SP Sarge Posted July 4, 2023 Report Share Posted July 4, 2023 Saw this 28 for sale on gunbroker and was just scrolling the images accompanying the ad. Blish lock with no ears.....same as what was in my West Hurley...which I promptly replaced. https://www.gunbroker.com/item/996200484 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpbcps Posted July 4, 2023 Report Share Posted July 4, 2023 (edited) SP Sarge, Over the years, I have seen a number of 1928's and 1928A1's, which have had their Blish-Lock ‘ears’ removed. I read that removing the ‘ears’ was common for British Commonwealth Thompsons used in the Western Desert, as the modification was believed to reduce possibility of jamming. In my collection I have a 1928A1 which has some history; it was recovered in Northern Ireland, having been used by the Irish Republican Army for a period of its life. As well as an improvised fire selector lever, made of what looks like brass, work of an IRA armourer, the serial numbers have been ground off. Its Blish-Lock piece has also had its ‘ears’ removed, so I presume that was done in its earlier life, when in service with Commonwealth forces. Edited July 4, 2023 by rpbcps Photos added Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SP Sarge Posted July 4, 2023 Author Report Share Posted July 4, 2023 That is a really cool piece of history you have! I travel to Ireland twice a year to the southwest. I have friends I stay with in County Kerry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpbcps Posted July 4, 2023 Report Share Posted July 4, 2023 I think so too. It compliments my Model of 1921, which, due to its original 3 digit serial number, (the number has been chiselled off), I believe it was one of the SS Eastside Thompsons. Last time I was in Ireland, Dublin, was May, although over the years, since the 1980's, I visited Ireland many times, including Kerry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD. Posted July 5, 2023 Report Share Posted July 5, 2023 In case anyone is interested, I suggest you pause for a moment and look at the nomenclature. This Thompson may be a lot of things, but it is not a Savage Thompson that left the Utica factory in 1941 with these markings. Note the "No." marking. Savage Thompson submachine guns are marked "NO." The font style for the nomenclature markings is close but no cigar. I see one very obvious mistake in this serial number range. In addition, note there is not the typical "A1" marking at the end of 1928 that should be present when the "US" markings were applied. There are many more suspect things about this Thompson gun. I could do a clinic on this Thompson. Welded receiver? You bet! That may be the reason a modified Blish lock without the ears is present. I wonder if a standard Blish lock would work. Be careful out there! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gijive Posted July 5, 2023 Report Share Posted July 5, 2023 TD, Yes, you are quite right about the markings on the left side of the receiver. It appears that they marked the receiver to match the trigger frame markings, which appear to be legitimate. Except for the “Single” mark which has been reapplied. I would advise an in- person inspection on this gun. It is quite a mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reconbob Posted July 5, 2023 Report Share Posted July 5, 2023 (edited) If you scroll down and read the description the guy says it’s a reweld - but only in one spot of the receiver that had a failure of some kind and that otherwise it’s AOK and much better than a West Hurley. In picture #58 if you zoom it you can see what look like cracks on the inside of the bolt channel. I wonder if the H-lock had the wings cut off, not because the angle cuts are no good, but because farther back in the receiver the H-lock hits the spot that was welded? Another caveat emptor… Bob Edited July 5, 2023 by reconbob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inertord Posted July 5, 2023 Report Share Posted July 5, 2023 That’s definitely not good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpbcps Posted July 5, 2023 Report Share Posted July 5, 2023 Good points! I am travelling at the moment, story of my life, so did not open the link, I was just looking at the picture in the post when I replied, 49 of 65. So I never saw the other photos, lesson learned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bridgeport28A1 Posted July 5, 2023 Report Share Posted July 5, 2023 9 hours ago, inertord said: That’s definitely not good. This picture also is interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD. Posted July 5, 2023 Report Share Posted July 5, 2023 If you look closely at the left side of the frame you can see where it was at one time (torch???) cut and repaired. My guess is this Thompson was all parts and pieces someone welded back together and later amnesty registered. Looking at the receiver nose, it may also have been a dewat at one point. A Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) would be interesting and may provide some insight into the past history. If not for the 1986 ban, this Thompson would be near worthless. Given today's prices and the vast differences in the products in the Thompson market, it really behooves a prospective purchaser to understand the product before pulling out the check book. This website, books, and the Thompson Shows & Shoots are the best methods to become a knowledgeable buyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TennesseeTaylor95 Posted July 5, 2023 Report Share Posted July 5, 2023 1 hour ago, Bridgeport28A1 said: This picture also is interesting. Just so I can learn more from this discussion, what is off about the receiver in this photo (photo 61 of 65)? Is there another welded portion I am missing or something else going on here that I am not catching? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bridgeport28A1 Posted July 5, 2023 Report Share Posted July 5, 2023 2 hours ago, TennesseeTaylor95 said: Just so I can learn more from this discussion, what is off about the receiver in this photo (photo 61 of 65)? Is there another welded portion I am missing or something else going on here that I am not catching? Take a look inside my circle. I am suspicious about the “line that is somewhat irregular. I have only viewed the Gunbroker photos on iPhone screen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TennesseeTaylor95 Posted July 5, 2023 Report Share Posted July 5, 2023 Ah, got it. I didn't notice that so thanks for pointing it out to me. So it is some kind of gouge or scrape in the extractor groove, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TennesseeTaylor95 Posted July 5, 2023 Report Share Posted July 5, 2023 The seller mentions that the actuator is a replacement as that is what caused the "catastrophic failure"/ "blow out" in the receiver. Maybe I am just not wrapping my head around this correctly, but how in the world would an actuator cause that kind of damage to the receiver? As TD. mentions, a FOIA request would be interesting to see the history of the gun because what we see and what the seller is saying don't seem to add up to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Got Uzi Posted July 5, 2023 Report Share Posted July 5, 2023 If the actuator cracked in the where it, the Blish, and the bolt all come together, it is possible in theory for part of the actuator to separate and be loose from the rest of the bolt mass…then when it came forward it could have wedged/jammed/slammed into place causing it to break. Freak things happen and no one person has seen every variation of a major break on a gun. Buy the gun, not the story and look close then make up your own mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anjong-ni Posted July 6, 2023 Report Share Posted July 6, 2023 It would appear that the lower receiver also suffered from the effects of the "critical failure". ...Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john Posted July 6, 2023 Report Share Posted July 6, 2023 (edited) Is it possible that at some point, someone damaged the pivot plate and tried to remove it (and succeeded!) while the lower was still on the upper? It'd be a real bear to disassemble the gun after that without a large amount of damage. Just thinking about that and trying to imagine where disassembly damage might occur .........and it looks like that pivot plate pin in the pic from Phil has seen a lot of pounding, both on and around the pin. Is the other pin banged up as well? Edited July 6, 2023 by john Spelling 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