wwl Posted October 11, 2008 Report Share Posted October 11, 2008 What is the current thinking of how many were made and how many are there surviving today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gijive Posted October 11, 2008 Report Share Posted October 11, 2008 Welcome to the Boards! This topic has been debated many times and I think the general consensus is that the number made probably numbered in the hundreds, if that. There have been probably been less than thirty, maybe, for sale over the years. It is probaly the most scarce variation of the Colt Thompson. I don't believe any of the major collectors know for sure how many currently exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Fliegenheimer Posted October 11, 2008 Report Share Posted October 11, 2008 (edited) It is not so much that they were made as they were just converted from existing Colt 1921 TSMG's. As G.I. Jive states, this model has been discussed in the past. AOC records showed 42 Model 1927's as of 1934. If the frequency of Colt TSMG's advertised for sale in the past 30 years is any sign, I would say that the true 1928 Navy with proper stocks and swivels is scarcer than the 1927 Model. The notion that the 1927 Model should demand a premium price was started by Curtis Earl, not because it was necessarily more desirable or unusual, but because he had a couple of them. Edited October 11, 2008 by Arthur Fliegenheimer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gijive Posted October 11, 2008 Report Share Posted October 11, 2008 Arthur is absolutely correct, the 1927 Semi-Automatic Carbine was just a coverted 1921 Model, not a separately manufactured model. His numbers are probably more on taget also; I was just speaking in broad terms to give a comparison of the numbers of 1927 Models to the original 15,000 Colt guns. I also agree with him that an original configuration 1928 Navy Model with horizintal commercial foregrip and Enfield type sling swivels is harder to find than the 1927 Model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colt21a Posted October 11, 2008 Report Share Posted October 11, 2008 (edited) collect in peace.Ron Edited October 12, 2008 by colt21a Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pca16 Posted October 11, 2008 Report Share Posted October 11, 2008 I would disagree that the 1928 Navy with the correct horizontal fore grip and offset sling swivels are scarcer, or more desirable than a correct 1927. I currently have in my collection a 1928 Navy with the correct, short fore grip and offset sling swivels (8066). The fore grip is about ¼ inch shorter than the military version found on AO/Savage mfg. guns. I also have two complete sets of Colt Thompson wood for the Colt made 1928 Navy with the above (short fore grip and off-set swivels). Now, I also have a 1927A(5066) that has the correct semi-auto internals as well as the in the white milled out receiver and lower. Now, in my humble opinion the original 1927 with the correct internals and the milled receiver and lower is much harder to locate than furniture, (which the wood is) as this is the only factor that would make the 1928 Navy with same scarce. I currently have the ability to turn 2 additional 1928 Navy’s in to scarce guns, but I do not have the ability to mill out and stamp receivers and lowers, nor do I have the ability to manufacture the internal parts required to make the 1927 correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colt21a Posted October 11, 2008 Report Share Posted October 11, 2008 (edited) Edited October 12, 2008 by colt21a Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pca16 Posted October 11, 2008 Report Share Posted October 11, 2008 The two piece riveted actuator would be required to make any early Navy correct, regardless of the furniture on the gun, however, the stock set that is on the gun is ware the “scarceness” is currently being placed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gijive Posted October 11, 2008 Report Share Posted October 11, 2008 Brian, I would agree that the scarce wood is what we are talking about. I also have a correct set of wood for the 1928 Navy Model, but they are few and far between, in my opinion. You're lucky to have located two sets. I think what we were talking about, though, is a documented 1928 Navy Model that came to the police agency in that configuration, not a gun that had the wood replaced, although after so many years who could really tell? It just seems that not many police agencies ordered them in that configuration, although, as I think of it probably more of them were sold than the 1927 Model. It's all a matter of conjecture, I don't think anyone really has the numbers on how many of each Auto-Ordnance actually sold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD. Posted October 12, 2008 Report Share Posted October 12, 2008 This is a great topic. Question: Do all known