1928ac Bridgeport Question

[blueline541]

I read the thread about the '28AC Thompsons that are usually associated with police departments. The thread mentioned that very few Thompsons were ever purchased directly from the factory by PDs but instead led a life prior to being acquired by law enforcement.

 

One member mentioned the possibility of these "police" Thompsons having been imported back from Britain. Upon returning to the states Federal Labs, etc., would rebarrel and/or refinish the guns before selling them to PDs nationwide.

 

Is this reasonably possible? Mine has no military or import marks, has the US ground off, and is thought to no longer have the original barrel. If my Thompson was not originally purchased by the Tennessee Highway Patrol, who allegedly owned it, where did it go upon leaving the factory?

 

What are the chances this gun saw military service? Thanks for the help.

[First Sergeant]

blueline

 

Chances are slim without military markings but I suppose there are exceptions. The best bet is to send FOIA request and get the history that is available on it. A sample letter is pinned at the top. I should do the same thing but never seem to have or take the time. I would like also to send a note on dept letterhead to the PD that had my 28AC to see what, if any, additional history they can give me. One of these days I will. If you don't have Frank's book American Thunder II, I highly recomend it. It will have many answers to your questions and is a wealth of information on Thompsons.

 

Chuck

[gijive]

Phil,

 

Nice concise assessment of the Auto-Ordnance 1928 Models with the law enforcement connections. I wish there was more documentation on these guns, also. You're right, the marking are sometimes inconsistent, i.e., serial numbers with X's, some without, etc. They are an interesting chapter in the 1928 Model Thompson. I hope some conclusive documentation shows up one of these days.

[blueline541]

Thanks for the responses.

[Frank I.]

In American Thunder II there is as much info as I could find on these guns, I too would love to have "the rest of the story".

 

I have seen these with no military markings at all, some with just the Ordnance Wheel stamp but no AIO initials. Which as someone mentioned they probably never went to the military. Some have vertical foregrips.

 

Best guess is they were assembled from left over parts, contract overruns, or guns rejected due to the introduction of the M1 model.

 

I did have a IRS form? Dont recall exactly, see the book if you have it. But it was for several 1928 AC Thompsons that went straight from the AO factory to a Mass. PD in 1944 during the war. The PD still has the guns and they are the AO Thompsons no military markings, US removed A1 overstamped AC, vertical foregrips, L sight, smooth barrels.

 

BTW the guns are NOT for sale

[kcub]

Although, it seems that they should have steered all the police/prison guard requirements towards the Reising and saved the tommies for those marines in the pacific theatre.

 

I know this happened to an extent but it should have been 100% since the Reising was so jam prone in beach amphibious combat.

Edited June 2, 2007 by kcub

[TNKen]

I tried to get info from the Mobile PD, but had no luck.

 

ATF never responded to my FOIA. I wonder if we all did FOIA's, we might at least get a pattern, based upon the initial transfer date.

 

Ken

[RoverDave]

QUOTE (TNKen @ Jun 2 2007, 12:42 PM)

ATF never responded to my FOIA. I wonder if we all did FOIA's, we might at least get a pattern, based upon the initial transfer date.

I plan on doing one on my 1928AC when the transfer is complete and I actually have the gun.

[gijive]

QUOTE (Frank Iannamico @ Jun 1 2007, 09:19 PM)

Best guess is they were assembled from left over parts, contract overruns, or guns rejected due to the introduction of the M1 model. I did have a IRS form? Dont recall exactly, see the book if you have it. But it was for several 1928 AC Thompsons that went straight from the AO factory to a Mass. PD in 1944 during the war. The PD still has the guns and they are the AO Thompsons no military markings, US removed A1 overstamped AC, vertical foregrips, L sight, smooth barrels.

Frank's reply is an important key to making an educated guess on how these guns seemed to make their way into law enforcement agencies. Based on Frank's research, production of the 1928 Model ended in 1942, therefore as Phil pointed out, his receiver was made during that production period. The IRS transfer form dated 1944 gives a clue as to the reason for no military and inconsistent markings on these law enforcement guns. If I remember correctly, all Thompson production, including the M1 series, ended in 1944. So, if no guns were being manufactured and the IRS transfer of the 1928 Models in question occurred about the time production ended, it makes sense that Auto-Ordnance probably started soliciting law enforcement sales again. This fits in with Frank's theory about the guns being contract overruns, surplus parts and guns cancelled by the military due to the M1 production in 1942. Auto-Ordnance probably had hundreds of 1928 Models left over from the switch to the M1 series and turned to law enforcement sales again after war production ended. This might explain the different variations, i.e. serial number sequence differences, some with miltary acceptance, some lacking markings, etc. Most of these guns seem to be the last 1928 variant produced, with smooth barrels and stamped "L" sights, so they were near the end of the 1942 production run.

