NOS Colt 1921A barrel on Gunbroker

[MrBill]

Thanks Again TD I personally own five Colts but I am by no means a authority on Thompsons. You have to be so careful and some sellers are less informed than we are. i have a overstamp i bought eight or nine years with a ringed barrel because it was the only way to get the Swetnam case that came with it. The gun has a Savage Barrel I purchased at the Phoenix SAR show in 2015 so If anyone has a real Colt barrel in about 80% condition please PM me.

[Colt Chopper]

Here are some barrel pics of 2-early numbered "A" barrels, one rough "A" barrel, and one that has been threaded for a comp.

I can not 100% verify the threaded barrel, but no "Chatter" marks are present to my old eyes.

The "A's" have the Colt front sights, so you would assume their good to go. The threaded barrel is what ever you believe it is, since there is no provenance with it. I purchased the threaded one, because to me, it had the right look. Opinion's very.

Edited July 18, 2022 by Colt Chopper

[inertord]

FWIW every Colt Era 1921A Spare Parts List that I have observed lists the barrel / front sight sold as factory assembled. The barrel, front sight and front sight pin are not listed separately. It makes sense, as the front sight would be difficult to index and pin outside of the factory.

Edited July 18, 2022 by inertord

[firearm]

Got this one out of my spare part pile. Pretty sure it is original. If I remember right, I have the lower that came with it around here somewhere.

[Got Uzi]

While it would be nice to put an original Colt Barrel and comp on my Colt NAVY....I refuse to pay the insane prices they go for these days. A repo barrel will work just fine for me.

[MrBill]

Got Uzi...I totally agree except when you try to sell the Colt (i do not shoot any of the Colts) Most of my small collection I purchased for under 30K a piece and i am fortunate enough to have a M1 I bought from Rueben in 2011 that is big and sloow. As we all know the prices for the old Form 4 stuff is pretty high. Curtis Earl was pretty accurate.

[Got Uzi]

Well my Colt NAVY is a pre sample so when it comes to that, you take what you can get. It always was and will be a "shooter gun" but at some point I'd like to make it more correct, even if its with repo parts and if or when I would sell it...I'd be damn sure to explain that.

[TD.]

Colt Chopper,

A very nice selection of barrels. Given the wear and front sight and two with assembly numbers, there is no doubt about the originality of these three. Your description of the threaded barrel is what I like to hear from a seller, i.e., it is what it is; inspect carefully! Years ago, the 28 fins would have given me pause but not today. I really like the look too, especially the last fin and index marking. If for sale and I was an interested buyer, I would inspect the 21st fin for signs of the grip mount touching when it was on a gun and the bore for any signs of rings or trouble.

 

inertord - great observation. I would guess that spare barrels without an index line on the barrel collar, front sights and pins would have been delivered to Auto-Ordnance as separate parts (but again, just a guess). With the proper tools and jigs, this would make a (factory) barrel replacement easy on a 1921A. When the compensator was introduced, the only added step if doing a barrel change would be to first thread the barrel boss. All opinions welcome.

 

firearm,

A very nice barrel. 29 fins and a Type 1 Compensator. If you can marry that barrel to the frame of a destroyed Colt's, that would remove all doubt as to originality. That said, I think the barrel speaks for itself loud and clear. Would I want to see it in person before paying or have a 10 day return period from a well-respected dealer like you? Yes? And I would gladly pay postage both ways in case of a return. But like Colt Chopper's threaded barrel above, I like what I see.

 

Got Uzi,

An original barrel on any Colt with original finish adds greatly to value. Of course, the lack of an original barrel is a big deduction for me and should be for most buyers. It really all depends on what a buyer wants to do with the Colt. If a shooter Colt is desired, the lack of an original barrel (and/or other parts) and a corresponding lower price may be something for a buyer to consider. Where I think most buyers get in trouble is thinking they will make the Thompson original again. That can be an expensive proposition (for any gun), especially if multiple issues exist.

 

Mr. Bill,

Yes, there are original barrels still out there. For sale? Probably none of the ones shown. That said, an 80% Colt NAVY with a Savage barrel (compensator?) would make an excellent shooter grade Thompson. I am sure you would have no problem selling it as is.

 

All good stuff!!!

[Got Uzi]

I agree that people think they can buy a mismatch Colt gun then throw money at it to make it "original" agian. The biggest issue with that is getting the color to match....if the colors don't match then its a known "fixer upper Colt" The only way to fix that is to have the gun refinished and by doing that, you lose the originality of the gun anyhow.

