this finish, without seeing it in sunlight, any observations would just be speculative. Without the white highliter on the stampings, the photography does make it difficult to determine what is truly faint and what is just not sharp due to the lighting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colt21a Posted January 15, 2009 Report Share Posted January 15, 2009 flip up the lyman and check the rivet's.i am sure gone postal is doing his homework on this one,i have seen enough tricks that they have used on Thompson's.over the last four decade's, remember even Roger, Earl, and a few others had guns reblued and restored.i myself had at least three. #894 would have fooled many a expert.also a number of years ago a few had been done {overstamp's.} that had actually been given some wear after the restoration job.to give them that not new look. and a easy way to spot is wood that has been taken off and on. and the grip screw's and washers underneath.{ many forget the grip washer's,} and the felt in the buttstock, for the oiler rattle, also replaced part's on inside, when some part's show no wear and others right next to it are worn. and comp pins mark's. from replacement. and pivot plate mark's. taken apart alot, or using handtool's the wrong one's. take every Colt into bright sunlight. that tells the truth. they are all brown....... if you don't Believe me, look at your Colt now.{ if you never have}a little trick i learned over 30 years ago. anybody that wants to buy this i'm sure the seller will give a letter stating all original as sold to me. with return contract. also look at frame side's not much wear. the buttstock has not been slid off much. and check behind the rear grip. for blue brown finish.you will also notice on frame serial a patina in the finish or the starting of rust {maybe} which means over the year's the stock was on metal to metal and maybe not oiled well.the pivot plate looks correct, and not a mark to be found just oil on it to give a different blue tinge.also in drum slot area some type of wear or light freckling. i give gone postal credit he located a nice one.not the trumped up crap that i have seen over the past ten year's.and i have seen them. i can guarantee you i sold a few better then #167, {his wins for documentation}#6011 for overall best gun.fit finish ,wood. i think the man has been offered $50,000.00 for it. he's still not selling it. and #5050 and #3283, and #7537,and #8780. this Navy is right up there on what i can make out of the pics'. in the top 50 or so gun's in private hands.another point the wood on this looks unmessed with and the rear grip fit looks perfect.no gap's. the washers should still be underneath the grip screws front and rear.shiny metal not blued. buy hey thats just me. i am sure all the other expert Thompson people will chime in. if anybody wants to batter whatever i have to say go ahead.just make sure you can back it up with 40 year's of playing with the Tommie's.not by just reading some book's or pics on the internet.but hands on looking at hundreds of them.and owning and selling as many. i like to keep Thompson history as it is. FUN and Fact. when $$$ gets in the way, then the way gets blurry. and never say to anybody when buying "Ron said this". use your knowledge about buying what you want to buy and your skill's.and fly, drive, or hitchike, to see what you want to buy if possible. that way no problems later on.i did it for sometimes more year's then i can remember. through rain snow, heat, and bad wind's.the fun was the chase and locating the item's.{ in the old days} a letter a stamp. or L.D.phone call. i could go on but why? over and out.now somebody go get a nice {late number}overstamp.Ron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bridgeport28A1 Posted January 15, 2009 Report Share Posted January 15, 2009 flip up the lyman and check the rivet's.i am sure gone postal is doing his homework on this one,i have seen enough tricks that they have used on Thompson's.over the last four decade's, remember even Roger, Earl, and a few others had guns reblued and restored.i myself had at least three. #894 would have fooled many a expert.also a number of years ago a few had been done {overstamp's.} that had actually been given some wear after the restoration job.to give them that not new look. and a easy way to spot is wood that has been taken off and on. and the grip screw's and washers underneath.{ many forget the grip washer's,} and the felt in the buttstock, for the oiler rattle, also replaced part's on inside, when some part's show no wear and others right next to it are worn. and comp pins mark's. from replacement. and pivot plate mark's. taken apart alot, or using handtool's the wrong one's. take every Colt into bright sunlight. that tells the truth. they are all brown....... if you don't Believe me, look at your Colt now.