Colt era horizontal fore-grips have the offset Enfield type sling swivel? I know the base of this swivel is smaller than the GI milled and stamped sling swivel so there is no interchangeability with these parts. I would like to know if any sling swivels have been noted on Colt Thompson's that do not have the offset Enfield type sling swivel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pca16 Posted October 12, 2008 Report Share Posted October 12, 2008 TD, I have noted "modern" type sling swivels on the butt stocks of Remington marked Thompson stocks, when they were added I couldn’t say. The correct sling swivels for the early Colt Navy with the horizontal fore grip would be the off set pair. I do have a 1921A that came from the Pennsylvania State Police and it has an offset swivel on the front of the vertical grip and on the butt stock. It is said that this is only found on PSP guns, but this again is attributing rarity to the stocks and not to the gun its self. If this is the case, I do not know, but it is true for this PSP gun. But, I believe it could be said, that all "correct" Colt era horizontal fore grips should have the offset swivel. The 3 that I have are all offset and have the smaller base. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gijive Posted October 12, 2008 Report Share Posted October 12, 2008 TD, Not having seen that many, I couldn't say for sure. All the pictures in collector's books on the Thompson, seem to show the off-set swivels. Many agencies probably modified their guns with swivels prior to an during the WWII when the military started utililzing the Thompson on a large scale basis. This may account for Springfield type milled swivels on some Colt Thompsons. I agree with Brian, that the "correct" swivels for the original 1928 Navy Model would be the Enfield type. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Fliegenheimer Posted October 12, 2008 Report Share Posted October 12, 2008 I would disagree that the 1928 Navy with the correct horizontal fore grip and offset sling swivels are scarcer, or more desirable than a correct 1927. I currently have in my collection a 1928 Navy with the correct, short fore grip and offset sling swivels (8066). The fore grip is about ¼ inch shorter than the military version found on AO/Savage mfg. guns. I also have two complete sets of Colt Thompson wood for the Colt made 1928 Navy with the above (short fore grip and off-set swivels). Now, I also have a 1927A(5066) that has the correct semi-auto internals as well as the in the white milled out receiver and lower. Now, in my humble opinion the original 1927 with the correct internals and the milled receiver and lower is much harder to locate than furniture, (which the wood is) as this is the only factor that would make the 1928 Navy with same scarce. I currently have the ability to turn 2 additional 1928 Navy’s in to scarce guns, but I do not have the ability to mill out and stamp receivers and lowers, nor do I have the ability to manufacture the internal parts required to make the 1927 correct. While the original four (4) internal frame parts are what makes the 1927 "different" from the 1921/28, three (3) of those parts are just modified original 1921/28 internal frame parts. The rocker is the only new part that was needed for the conversion. And even this part has been seen in several versions with one attributed to Colt manufacture and others to unknown manufacture. Whether the milled out areas of the receiver and frame ( and the notch cut into the base of the frame), enhance the visuals of the Colt TSMG is, I guess, subjective. But again, while the true Navy may only have cosmetic differences from its Colt brothers, the 1927 differences, aside from the rocker and the frame notch, are also cosmetic. Since ATF classifies it as a smg, it is a TSMG with a distinction without a difference. Does the 1927 fill a hole in a TSMG collection? Sure. Is it a bigger hole than the missing true Colt Navy TSMG? If Curtis Earl made a bigger deal about the true Colt Navy TSMG, (meaning that he had more of them than the 1927's), then maybe more of the furniture from torched unregistered Colt Navy receivers would have been rescued. Were the Navy stocks and grips you acquired parts from torched receivers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pca16 Posted October 12, 2008 Report Share Posted October 12, 2008 (edited) 8066 along with the other two sets of Colt era Navy stock sets came from the Beaver County Sheriffs Department here in PA. They had a large quantity of Thompsons that they "loaned out" to the steel mills in the Pittsburgh area. When I obtained 8066 it had the Navy wood on it, the other wood was on Savage guns, which at some point were mixed with Colt guns. I found correct wood for the Savage guns and retained the Colt era wood. Edited October 12, 2008 by pca16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Fliegenheimer