 

Thats the one thing I like about my Colt NAVY-its a real Colt gun, but I can shoot it and enjoy it as long as I want. I can rebarrel it, swap parts around and even have it refinished and it wont hurt the value as it is and always will be a Colt shooter gun. The fact that its a pre sample doesn't hurt it either way in that regard really.

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

2016 thread on AOC having difficulties with fitting Cutts Compensators/ring sights on Colt/Remington barrels before Fenn Manufacturing Company devised a devise to expedite the process. Whether 1921A barrels had witness marks on them at point of manufacture or upon installation on receiver was not settled. That the Gunbroker barrel doesn't have a witness mark may impact the legitimacy of its origin.

http://www.machinegunboards.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=19474&hl=fenn

[colt21a]

Bottom line its a $500 to $700 buck barrel. and yes i got stung buying a few items in over five decades.{about twice} and sold them for what i paid, and on the last barrel stock case parts deal, made a few hundred bucks.{wow they gave me steak for a month}or was it Cat food?

 

now everything Thompson is a big ??? mark.We have what a hundred guys in the u.s. still look for this stuff. Maybe way less.

because if it was thousands like the old days..... you would never find a thing anymore.

 

its like a old tribe holding on to the old ways. and hope the history continues.

 

10 15 or 20 years the five will get together

around a table and discuss. like the old Tokyo Raiders back in 2004 and 2009.

what could of. Now Somebody buy it and keep as a nice paper weight. And revisit this post in 10 years.

SINCE WE DO SEEM

 

to pop up stuff from 2012 2015 and 2016 as the need arises,On to the next" DRAMA OF THE THOMPSON, AND BEYOND."

 

RON K.

[Got Uzi]

I kept out of this thread as I have no dog in this fight, but as a machinist and being in the manufacturing world I want to address a couple issues:

 

Chatter in the thread root-how many here have actually machined threads, let alone an ACME type? Your cutting pressures can be greater than that of a typical 60 degree included ANSI thread, meaning the tool is going to push more. Also remember these was all HAND GROUND TOOL STEEL tooling....off the shelf carbide insertable tooling didn't exist. If a machinist didn't get a good grind on said tool, or the barrel material was sightly out of spec, or the fact that these were all belt driven line shaft machines, any number of things could have caused chatter in the root of a thread. Also keep this in mind-these were not going to get seen by the human eye as they were for function not finish. If there had been chatter down inside the grooves of the barrel fins, then those could be hit with a file or emery paper. If the threads gauge within the proper spec, why throw out something that is perfectly functional due to something that wont be seen in the first place? I've seen inside some Colt handguns of that era and let me tell you the outside looked nothing like the inside.

 

Now to say "I've never seen a Colt barrel with chatter like that" Ok fine, but also think on this-it could have been one "bad barrel" that the tooling started to fail or it was just a bad barrel blank and it was fixed after said barrel was done. Again, why throw out something that is perfectly functional due to a slight inperfection based on appearance in a non visable area? Does anyone have any of the approval or inspection data sheets from Colt of this era? What finishes they were supposed to hold? What their tolereances were?

 

No witness mark-keep in mind how many changes were made during the original run of 15,000 Colt guns....meaning stamping procedures, actuator slot variations, actuator variations, and so on. I ask this question as I don't know and I'm curious to this-was the witness mark struck when the barrel was machined or after it was installed? We know the guns were numbered-lowers, uppers, butt plates, butt stocks, ect. If the barrel was installed, front sight installed, test fired to confirm zero, then strike said witness mark to show that IF the barrel was removed, this is where its to be installed back to, as to ensure its zero point and headspace. Do we have the specs and bluing procedures of Colt at that time? Did they de-barrel the receivers and blue them seperate? I say no, due to seeing inside several Colt guns and guess what-the threads had bluing on them.....makes one think doesn't it. So it would give some validity to the notion that a NOS aka "replacement Colt 21A barrel" would not have a witness mark as it hadn't been on a gun yet. That and the fact that Colt wouldn't ship out a replacement part "in the white" as most of that era, well frankly most of this era too, don't have bluing tanks sitting in the shop. This again, would lend itself to the fact that there is no witness mark.