{ if you never have}a little trick i learned over 30 years ago. anybody that wants to buy this i'm sure the seller will give a letter stating all original as sold to me. with return contract. also look at frame side's not much wear. the buttstock has not been slid off much. and check behind the rear grip. for blue brown finish.you will also notice on frame serial a patina in the finish or the starting of rust {maybe} which means over the year's the stock was on metal to metal and maybe not oiled well.the pivot plate looks correct, and not a mark to be found just oil on it to give a different blue tinge.also in drum slot area some type of wear or light freckling. i give gone postal credit he located a nice one.not the trumped up crap that i have seen over the past ten year's.and i have seen them. i can guarantee you i sold a few better then #167, {his wins for documentation}#6011 for overall best gun.fit finish ,wood. i think the man has been offered $50,000.00 for it. he's still not selling it. and #5050 and #3283, and #7537,and #8780. this Navy is right up there on what i can make out of the pics'. in the top 50 or so gun's in private hands.another point the wood on this looks unmessed with and the rear grip fit looks perfect.no gap's. the washers should still be underneath the grip screws front and rear.shiny metal not blued. buy hey thats just me. i am sure all the other expert Thompson people will chime in. if anybody wants to batter whatever i have to say go ahead.just make sure you can back it up with 40 year's of playing with the Tommie's.not by just reading some book's or pics on the internet.but hands on looking at hundreds of them.and owning and selling as many. i like to keep Thompson history as it is. FUN and Fact. when $$$ gets in the way, then the way gets blurry. and never say to anybody when buying "Ron said this". use your knowledge about buying what you want to buy and your skill's.and fly, drive, or hitchike, to see what you want to buy if possible. that way no problems later on.i did it for sometimes more year's then i can remember. through rain snow, heat, and bad wind's.the fun was the chase and locating the item's.{ in the old days} a letter a stamp. or L.D.phone call. i could go on but why? over and out.now somebody go get a nice {late number}overstamp.Ron Ron, great post, sunlight outside is the best for seeing the "brown", a small battery maglight indoors will show you the "brown" "under" a finish on firearms, if the finish is 50 years old expect to see the brown. If you have a 1911 or old 1911A1 take a look to see what Ron means by "brown". If you don't see it with a maglite good chance it been refinished. Ross Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billatlanta Posted January 16, 2009 Report Share Posted January 16, 2009 GonePostal -- message & email sent. Bill GonePostal : Check for email or message. Thanks, Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gijive Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 (edited) Hi, I am resurrecting this thread to illustrate the photography and lighting discussion that centered around the originality of the finish on the gun for sale. I have taken some photographs with and without flash to show how lighting can affect the finish appearance and also to document the inconsistent depth of engraving that is present on Colt Thompson Submachine Guns. The finish on this gun is original and it has not been polished, buffed or otherwise altered. http://i414.photobucket.com/albums/pp227/Colt1928/Colt%20Engraving/PatentDates.jpg This photo shows the Patent Dates engraving and was taken without flash under fluorescent and tungsten light. http://i414.photobucket.com/albums/pp227/Colt1928/Colt%20Engraving/RightSidenoflash.jpg Overall view of right side of gun. http://i414.photobucket.com/albums/pp227/Colt1928/Colt%20Engraving/Leftsidenoflash1.jpg Left side view taken without flash showing shadowing in U.S. Navy stampings. http://i414.photobucket.com/albums/pp227/Colt1928/Colt%20Engraving/Leftsidenoflash.jpg Overall view of left side of gun. http://i414.photobucket.com/albums/pp227/Colt1928/Colt%20Engraving/LeftSideflash.jpg Left side view of U.S. Navy stampings taken with flash. Note sharper image and darker color of finish. http://i414.photobucket.com/albums/pp227/Colt1928/Colt%20Engraving/LeftSide-1.jpg Overall view of left side of gun taken with flash. http://i414.photobucket.com/albums/pp227/Colt1928/Colt%20Engraving/Leftside2.jpg Close up of Colt's Patent Firearms engraving showing inconsistent depth on some characters. Edited January 27, 2009 by gijive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Fliegenheimer Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 (edited) gijive, The subtleties of bluing are certainly affected by indoor photography. You should also include pics of this TSMG photographed in sunlight to illustrate even more differences, and how it affects the inconsistent depth on the roll marked characters. Edited January 27, 2009 by Arthur Fliegenheimer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gijive Posted January 27, 2009 Report Share Posted January 27, 2009 Arthur, That's a good idea! I'll take some pictures when I get a chance and post them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now