Thompson (M1928, M1A1)

[Nightcrawler]

Thompson (M1928, M1928 "Navy", M1A1)

Anybody ever fire a Thompson submachine gun? How was the balance? Controllability on full auto? They have a pretty good heft to them, but it's not too bad, at least not from the 16" semiauto clones I've handled.

The 16" models are ridiculous, in my opinion. Same overall length as my FAL, weigh just as much, and fire .45ACP...no thanks. (There's a custom FAL .45ACP model out there I'd rather have than one of those.)

But the originals are an interesting piece of history, I should think.

One thing I noticed. The stocks are too long and have too much drop. You can't get a cheek weld and shouldering the weapon puts it too far away from you, I think, and I'm 6'2". At least, I couldn't get comfy last time I held a Thompson semiauto, but that was awhile ago. I noticed in training photos from World War II that troops were taught to place the stock under their shoulder and spray at the target. While I'm sure this would be okay for very close ranged stuff, I'd prefer using, you know, the sights, at anything more than point blank range.

Interesting weapon, you know. While more modern designs are lighter and fire more powerful cartridges (I'm sure an AK with a drum mag can do anything a Thompson can), the Tommy Gun is still brutally effective at what it was designed to do: sweep enemy trenches and bunkers clean.

And of course, pictures.

M1A1 Thompson, courtesty World.Guns.ru

 

[Fed168]

I fired an overstamp model, Colt production awhile back. The weight is a definate plus in full auto, I think with the drum it was close to 15 pounds. The balance wasn't too bad, sights were tiny though, and you could feel the action moving. The weight made it feel like a real gun.

 

[ACP230]

I've shot a couple of Thompsons. They always tended to climb on me which probably indicates a lack of training when I shot them.
I thought the balance was OK, but was initially a bit surprised at the weight.
Thompson mags I emptied usually worked well and loaded easily. Some other subgun mags are much more trouble to fill.

 

[Art Eatman]

Holding the butt between bicep and ribs, two- to four-shot bursts are easily controlled. There seems to be a natural "pointability" which allows you to hit targets at relatively close range.

I shot at a three-foot target at 100 yards. Sighting on the center of the target, the first shot hit low, the second near the center and the third was at the top. The fourth walked off, high, of course. Combat, I'd sight just above the belt buckle...

Only got to shoot a couple of stick-mag's worth, but it was fun. A wonderful way to turn money into noise. It would be a good SHTF critter for a city fella...

, Art

 

[Soap]

Shooting a Thompson is pure joy. IMO it is very controllable on full auto. In FA mode, it is very easy to fire a deliberate round count, e.g., 1 round, 2 rounds, 4 rounds, etc. The weight probably has a lot to do with this. I have shot with a guy who can hold the Thompson into a 1' circle at about 25-35 yards for entire magazines. The funniest thing is when we were knocking old scrap steel over, all the FA shooters were only shooting 1 or sometimes 2 rounds so they could hit the targets quickly and accurately.

 

[Nightcrawler]

Pictures!







Thanks to The Tommy Gun Page for these pictures.

 

[Jim K]

Just FWIW,

The Models 1921 and 1928 use the Blish "lock" and have the operating handle on top. Both use a spring retracted firing pin actuated by a triangular "hammer" which rocks so its top drives the firing pin forward when the bottom hits the receiver. The M1928A1 is the Model 1928 as adopted for military service. Both guns can accept drums and stick magazines.

The simplified M1 has no lock, and its bolt handle is on the side, but it still has the separate firing pin. The M1A1 is the same as the M1, except that its firing pin is a simple projection machined into the bolt face like the STEN and M3. The M1 and M1A1 cannot use drums, only the stick magazines.

The original Thompson magazines were a 100 round drum and 20 round stick, designated the "C" and "XX" magazines. The 50 round drum, the "L" magazine was designed at the request of the military who considered (rightly) that the "C" drum was too bulky. In WWII, the 30 round stick ("XXX" magazine) was also produced at military request. If you have not caught on, the magazine designations were the capacity in Roman numbers.

Jim

 

[Nightcrawler]

There were several versions of the M1928 Thompson as well. The "Navy" model had a cyclic reducer and a horizontal wooden handguard, as the Navy felt that the vertical foregrip was too fragile.

The M1 Thompsons lacked the compensator, in addition to being straight blowback operated weapons.

 

[FPrice]

I fired a WWII-era Thompson M1A1 last year at the Westfield (MA) Sportsmans Club Machine Gun Shoot. I found it fairly easy to control, but with so many other shooters on the line I was having a hard time figuring out just where my bullets were going. I'm going to try again this year but I think I'm going to bring more money.

 

[Johnny Guest]

Oh, yeah, the TSMG - - -

I really like my Thompson - - It is a West Hurley-made Model 1928, from the 1970s, so I don’t feel as if I’m desecrating some cherished antique when I take it to the range. (Though the value has trebled in the ten years I’ve owned it.) I have both the vertical and horizontal foregrips, so I can set it up like the cop-and-gangster era type, or like SGT Saunders used in the old TV series.

The previous owner had procured a vintage Bridgeport 50-round drum, and the ensemble is pretty hefty, all right. The type XX, 20-shot magazine really “looks right,†especially with vert foregrip. It is also easier to carry slung and cased that way. But, for practicality, the 30 round military mag is nearly ideal. Plenty of ammo without being truly heavy and clumsy.

I shoot mine better in the 28A1 configuration, with the horizontal foregrip. This also allows use of a sling for comfortable carry. When I get an extra vert foregrip, I’ll inlet a swivel in it, like the Brits did in WW-II.

