Semi auto Thompsons, interesting.

K

Kimio

New member
I love the history behind WWII weapons, I normally gobble up any information pertaining to the topic of WWII small arms. I recently found out that apparently there are new production variants of the M1 Thompson, and while this is most likely old news (very old most likely) it's refreshing to see that there is an option for people like me who would probably never have the disposable income to drop 15k or more for an authentic automatic Thompson.

I'd imagine the real deal would be sort of rare to come by. I recall reading that all but a few still exist in museums here in the states due to the old stock being destroyed after it was discontinued to be issued to our troops. Thus leaving the only other examples coming from out of the country from our allies that used them as well. Correct me if I'm wrong please.

Hopefully I'll be able to get one someday.

Thoughts on the semi auto version? Has anyone had the chance to actually see one or even better, fire one?
 
Thompson

I have one. It is fun to shoot. Factory reccomends ball ammo only. I have both 30 rnd stick mags and a 50 rnd drum; there is a reason the military used only stick mags. I have yet to get the drum to cycle a full 50 rounds, no problems with the stick mags. Hope this helps.
 
Mine was awful. The purest lemon I have even experienced. Kahr was a nightmare to deal with, and their service people are incompetent (and that's almost too nice of a description). A hunk of junk in every way except looks. They do look nice.

there is a reason the military used only stick mags. I have yet to get the drum to cycle a full 50 rounds
Click to expand...

The original drums function just fine. The military didn't use them because they were complex, expensive, and bulky, as I recall.
 
They have pretty "mixed" reviews. (Too many for my taste.) Darn shame because I really like the Thompson. I have fired an old FA model. The coolest gun ever. Period.
 
For the money they ask I'd rather get an M1 carbine. The semi auto thompsons have so little functionality in common with the original, thanks to the BATF banning open bolt guns. The semi auto thompson is practically a long barreled pistol, and an expensive one at that.

I've shot two, one had keyholing and horrible accuracy, the other was nicer, but the 16 in barrel made it unbalanced, and unwieldy. I would not recommend them to anyone except for the hell of it.
 
That's a real shame. I thought with the lift on assault weapon bans that the ruling against the automatic Thompson would be lifted.

Guess I can dream right? So the semi automatic version is more a novelty than anything else eh.
 
Kimio the assault weapon ban only deals with semi-autos. Full auto have been restricted since 1934 and could not be registered after 1986.
 
My favorites are the original WWII-issue 1928A1 "Navy model" (with horizontal military foregrip) made TV-famous by Sgt.Saunders on "Combat!" and the subsequent M1A1--the "...Private Ryan" model seen in increasing numbers in the last half of the war. These full auto versions sported 10.5" barrels--as did most of the '28A1's original civilian 1921/1928 counterparts--and therefore the configurations ubiquitous with WWII and what most think of when hearing "Thompson." Since the short barrel--select fire or not--is severely restricted, the 16" available from Kahr/AO just doesn't seem right and limits my interest. Just not the same famous gun. It's like if they put a 24" barrel on an M1 Carbine--sort of defeats the purpose. At a hefty 11 or 12 pounds "dry," the otherwise fairly wieldable, compact dimensions is one of the few features advantageous to the original Thompson set up. The 16" barrel just makes it long--and still heavy.
 
dont know about warantee nightmares. My buddy had one of the thompson guns from before Kahr bought them out and had it about worn out for 10s of thousands of rounds. He sent it in because it had a broken part and it came back completely rebuilt and like new. they even put a new barrel on it.
 
Drums for the Thompson were USGI equipment. Just not common

http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=84351&hl=thompson

http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=72534&hl=thompson

http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=68561&hl=thompson

http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=56734&hl=thompson

http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=26211&hl=thompson


Full-auto weapons are not illegal in the USA. You basically have to get a chief LEO, Judge, or similar to sign off on an application form, tell the BATFE the right things, give them fingerprints (your own, one assumes) more forms, give them your money, get the tax stamp, sell your children to get the dough, and buy it (as long as it was previously registered)

That said, The firearms made now by Auto-Ordnance are not the same 'poor' quality they were years ago. I'd buy a semi-auto Tommy. It's a novelty pistol-caliber semi auto carbine...but I'd still buy one. Somebody give me the money and I'll prove it :D
 
Having fired several original commercial and military Thompsons, I'm surprised to hear the semi version is often unreliable. The older ones I've fired ran great with either sticks or drums, so long as FMJ was used.
 
I think it's open bolt vs. closed bolt design, Sarge, and the semi-auto design is a departure from original concept

Original Tommies were so well made, too. But I don't really see an inherent reason the semi should be unreliable. Maybe somebody who happens to have both versions can explain
 
1927A-1/T5

Bought mine in May ..lightweight (aluminum receiver 9.5lbs) 30rd stick magazine. I've shot appx 500 rds. of new factory ball ammo. (Federal and Winchester 230gr) One handed firing is simple,accurate for me out to and past 25yds. It's truly a blast to own and fire. Was out to the FUN GUN SHOOT in SD first part of Jun and saw appx: 20 full auto Thompsons being fired with NO problems using stick and drum magazines. Kahr Arms/Auto Ordinance in MA. built mine right:)
 
I've heard some good things about the auto ordinance SBR Thompsons. The majority of complaints were like the ones on here, they don't like drums. Theres a guy I know who put one of those 'hellfire' ,or whatever they're called, triggers on one and he said it's a blast. And they're supposed to be legal because they increase your trigger pull capability and when I looked at one it just reminded me of a response trigger for my Tippmann.
 
I recently found out that apparently there are new production variants of the M1 Thompson
Click to expand...
The Kahr/Auto Ordnance/Thompson is not really a variant of the Thompson M1, it is a different mechanism entirely. It is patterned after the Thompson Model 1927 (in appearance only) due to the ATF fighting anything that could even remotely be considered modifiable to fire full auto. The ATF required the entire fire control group to be designed in such a way that it could not accept USGI parts, the upper receiver sized so that it could not accept USGI bolts, and the materials spec that will not allow the kind of stress loads generated in full auto. What you have is a mechanism that looks like a Thompson 1927 but functions entirely differently.
 
For the money they ask I'd rather get an M1 carbine.
Click to expand...

+1

You can still easily find USGI carbines that actually served with our troops. And of course for someone who wants a new gun, the Kahr/Auto-Ordnance carbine is actually a pretty faithful replica of the original, unlike their Thompsons.
 
You can still easily find USGI carbines that actually served with our troops.
Click to expand...

And for half or less the MSRP of the Tommy from Auto-Ordnance too


....but if you're looking for a semi-auto tommy gun, the M1 carbine wouldn't be the same. I love my Inland M1A1, and I have an M2 stock for it too so I get the best of both USGI M1 carbine worlds. But the M1 carbine isn't what everyone wants
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top