Posted October 12, 2008 Report Share Posted October 12, 2008 8066 along with the other two sets of Colt era Navy stock sets came from the Beaver County Sheriffs Department here in PA. They had a large quantity of Thompsons that they "loaned out" to the steel mills in the Pittsburgh area. When I obtained 8066 it had the Navy wood on it, the other wood was on Savage guns, which at some point were mixed with Colt guns. I found correct wood for the Savage guns and retained the Colt era wood. Wow! Pretty good score. But it does some what illustrate the point that the true Colt Navy TSMG is indeed scarce. In order to obtain the furniture for a true Navy, you had to purchase the Colt Navy, and the two Savage TSMG's. Unless you decide to sell these two sets of Navy furniture, the odds of coming across such specimens is less frequently encountered then seeing a 1927 advertised for sale. The BCSD had seven (7) known Colt TSMG's (1, 21AC, 6, Navy's) with #8066 making it eight (8). #11492 was initially sold to the U.S. Army before the BCSD got a hold of it. Which of these BCSD Colt Navy's did the true Navy furniture come from? We will never know. But it is also impossible to know which Colt TSMG's were modified by AOC to 1927's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD. Posted October 12, 2008 Report Share Posted October 12, 2008 I believe the Model of 1927 Thompson Semi-Automatic Carbine is much more than a distinction of Colt era Thompsons. Less we forget, all 15,000 were manufactured as Model of 1921's. What the company did with those 15,000 is the difference. The Model of 1927 Semi-Automatic Carbine was an actual MODEL -designed, advertised, marketed and sold by Auto-Ordnance Corporation. I believe there is an early Auto-Ordnance sales brochure that lists 5 different variations of the Model of 1927: Model of 1927 A Model of 1927 AC Model of 1927 SC Model of 1927 SCD Model of 1927 SCDS The key word is variations. Would a collector have to have all 5 different Model of 1927 variations to have a complete collection? The Model of 1928 Thompson Thompson Submachine Gun was also an actual MODEL - designed, advertised, marketed and sold by Auto-Ordnance. Some variations of this Model are harder to find than others. I agree the Model of 1928, marked US NAVY with a horizontal fore-grip and sling swivels, is a much harder Model of 1928 variation to locate than the Model of 1928, marked or unmarked with US NAVY and with a vertical foregrip. Another very rare Model of 1928 variation is the Model of 1928 A - with any type furniture. I would think this would be the rarest Model of 1928 variation (but I would be interested in everyone's comments). Again, would a collector have to have all the Model of 1928 variations to have a complete collection? I think it important to speak in terms of the different models and the variations in the different models to obtain a true idea about scarcity. For example, I recently had the good fortune to locate a Model of 1928 Navy marked Thompson with vertical foregrip, that was unknown to anyone, including Gordon. If I had purchased this 28 Navy, along with a set of wood from Brian, I could have easily constructed the Model of 1928 variation with US NAVY markings, horizontal foregrip and off-set sling swivels. I guarantee it would have been a perfect conversion. Had I done all of this, would anyone in the Thompson community traded me a Model of 1927 for my Model of 1928 variation in an even exchange? I believe value and ease of conversion are an important part of any question dealing with scarcity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colt21a Posted October 12, 2008 Report Share Posted October 12, 2008 (edited) Edited October 12, 2008 by colt21a Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gijive Posted October 12, 2008 Report Share Posted October 12, 2008 (edited) Tom, Interesting post. What are the literal translations of the Model 1927 acronyms. I'm familiar with 1927A and 1927AC, but what are the additional acronyms with the S? Something to do with S for sling, I presume? Edited October 12, 2008 by gijive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Fliegenheimer Posted October 12, 2008 Report Share Posted October 12, 2008 (edited) I I think it important to speak in terms of the different models and the variations in the different models to obtain a true idea about scarcity. For example, I recently had the good fortune to locate a Model of 1928 Navy marked Thompson with vertical foregrip, that was unknown to anyone, including Gordon. If I had purchased this 28 Navy, along with a set of wood from Brian, I could have easily constructed the Model of 1928 variation with US NAVY markings, horizontal foregrip and off-set sling swivels. I guarantee it would have been a perfect conversion. Had I done all of this, would anyone in the Thompson community traded me a Model of 1927 for my Model