The Early Savage 1928 Thompson

[765 21D]

Hi James,

 

Thanks for sharing :)

 

I think there is an Woolwich proof mark on my other Savage that is in the 113,000 serial No range.I think this particular Thompson gun also has the MOD arrow on the other side of the receiver near the front end.

 

Regards,

 

D

[AlanDavid]

Thank you 765 21D and MkVII. So with one early example 183XX my theroy holds true that very early Savage guns do not have the Woolwich crown. Does anyone have information on the other early eaxples, which seem to be few in number. It would be good to work to a cut off point if possable.

 

So far we have 183XX no

86612 yes.

 

Keep 'em comming.

 

Regards

 

AlanD

Sydney

[Canuck]

Alan,

 

I have three 1928's. Serial # 22802, 33791 and 125272. I also have what I believe is a 1928 that had the "US" and "A1" added when the lend lease program began.

 

22802 is a patent date gun with NY markings. The only proof marks are GEG and the British Broad arrow with inspector markings of a very faint "crown" over a "M1" over what I believe is actually an "E" tippped. Not a "M".

 

33791 is a patent numbers gun with NY markings. Once again only the GEG proof and the British Broad Arrow with inspector markings. It has a "crown" over F7 over an "E". This "E" however is upright so there is no doubt about it being anything else.

 

125272 has only the GEG proof marks and nothing else. It has been reblued but there is no indication that anything was ever ground off. It has the Bridgeport address, no more NY.

 

All of these guns have the knurled selectors and actuator, the smooth ejector and typical "early production" features. I would need to have an expert confirm it but I think the finish on 22802 may be original. The gun is very nice (but not flawless).

 

The fourth gun is serial 153676 and it also has the Broad Arrow over the inspector proof of a "crown " over an "A1" over the vertical "E". However, in addition to the GEG proof there is also the RLB acceptance proof and a flaming bomb. Additionally it originally had a smooth ejector. The selectors have no knurling but they could very well be replacement parts.

 

So none of these four guns that came to Canada have a Woolwich proof. I had always thought that the Woolrich inspectors were checking these guns when they arrived in England or when they where refurbished there. I really have no idea what went on back then!

 

In any event I hope these four guns have added something to the "early Savage1928" thread.

 

Regards,

 

Canuck

Edited February 12, 2013 by canuck

[rpbcps]

Very interesting post,

I have a deactivated Model of 1928, I bought back in 1996 which has the Woolwich crown, the serial number is 85,140.

 

The lower was originally mismatched and the 85,140 serial number has been added to the lower and the original struck out with a line through it, so I presumed this was a refurbished weapon.

 

Although she is mismatched, I still love her, but still looking for a 1928 with NY address for the collection.

Stay safe

Richard

[bug]

Some good info in your post, too. The forced match lower you have sounds a lot like what we saw on the so called "Russian guns" parts kits we got over here awhile back. Would you be so kind as to post a pic of that? Does the butt stock have the cross bolt mod? Is it US ------ A1 marked?

 

Sorry for all the ???.

 

Bob D

[rpbcps]

Some good info in your post, too. The forced match lower you have sounds a lot like what we saw on the so called "Russian guns" parts kits we got over here awhile back. Would you be so kind as to post a pic of that? Does the butt stock have the cross bolt mod? Is it US ------ A1 marked?

 

Sorry for all the ???.

 

Bob D

 

Bob,

 

No problem, I am currently abroad at the moment working, but when I get back to the UK, I'l make time to take some photos and post them.

 

It is marked 'Model of 1928', no 'US' or 'A1' on this one.

 

If I recall correctly, no cross bolt modification, but it has the British/Commonwealth sling attachment modification on the butt stock.

 

Stay safe

Richard

[rpbcps]

Some good info in your post, too. The forced match lower you have sounds a lot like what we saw on the so called "Russian guns" parts kits we got over here awhile back. Would you be so kind as to post a pic of that? Does the butt stock have the cross bolt mod? Is it US ------ A1 marked?

 

Sorry for all the ???.

 

Bob D

 

Bob,

 

Bob,

My son has just took a couple of photos for me of the serial numbers, and forwarded them to me. The original lower number is not struck through, as you can see, I must have seen that on another Thompson though, for it to stick in my mind.

Have a good weekend

Richard

 

 

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

I stand by my earlier post that Auto-Ordnance would not have spent a lot of money it did not have to maintain 1000's of spares of any item for guns that were selling at a snails pace. However, something happened in 1939 that may have changed this. Can anyone think of what happened that may have set in motion a business need for Auto-Ordnance to order a large quantity of Thompson spare parts from Colt. I can.