 

Think on it what you will, but to sit here 101 years later and say "this was how it was" or "I've never seen that" can be a little over the top. Have you seen all 15,000 Colt guns? Inspected every single one or at least 50% to see the variations of the manufactuing tolerances? I can tell you that shit happens in a machine shop and you let things go based on dead lines or just plain judgment due to its end use. Also remember that most of the "spare parts" are coming off of de-mil'd guns....aka finished and functional guns. They were never intended to become "spare parts" but things happen.

 

This is some food for thought based on a machinist's point of view on this subject, that and having been in manufacturing for 18 years doing the work.

[TD.]

Got Uzi,

All great questions for you, reconbob and other machinists (or members very knowledgeable about manufacturing) to discuss. Thank you for posting. All above my pay grade!

 

It is my understanding from speaking with an employee of Turnbull Restorations on several occasions that the Colt Thompson receiver/frame and barrel were blued separately with a slightly different process. I understand this had something to do with the heat involved in the bluing process, but I cannot explain why. That said, original World War II Thompson guns have a dulite finished receiver and frame and brighter blue barrel and compensator so there appears to be something to this.

 

There is a huge difference when inspecting a complete Colt Thompson and loose parts said to be from the Colt era. Loose barrels with no provenance are particularly difficult to identify. Looking for "chatter" marks between the threads or the lack thereof is a great piece of information to have when making a purchase decision. I doubt "chatter" marks is the end all definer, but every piece of information helps when making a decision. I do like how the barrels posted by Colt Chopper and firearm do not have chatter marks between the threads. Only one of the barrels by shown by Colt Chopper has any authentication issues. That said, Colt Chopper liked how it looked and purchased it. I agree and will defer to his judgement. If I needed a barrel for a Colt threaded for a Type 2 compensator, I would be knocking on his door (with cash in-hand). Of course, if this barrel had chatter marks between the threads (and it does not) then a reevaluation may be in order. But that may not change my or his opinion!

 

All good stuff!!!

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

Comparison of Chopper's Colt 1921 barrel and Gunbroker MJH45ACP barrel appears different in the distances in the machining portion between the last thread and the collar.

[Got Uzi]

Looking at something and comparing it when they are two different angles doesnt really hold much water in my book. Appears and is are two different things, so I will argue that has no bearing here unless you can physically measure both barrel side by side. Hence why the seller has an inspection period listed in his auction.

 

Do you understand how threads are cut? That these are handmade? Your thread relief will change from part to part. Youll be close butif you get down to splitting hairs, they wont be the same. You also need to consider what time frame they were made. An early serial number gun could have one machining practice used while a later gun was done differently. You also should keep in mind that WWII Savage and AOC made guns were following the manufacturing processes that were tested and improved by Colt over the span of 15,000 Guns.....

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

Hence why the seller has an inspection period listed in his auction.

 

You also need to consider what time frame they were made. An early serial number gun could have one machining practice used while a later gun was done differently.

 

Not sure how MJH45ACP's routine inspection period renders debate about his claims the barrel to be an OEM/NOS uninstalled Colt/Remington barrel moot. Revealing the identity of the "reputable dealer" only to winning bidder also ladles additional chatter (as in incessant talk bout trivial matters.)

 

The time frame regarding manufacturing the Colt TSMG consists of 16 months. This board has threads comparing the differences and similarities earliest between the earliest 1000 or so Colt TSMG numbered barrels to those produced months later sans serial numbers. This isn't unplowed ground.

[Got Uzi]

And yet you still havent answered my question or made argument to my point that production procedures can change over time, or to the fact that no one has yet to produce the tolerance specs on the machining of said items.

 

To say something isnt what it is claimed to be based on chatter in threads isnt enough for me to raise a flag and say its a fake It is established that Colt barrels can have variations as far as fin count and diameter of said fins. Its safe to presume this can happen with a threaded shoulder and thread relief gap too.

 

I would pose the question this way-prove that it IS NOT what it is claimed to be and back it up with solid facts. Not evidence based on barrels that have been installed in guns (aka parts kit guns) but actual NOS parts. Explain why there is no witness mark when its never been on a gun, nor had a front sight installed. I put it back to you sir, prove that it isnt what it appears to be with hard evidence and fact, not presumptions or comparing it to take off barrels from built and functional guns.

 

As for unplowed ground....new things are being discovered on Thompson guns and their production as well long held theories being changed due to new outlooks on processes. Keeping an open mind on things allows for growth....the world being flat was considered an unplowed ground argument too and look where we are now.....