 

Of course this is all speculation on my part, but it seems one could make a logical argument that the 1928 Model configuration and marking variations point to surplus items earmarked for law enforcement sales.

[Frank I.]

I have combed the National Archives for over 12 years looking for Thompson related documents and haven't found anything new for some time. Some of the documents I did find included The History of Maguire Industries (AO) but there was no mention of the elusive '28 AC guns.

 

Tracie Hill has been quite successful uncovering new info. He makes a lot of contacts through the Thompson shows he does, maybe someday...

 

The member doing the FOIA let us know what you find. My experience with FOIA requests has revealed that the success largley depends on the individual that gets it...some just fluff it off saying there is nothing or just ignore the request. Some times it take several requests to get the right person.

 

 

[Arthur Fliegenheimer]

Frank,

 

Did you ever come across any archival documents pertaining to Maguire's 1949 sale of crates to Kilgore?

[TD.]

gijive,

I have to disagree with your thoughts about Auto-Ordnance (AO) (or Savage Arms) having 100's of Model of 1928 receivers left over after the adoption of the M1 Thompson. It has been my observation over the years that firearms manufacturers selling arms to the government are usually able to clean up most of the remaining inventory in one model prior to a change to a newer model. In this case, the war was still ongoing and the need for Thompson’s of any model existed. I would think AO would have had some Model of 1928 receivers left over just from slave type parts scattered throughout the factory. However, I can't believe they had 100's of unused receivers.

 

Of course, this is just my opinion. I am open to everyone's thoughts on this. Great thread.

 

Are you back home?

[TAS1921AC]

PhilOhio: "I continue to think that the more simple and likely answer is probably the way it happened, a few guns pulled off the line during wartime for priority LE customers."

Phil, I tend to agree with your theory. After all, didn't doctors get special allowances for gasoline and tires during the wartime shortages? I would think that LE requirements would warrant the same considerations.

Why don't all of the folks with FOIA questions each write a letter a week for a couple months? Maybe they would find it less work to respond than to keep reading the same requests over and over.

 

[gijive]

TD and Phil,

 

You guys make good arguments contrary to to the secnario I posted. I guess I was trying to come up with an arbitrary figure that would fit a plausible number of contract overruns and cancelled miltary orders as Frank speculated. I didn't mean to suggest that there aere hundred os receivers laying around, I meant completed guns or enough spare parts, after the 1928 contracts were cancelled, to assemble several hundred guns.

 

I realize they wouldn't have changed the roll markings on the receivers to eliminate the US and A1 designations during wartime production strictly for law enforcement orders, but I can't imagine the law enforcement orders were that plentiful during the period of 1941 to 1944. The inconsistent markings leads me to believe that the guns were not sold during the regular production run, otherwise it would seem that the markings would be more consistent. The X's after the serial number on some guns, sometimes on the receiver and grip frame, sometimes not, in some cases no X at all, suggests to me that the markings were arbitrarily applied after the guns were assembled. Frank also mentioned that many of these guns have vertical foregrips. That grip was phased out after the early British orders and the 1928A1 designation became standard in 1941. Even the British lend-lease guns after 1941 had the horizintal foregrip. Obviously there were many spare grips around, but the standard grip during late production would have been the horizontal grip.

 

I just happen to agree witth Frank's best guess theory. Not simply because he is the host of the site, but because his extensive research has not turned up any other information on these guns. I realize my theory is simply a guess and I'm sure my estimation of numbers of guns is likely not accurate, but the altered serial numbers and removed markinsg suggests to me surplus guns that were marketed after normal production of the model ended.

 

Again, TD and Phil, you make excellent arguments to the contrary. I am enjoying the discussion on this topic.

[Frank I.]

Arthur,

 

To answer your question about Kilgore, no the history was written in 1945.

 

To expand on the 1928 AC quest, how interesting would Thompson collecting be if we knew everything? Seeking info keeps everything interesting and fun.

 

 

[blueline541]

I had no idea there could be so much mystery and conjecture surrounding the history of such famous firearms. Interesting and frustrating. Great thread though.

[gijive]

QUOTE (TD. @ Jun 2 2007, 09:45 PM)

Of course, this is just my opinion. I am open to everyone's thoughts on this. Great thread. Are you back home?

TD,

 

I missed your question when responding to your post. No, I'm not home yet. It's Sunday and I had a little time to devote to the Internet, so I thought I'd jump in on this thread. It's an interesting topic. Hope to see you sometime next year. I'll be in touch.