 

The Kraut battleship Schleswig-Holstein opened fire on a transit depot at Westerplatte in the Free City of Danzig? Colt was still making parts in the 1000's for the TSMG in 1939 before September 1, 1939.

[TD.]

No, prior to that. A U.S. government order for 951 Thompson guns and spare parts on July 3, 1939, probably got the machines working to make the necessary spares. And when Russell Maguire took over Auto-Ordnance 18 days later with an infusion of capitol and a new business plan the manufacture of spares probably continued because he planned to sell off the remaining Colt guns - quickly.

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

No, prior to that. A U.S. government order for 951 Thompson guns and spare parts on July 3, 1939, probably got the machines working to make the necessary spares. And when Russell Maguire took over Auto-Ordnance 18 days later with an infusion of capitol and a new business plan the manufacture of spares probably continued because he planned to sell off the remaining Colt guns - quickly.

 

Well, in November, 1939, it was the Savage Arms Corporation that was interested in purchasing TSMG parts from Colt Patent Firearms manufacturing Company. The same organization that you figured would be too proud to use Colt parts in their TSMG. But you do not believe the advent of WWII had anything to do with AOC getting Colt to make spare parts for the TSMG?.

[TD.]

I believe the U.S. government order for 951 Thompson gun and spare parts on July 3, 1939 is what caused AOC to subcontract again with Colt's for the manufacture of spare parts. Prior to that operations at AOC were dormant, near dead, no money. I also believe Russell Maguire knew his new team would be selling the remaining stock of Colt guns in short order because of an impending war in Europe and spare parts would be needed (and profitable).

 

Savage did not sign a contract with AOC to manufacture the Thompson gun until December 15, 1939. If Savage subcontracted any of their work to Colt's for parts, it would have happened after that date - and been short lived. Most likely, if Colt's was still making any Thompson parts in that time frame, it was for Auto-Ordnance Corporation, the owner of the Thompson gun.

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

Savage did not sign a contract with AOC to manufacture the Thompson gun until December 15, 1939. If Savage subcontracted any of their work to Colt's for parts, it would have happened after that date - and been short lived. Most likely, if Colt's was still making any Thompson parts in that time frame, it was for Auto-Ordnance Corporation, the owner of the Thompson gun.

 

 

Of course when or if Savage signed a contract with Colt is not the point. The point is Savage Arms VP F.F. Hickey did inquire of Colt to purchase spare parts to be used in their Savage made TSMG. Ergo Savage, at the highest corporate level, had no problem using Colt parts.

[TD.]

Colt's would not have owned any spare parts for the Thompson gun to sell to Savage. Colt's certainly did not advertise or sell any Thompson spare parts. Remember, the Thompson gun was under patent protection at this time. Colt's and others only made spare parts for the Thompson gun when so contracted by Auto-Ordnance. Any Colt's made parts obtained by Savage would have come to them via Auto-Ordnance.

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

Colt's would not have owned any spare parts for the Thompson gun to sell to Savage. Colt's certainly did not advertise or sell any Thompson spare parts. Remember, the Thompson gun was under patent protection at this time. Colt's and others only made spare parts for the Thompson gun when so contracted by Auto-Ordnance. Any Colt's made parts obtained by Savage would have come to them via Auto-Ordnance

 

That would be news to Colt (and AOC as well, I guess) since they were still making spare parts for the Colt TSMG by 1939

Half correct. Colt may not have advertised their TSMG parts, but they were still making and selling them

Where did you read this? Why would Colt V.P. Fairweather be corresponding with Hickey if they were prohibited from dealing with anyone other than AOC regarding the TSMG? You believe Savage would be in violation of their contract with AOC if they contacted Colt directly? But what does any of this have to do with the fact that Savage sought after Colt for parts and did actually use them in their Savage TSMG?

Edited February 22, 2013 by Arthur Fliegenheimer

[TD.]

Your right. I believe Colt's was making spare parts in 1939 - for Auto-Ordnance - not for Colt's. It was a money maker or they would not have been doing it. Any discussion between the presidents of Savage and Colt's in 1939 regarding the Thompson gun had to do with Russell Maguire trying to get the Thompson back in production. Colt's said no. Savage agreed but with a very advantageous contract. There was a history with the Thompson contract between these two companies as Savage also bid on manufacturing the Thompson for Auto-Ordnance in 1921; Colt's won the bid.

 

Again, if Colt's made any parts for Savage (and I don't believe they did), it would have been very short lived. Any Colt's parts used in a Savage manufactured Thompson would have been originally manufactured for Auto-Ordnance.

 

All good stuff!

[765 21D]

Hi All,

 

I just took the buttplate off of the early Savage to see what the number was on the butt and it is # 338. It is definitely a wartime made butt as it is done in a smaller type number font.

 

Regards,

 

D