of 1928 variation in an even exchange? I believe value and ease of conversion are an important part of any question dealing with scarcity. No matter how AOC tried to repackage, or aggressively market, the 1927 it bombed. Whether a collector is anal to the point of acquiring every version of the same Model, even if the differences between one from another is the addition, or subtraction, of a letter or number, is for that collector to decide. But the significant differences between the 1927 Colt TSMG and the 1921 and 1928 Navy Colt TSMG, that were all from the same 1921 batch manufactured in a 16 month period, are so slight that assigning a hierarchy of value can only be based on purely subjective rational. The obvious answer to your question about the trade is: A. What are the aesthetic conditions of the two TSMG's in question, i.e., are they both 90+ % or is one 90+ and the other 80% etc. AND B. The problem with newly discovered Colt TSMG's, whose whereabouts have been unknown since they came off the assembly line, is that they are susceptable to what you suggest doing in a high value, if somewhat frozen, market. C. How much did you pay Brian for the furniture in this theoretical deal? Somehow ease of alteration between a Navy and true Navy is now supposed to justify the hype that Curtis Earl employed to inflate the price of his 1927's? While both Earl and Cox placed a 50% extra value on 1927's in the 1970's, they had a hard time convincing collectors that this was justified. Both were still trying to find buyers for the same 1927's years later. Over the last decade, the market closed the gap between 1927's and other Colt TSMG's to maybe 15%? Edited October 12, 2008 by Arthur Fliegenheimer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD. Posted October 12, 2008 Report Share Posted October 12, 2008 Chuck, Model of 1927 A - vertical foregrip, no Compensator Model of 1927 AC - vertical foregrip with Cutts Compensator Model of 1927 SC - horizontal foregrip with Cutts Compensator Model of 1927 SCD - horizontal foregrip with Cutts Compensator and Type L Drum Model of 1927 SCDS - horizontal foregrip with swivels & sling, with Cutts Compensator and Type L Drum Arthur, The marketing of the Colt era Thompson Submachine Gun bombed. If not for Russell Maguire, the history of the Thompson Submachine Gun would have been a short one. Every serious collector of the Colt era Thompson Submachine Guns wants a Model of 1921, Model of 1927 and Model of 1928 in their collection. While there are variations within each Model of the Colt era Thompsons that can affect price, the cost for the Model of 1927 will normally be the highest. There were just a few of the 15,000 Colt era Thompsons re-marked Model of 1927, fewer still available for civilian ownership. Hence the higher cost. Do you think the Model of 1928A is rarer than the Model of 1928, US Navy model? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalbert Posted October 12, 2008 Report Share Posted October 12, 2008 Do you think the Model of 1928A is rarer than the Model of 1928, US Navy model? TD, Yes. David Albert dalbert@sturmgewehr.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pca16 Posted October 13, 2008 Report Share Posted October 13, 2008 (edited) Do you think the Model of 1928A is rarer than the Model of 1928, US Navy model? I have examined only one 1928A that is currently owned by an individual here in PA. It is an interesting gun. The finish is worn on the top of the barrel and the nose of the receiver in a manner that the barrel is not in question. You would have to see it to understand, maybe sig has seen the gun as well. It also has correct offset swivels and horizontal fore grip. If we are placing rarity on the wood as well as the gun, this is probably it, a 1928A with horizontal fore grip and offset swivels. Also I did not purchase two Savage guns to obtain the Colt Navy wood, I purchased the Navy and they gave me the stocks. ALSO THE NUMBER ON MY NAVY FROM BEAVER CO. IS 8860, NOT 8066 SORRY. IT'S BEN AWHILE SINCE I LOOKED AT IT. BUT I DID DUST IT OFF FOR THIS CONVERSATION. Edited October 13, 2008 by pca16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philasteen Posted October 13, 2008 Report Share Posted October 13, 2008 I would say the rarest of all versions is the Colt US Model of 1928AC. How many of these are documented? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD. Posted October 13, 2008 Report Share Posted October 13, 2008 philasteen, Do you mean the Colt Thompson's marked: U.S. Model of 192B A1? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireMerc Posted October 13, 2008 Report Share Posted October 13, 2008 I think there are 6 known to exist, 5 transferable (3 of which are non-matching) and a dealer sample. http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q304/class3nfa/SN14181Colt28.jpg 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