[giantpanda4]

TD,

 

You say they usually clean up after a model change over. But what then about all of the receivers Numrich had to register and sell in the 50's (the NAC's)? There were about 200 of them, right? Why wouldn't you speculate that there were more and AO sold them as PD guns in the 40's? I would make that leap...

 

[TD.]

giantpanda4,

George Numrich obtained 95 NFA guns from the purchase of the Thompson from Frederic A. Willis and Associates in 1951. This number includes the prototype Thompson’s, many of which were later donated to West Point. Not all of the 95 guns were Thompson’s. I do not know the exact number of actual 1921, 1928 or M1 receivers actually obtained from this sale, but suffice to say it was less than 95. These receivers include the leftovers from the Colt contract, the Savage contract and the Auto-Ordnance Bridgeport plant production. Many of these receivers were later made into a complete gun and sold to law enforcement agencies in the 1950's by Numrich Arms Corporation. As you can see, this is not many leftover guns or receivers from three production runs of Thompson’s.

 

I believe Maguire Industries did not make much of an effort to market the Thompson after the .45 ACP Model T2 submachine gun designed by William Douglas Hammond was not adopted by the U.S. and Thompson production stopped in 1944. However, I have not researched this area fully so others may be better informed. Obviously, some sales did take place and this helps piece together the story.

[Frank I.]

There is one of the MASS 1928 AC guns is for sale on the Sturmgewehr board

 

WTS: Manhattan Project 1928A1 Thompson C&R $29,500

 

Posted By: Auto Burst Tech in Easton, MA (c-24-91-174-227.hsd1.ma.comcast.net)

Date: 6/3/07 23:05

 

This is a very historic and collectible one of a kind 1928A1 Thompson. This very gun was historically documented in Frank Iannamicko's book "American Thunder-Military Thompson Submachineguns" as one of only two Thompson SMG's used to safeguard the "Manhattan Project" inside the Mass Institute of Technolodgy (MIT) during WWII development of the nuclear bomb. After the war, this Thompson was transfered to the Cambridge Police Dept untill it was purchased by a class 3 collector in the 1980's. the gun has all original finish still intact. The serial number has a X suffix, but retains all original U.S. Ordnance markings. The stock bears the CPD of the Cambridge Police Dept. Gun is in 95% plus condition with perfect internals. Will transfer on Form 3 to FFL dealer or pay transfer tax for local sale.

[TNKen]

Speaking of NAC guns, here's one that just hit Subguns.

 

Serial number "A.O. 152218x NAC"

 

Very close in time to my gun "A.O. 151106x"

 

Which makes me wonder who added the "x" suffix on this NAC gun.

Note also the overstamp attempts.

 

http://www.subguns.com/classifieds/index.c...query=retrieval

Edited June 4, 2007 by TNKen

[Lancer]

QUOTE (TNKen @ Jun 4 2007, 10:42 AM)

Speaking of NAC guns, here's one that just hit Subguns. Serial number "A.O. 152218x  NAC" Very close in time to my gun "A.O. 151106x" Which makes me wonder who added the "x" suffix on this NAC gun. Note also the overstamp attempts. http://www.subguns.com/classifieds/index.c...query=retrieval

Obviously this was a Bridgeport 28ac. Looks like someone (Numrich?) tried to restore the original U.S. and A1 markings. The serial # range is right.

 

 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v713/Lancer1717/AO152213x.jpg

[gijive]

QUOTE (TNKen @ Jun 4 2007, 09:42 AM)

Which makes me wonder who added the "x" suffix on this NAC gun. Note also the overstamp attempts.

TNKen,

 

Review some of the earlier posts on this subject. That is one of the peculiarities of these guns that we have been discussing. Some have the X suffix, some don't. Some have it on the grip frame only, some have it on the receiver like the one shown in the ad. The markings on these law enforcement guns are inconsistent, and we're trying to come to some logical conclusion why?

[TNKen]

When I look at the "X" on mine, it is full sized and in line with the remaining serial numbers. The "x" on this gun appears to be in lower case and stamped off-line with the remaining parts of the serial numbers.

 

It is interesting to note that the "5" in both this gun and mine are raised slightly above the line, which makes me wonder if the same device was used to strike the numbers.

 

Ken

[gijive]

TNKen,

 

That's an interesting observation. The X's were obviously added after the fact by someone at Auto-Ordnance, because the roll marked serial number wouldn't have come the line with an X. The mystery is what the X designates? It must have meant something because many of them are marked that way. Did the X designate law enforcement, rebuild, surplus, refinish, etc? Who knows?