Edited July 22, 2022 by Got Uzi

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

 

 

prove that it isnt what it appears to be with hard evidence and fact, not presumptions or comparing it to take off barrels from built and functional guns.

 

As for unplowed ground....new things are being discovered on Thompson guns and their production as well long held theories being changed due to new outlooks on processes.

 

Keeping an open mind on things allows for growth....the world being flat was considered an unplowed ground argument too and look where we are now.....

 

For someone without a canine in this fight, as you previously stated, you sound more like Michael Vick. If we knew the identity of the "reputable dealer," who is the sole authority MJH45ACP rests his proof on that this hidden from public view barrel for the last 101 years is indeed a Kosher virgin Colt/Remington barrel, we could have him pony up this "hard evidence."

 

It is is interesting you invoke the myth that Medieval people believed the World was flat.

 

"You might ask, then, how it came to be discovered that the world was round. For this answer, we have to look up. In an age with no electric streetlights, people were constantly exposed to the brilliant beauty, and predictability, of the night sky. In order for the regular pattern of the stars to make any sense, either the Earth or the rest of the universe was moving around. An Arabic astronomer from the ninth century, Ahmad al-Farghani, supported this theory by pointing out that ships do not simply disappear from the horizon, as if they have fallen off; they slowly sink down until they cannot be seen."

https://www.medievalists.net/2013/11/ironing-out-the-myth-of-the-flat-earth/

[Got Uzi]

Nice, down to name calling as I bring some sound logic and questions to a debate. Man I love the guys who worship at the altur of the almighty Colt Thompson and refuse to allow anything to challenge or question as "known". I don't have a dog in this fight other than the fact that there are people on here who are quick to judge and base opinions subjects that there is no set in stone documentation that it was done that way and so on. I too, have been on the receiving end of one of these MGB "this guy is full of it" threads back when the Tuscarawas County Sheriffs Department 1921AC was being sold. I was the guy who got the shaft and knew the entire inside track on that gun, while a bunch of guys on here going off of heresay and incomplete information. So theres my "dog in the fight" sick of seeing how things can't possibly be true if 2 or 3 people say it isn't...yet again I turn the question around-prove to me it isn't what it appears to be either.

 

As for the identity of the dealer.....has anyone asked said seller who this person is? Or is everyone here just sitting on there hands and pointing fingers? I know who the seller is and he's an upstanding guy by reputation, whom if asked, I'm sure would provide more information. Yeah I'm the young guy in the room, yeah I question things, and yeah I have no issues calling out things that don't seem right or when someone seems to be getting an unfair shake based on poor evidence.

 

I'm not sure who is worse-Colt Thompson or HK people when it comes to looking down on others who don't "measure up"......yes that was some tongue and cheek humor with hint of seriousness in it.....

Edited July 22, 2022 by Got Uzi

[Countryboy77]

Got Uzi As a newbie myself I respect everyones points and the more the better for comparison.I like to think myself a pretty intelligent guy and can figure it out.As a novice around modern cnc production and somone whos left mountains of chips on manual equipment I could totally see Colt Remington or whoever 100years ago over a year and a half of production based on different machines turning out the same part by a couple different on the same machine or different machines,tge way its indexed ect..as all handmade parts are going to have some difference eigther minute or substantial wouldnt discount its authenticity.However Extreme claims must be backed by evidence and whoever makimg the claim the responsibility of evidence falls on their lap.If I said I have a talking dog it would not be your responsibility to prove me wrong or right it would be My responsibility to prove it. On another note i personally believe the Colt market got hyper inflated based on big money individuals getting into the hobby.A replacement barrel will always be what it is,a replacement.Some are better than others.Even if a barrel is s colt its a replacement. The GI Richardson barrwls are the best,still a replacement.So whoever is going to use it as a replacementhas to be happy with it.If itfits and works and looks like a solid replacement great! Because having a beautiful gun with a blown barrel is a tragedy and if this barrel gets somone out of that situation great for them.I think at this point it would be nearly impossible to validate if its original or not

[Got Uzi]

I agree on the Colt prices getting inflated as big money guys are looking for ways to find better "investments" aka hide money.

 

As to providing the evidence-I do agree that it is up to the seller, in whatever case, to do so as to back up a claim and my humble opinion, he has done so. He has pointed out details that match up to what is known about barrels as far as the front sight area and so on. To say that it doesn't have a witness mark and instantly claim it as a fake based on that, is again IMHO, a bit of a stretch as it wouldn't have one since it was never installed.