With the Cutts compensator and the correct technique, controllability is not a problem. I’ve also fired real antique 1928s, M1, and M1A1 Thompsons. Never shot a 1921, though, and the long barrel semis never attracted me.

I shot in an SMG match last weekend and tied for third place. All shooting had to be done in full auto mode. Believe it or not, my major problem was firing LONG ENOUGH bursts. Couple of stages required good shooter control, with three-to-five hits mandatory. I have practiced for so long, firing short bursts, that two rounds are second nature.

Most stages had targets placed at 10 to 20 yards. Clay birds hung from a string at 20 yards are a bit challenging. There’s really no difficulty getting a hit or two on the IPSC silhouettes at 50 yards, and, as Art indicated, 100 yards is not out of the question. I refer semi-auto for much over 50 yards, though. Elder son and I can both score on siloes at 200, with some effort. Open bolt, y’know.

In last week’s match, it was fascinating to observe - - - With all the MACs, MP5s, and an M16 short barrel, the most reliable with any kind of ammo were my Tommy, a vintage MP40, and a Sten tube gun. Our WW-II designs seemed to tolerate cheapo surplus factory and handload ammo better than the more modern, high-dollar guns.

While I have a great deal of liking for the TSMG, I have no illusions about the practicality of it in a non-military setting, even for cops. A good rifle or carbine is far superior for tactical purposes. Remember, the TSMG was designed when the bolt or lever action rifle was the norm. But the TSMG is still arguably the absolute FUNNEST way to turn .45 ammo into noise and empty brass.


Johnny

 

[Dr.Rob]

Funny you posted THAT ww2 pic, containing the BESTEST FA ever, the BAR. Imagine using one of those against a mac-10 in a plate shoot.



You think a Tommygun is fun? Try lighting up the night with a full auto 30-06 with magazines the size of 8 track tapes.

OK back on topic. I've fired a Tommygun before in WW2 configuration with the cutts comp on it (and I understand that those models actually are smoothbores.. no rifling)and I recall that it was, heavy, slow, awkward compared to how I thought it would be. Muzzle climb is retarded by wrapping the sling on your support hand and pulling downward.

I didn't shoot anything far away and was only using 20 rd mags, but it was still heap big fun. Turns a car into a bonnie and clyde special in seconds, nice BIG holes.

But as far as being heavy as it is, and being such a short range weapon you can sort of see why the army tried to make a go of the M-2 carbine. Lighter, faster, lots of bullets better penetration etc.

 

[Johnny Guest]

I dunno, Dr. Rob - - -

I've never fired a BAR, but would dearly love to do so. Certainly, I'd like to own one, both from sheer avarice and because it is such a classic. I trust it would be heavy enough to handle easily.

Tell ya one thing, truly - - The FAL, M14, and AR10 are no picnic to handle in full auto fire. I mean, I feel that a RIFLE ought to have a measure of accuracy, 'way on out there. The three I mentioned were okay at a distance, fired in semi mode, but were relatively useless beyond 20 yards in FA. Perhaps the M14E2 or the squad auto FAL, with heavy barrels and bipods, would be a different matter . . .

I've tried and tried to like the M2 Carbine. Again, in semi, it is neither better or worse than the M1 USC, which can really be pretty good. I cannot picture a use for the FA feature, though, in anything other than clearing out a room. It climbs so badly and fires so rapidly, that I cannot get more than one hit on a silhouette at over 25 yards in FA.

Best use I've found for the M2 is to let someone fulfill a desire to shoot a machine gun. I've heard of ONE time a cop used one to flush an escapee out of a weed-filled vacant lot - - It was the sound effects that did it, though. The deppity yelled that he was gonna machine gun the entire field, and then emptied a 30 round mag into the ground up close. The surrendering felon SWORE those bullets were clipping the weeds RIGHT OVER his head!

Best,
Johnny

 

[C.R.Sam]

Random thoughts.
For sloggin through brush n stuff, 4 XXX sticks in reserve a lot easier to tolerate than a spare drum.

M-14 and FAL on auto a real handful. BAR quite handy. Difference in weight makes a lot of difference.

Sam

 

[Art Eatman]

SOF Magazine compared the controllability on FA for a BAR, an FAL, an M14 and a G3. Only the BAR could be held on target, a one-meter diameter rock at some 500 meters.

Shooting a BAR and hitting is easy. The difficulty is in the toting.

Art

 

[C.R.Sam]

And the older we get the less weight is harder to tote.

M-60 makes a very controllable auto rifle...
But impractical if walkin or ground floppin or turning etc.
Twisted belt = quiet gun.

Sam

 

[444]

I have fired several Thompson SMGs. They are a real jewel. Big, heavy, great quality. I would love to own one, but for actual use it leaves a lot to be desired. It is interesting to fire the various generations of SMGs and see the differences in them. The Thompson, the Uzi, the MP5.
Finally, I think we have grown beyond that phase of arms development. A change that I think is for the better. But the SMGs are a lot of fun to shoot.
Now you got me thinking, I might take my Sten out after the Steeler game.

 

[Gunhamr]

I carried an M1 Thompson for a while in WWII in the South Pacific.
We had the 20 round stick mags. Can't recall any drums in our unit.
All the boys that had them, liked them. There is something very reassuring about the weight and feel of one of them. Maybe a little off topic but we also had some Reising subs and they were a piece of junk and the boys that were issued one of them usually threw them away as soon as they could find a replacement. The Thompson definitely had a place. They served well in cave and bunker cleaning. I don't own one but wish I did.
Have a neighbor who owns five of them, one stamped Alcatraz. He lets me fire one occasionally but won't let me fire the Alcatraz. Can't imagine why.