 

Let me put it in this light-had this barrel come out of an FBI armory, or out of a 50 year old collection, locked in a safe and never opened, would this discussion still be happening? In the quest for the most "authentic reproduction" of something (Colt parts boxes come to mind) some can argue that we now are seeing the effects of trying to determain real from fake. Some are easy to prove, while others are not. I'll use this as an example-say I make an "anchor stamp" and then have someone make somebutt stocks for me and I mark them-how would you know in 20-30 years if they were not marked as such? We have people making "reproduction parts" so close to the originals that no one knows and its starting to bite people in the ass....well wallet and if the bite is too deep then ass LOL But my point is this-you can take the listed barrel at face value, reach out to the seller and ask for the back story on it and let your wallet decide what you want to do. Sitting on the computer comparing pictures of different barrels made at different times (we don't know when some were done as they arent marked) is kinda hard to do. Unless you have both in hand with measuring tools its hard to judge.

 

I sold a Colt Marine Service Kit a few years ago. It came with a gun that I purchased and I drove down to see TD and SIG so it could be verified as a real parts box. Upon looking it over and seeing what all was in said parts box, it was realized that it was a Marine Service kit (missing one spring and cleaning brush) now by the standards of which we are looking at this barrel, the argument could be made that said parts box just had the extra parts added to it so it would appear as if it were a Marine Service kit. The odds of someone taking the time to search out all those Colt parts seems a little improbable, but it still could have happened. So you have to take it at face value and decide:is this an original Marine Service Parts Kit or is it a regular Colt spare parts kit someone added extra parts to? You would have to decide that for yourself.

[Gio]

First let me say that I am not a machinist. I do think that the Colt steel makeup and hardness was different from WWII barrels. Is there any way to check these without compromising the barrel.

 

Frank

[Got Uzi]

There are some tests that can be done to check the hardness of the barrel. You could use a Rockwell hardness tester which would leave a small center punch type mark (not ideal in a visible area) or there is the ball tester (forgive me I can't remember the techical name) which basically a ball inside the tool drops and you measure how high it bounces then that can be used to determain the said items hardness.

[StrangeRanger]

Colt era and WWII era steels may or may not have been the same. Finding out would require a deeper dig than I'm ready to do

The Ordnance Drawing for the Thompson barrel dated 31 Dec 1941 does not specify the grade of steel to be used in manufacture.

More to the point the entire system of specifying steel grades and their content was completely revised in the late 1930s. Steels used in the early 20s may have either been the same, been renamed or been replaced entirely.

[Got Uzi]

Someone did some digging online for me and found an Ordnance drawing from 1941 which shows some interesting things.

 

First if you notice that it says to draw a line to match that line on the one on the gauge. Draw not stamp. This could be, again IMHO, a reference to make sure things line up where they "should" at assembly and then be struck with its perminate assembly position.

 

Also notice the thread pitch and the thread relief length. The relief is shown to be .065 +.010 now add in the pitch of the thread to that and you could end up with a section of the thread relief where it measures .140-.188 wide. So to try and compare two barrels from pictures online and say the relief cuts don't match doesn't hold water as it all depends on where you are looking. Note that the shoulder of the barrel (which interfaces the nose of the reciever) is .158 -.016 so your shoulder could vary from .142-.158 while the threaded stub is .495 +.010

 

If you look even the fins have a wide open tolerance on both spacing and width: .210 -.010 on the spacing and .085 -.020 on the width. It is very possible that if you were riding the tolerances shown you could increase your fin count or decrease it. Theres no set number of fins required on this drawing, only diameters at specified points.

 

Add all this up and you can see a differece that the MK1 eyeball can detect that something is different. Does it mean its "not correct" compared to others like it? Nope just means its within acceptable working tolerances and will be a servicable part. One other thing to point out is there is NO specified finish requirements on this drawing.

 

These are all points taken off of an Ordnace drawing from Dec 31 1941 with revisions clear out into Oct 30 1944. See link below:

 

Unknown (nfatoys.com)

 

I am taking a few liberties with this in my reasoning as this is for USGI barrels, NOT Colt, but it stands to reason that there wouldn't be much, if any change in the threaded stub section of the barrel where it interfaces with the receiver nose. One can also make the point that going off this drawing, the Colt thread relief shown in other examples here, as well as the barrel in question, have a thread relief slightly deeper than what is shown to be USGI spec.

Edited July 22, 2022 by Got Uzi