User Panel
[#1]
Originally Posted By sleestakwhisperer: The shape of the stock won't necessarily change the tendency for a gun to have muzzle rise. The stock could be a banana shape, or dead straight, or silly straw shape. But the thing that actually matters is the distance between the center of the bore and the center of the contact area on your shoulder. The amount that the gun want to twist upward is called a "Moment" and it is equal to the force F times the eccentricity X. When you fire a gun, it creates a rearward force that is positioned at the center of the bore. This force is counteracted by a pressure of your shoulder on the buttstock. The center of the force is more or less the center of the contact area with your shoulder. In the picture, you can see that the three guns have completely different stock shapes, but the Moment is still the Force times the distance between the two forces. If you want to change the amount of upward twist or "moment" that the gun exerts, you have to make X smaller somehow. The M16 was cleverly designed to minimize the X distance between the force couple by lowering the centerline of the bore and elevating the sights. I never experienced much muzzle climb from my Thompsons, because the recoil impulse is so light. https://images2.imgbox.com/17/fd/7DFtxPsX_o.png View Quote I find it interesting to compare and contrast shooting the Thompson (a 1921 with a 1928 recoil setup installed), the M16 with a couple different .45 ACP uppers, and the full size Uzi with a .45 ACP conversion. Each setup as its own "personality". At the end of the day, .45 ACP is too expensive to shoot full auto no matter what you use. MHO, YMMV, etc. |
|
|
[#4]
If you guys never saw "Public Enemies", check it out.
IT'S A GENUINELY GREAT MOVIE It's pre-DEI, so there are no Empowered Girl Bosses in it. So don't count on any empowerment. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_4S_-cr9Rs |
|
|
[#5]
Originally Posted By sleestakwhisperer: The shape of the stock won't necessarily change the tendency for a gun to have muzzle rise. The stock could be a banana shape, or dead straight, or silly straw shape. But the thing that actually matters is the distance between the center of the bore and the center of the contact area on your shoulder. The amount that the gun want to twist upward is called a "Moment" and it is equal to the force F times the eccentricity X. When you fire a gun, it creates a rearward force that is positioned at the center of the bore. This force is counteracted by a pressure of your shoulder on the buttstock. The center of the force is more or less the center of the contact area with your shoulder. In the picture, you can see that the three guns have completely different stock shapes, but the Moment is still the Force times the distance between the two forces. If you want to change the amount of upward twist or "moment" that the gun exerts, you have to make X smaller somehow. The M16 was cleverly designed to minimize the X distance between the force couple by lowering the centerline of the bore and elevating the sights. I never experienced much muzzle climb from my Thompsons, because the recoil impulse is so light. https://images2.imgbox.com/17/fd/7DFtxPsX_o.png View Quote My undergrad degree is Mechanical Engineering. Your discussion is exactly what I have in mind, but I think you're ignoring that the shape of the stock is what controls where the contact area of your shoulder is in relation to the bore line (X in your annotations). If the stock extended straight back without so much drop at the heel, X would be reduced. |
|
|
[#8]
Originally Posted By peachy: I am just familiar with the 1942 prototypes; I don't know anything about the testing or results thereof. I don't have the book in question. Also, while I'm aware that the 1942 stock is an example of a straight stock, the design that I am familiar with is not what I'm suggesting or asking about. In the 1942 version that I'm aware of, the stock actually rises up over the rear of the receiver necessitating taller sights. I am not sure what the other prototype looks like, I'm only aware of this one: https://www.forgottenweapons.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/tsmgstock.jpg The version I'm envisioning is different. Specifically, I'm wondering how much it would help recoil if you made a more-or-less traditionally shaped Thompson stock with the same drop at comb but made it extend straight back so that the drop at comb is equal to the drop at heel. I think you'd still be able to use the stock sights with that setup because most people seem to place their cheek at or close to the front of the comb when shooting. This would not eliminate the X dimension as sleestakwhisperer annotated above, but it would reduce it. View Quote Can you make a sketch of your idea and post it up? Seeing as how the shooter's shoulder location is fixed, is it possible to reduce the moment couple without lowering the axis of the bore relative to the shoulder? |
|
|
[Last Edit: peachy]
[#9]
Originally Posted By sleestakwhisperer: Can you make a sketch of your idea and post it up? Seeing as how the shooter's shoulder location is fixed, is it possible to reduce the moment couple without lowering the axis of the bore relative to the shoulder? View Quote Checkout the first and last posts here: https://www.machinegunboards.com/forums/index.php?/topic/28431-straight-stock-mystery/ ETA: it didn't seem like anyone knew anything about the first one. No one commented on the last one either. It just seems like an interesting idea to play with to see if it improved the control of the gun. |
|
|
[#10]
Ost. I've always wanted a thompson. I need to find someone local and handle/ shoot one.
I'm sure i could Google it but is there a model where the furniture is interchangeable between the war time and gangster style guns? And I remember reading that only certain models took drums? Anyone want to trade a 1919 lol. I like shooting it (especially with the 22lr kit) but it is truly a pain / inconvenience to own a crew served weapon without a crew to serve it....it has a lot of baggage when I take it to the range. |
|
''Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid.''
|
[#13]
Originally Posted By jbntex: I have had my 1928 Savage Thompson for probably about a decade. Like every machinegun there are pros/cons to the Thompson just like every model machinegun out there. ... The biggest cons for the Thompson is that IMHO they are really not a great shooter. They are very heavy for a subgun weighing in more than most 308 battle rifles, the stocks LOP is long and the stock angle is not very comfortable, the iron sites are marginal at best and even the Lyman is overly complicated for what it is (with no way to really improve the sights or add an optic), its open bolt so first shot accuracy like all open bolt guns is not great, its in a more expensive caliber to shoot in volume (45acp vs. 9mm), they really can't be easily suppressed (yes I know folks have made one off adapters/suppressors for Thompsons), other than some 22LR kits there isn't much you can do to expand the shooting experience, and the fire control levers and mag release are awkward in positioning. While the rearward recoil is not bad at all as its an 11+lbs gun shooting a pistol cartridge the muzzle climb controllability isn't the best. Personally I think this is due to the fact that the vast majority of the actual weight in the Thompson is from the pistol grip and back (the steel grip frame, the wood stock, the whole rear end of the receiver, where the majority of the mass of the bolt is during the firing sequence, etc.) The front end of the Thompson where the weight needs to really be to control muzzle climb is actually pretty light. The vertical front grip helps with this but the 1928A1, M1, M1A1 horizontal foregrips don't have a whole lot of material to grab onto and its easy to burn your hand on the barrel if you are not careful. The angle of the stock with the "high-rise" placement of the receiver and sights doesn't help to mitigate muzzle climb either. For me personally, having shot machineguns since I was a kid and being 6ft/200lbs controlling a Thompson is no big deal. However, folks new to machineguns or shooters who don't have a lot of upper body strength (small women, kids) controllability is a very real concern. Given how iconic the Thompson is, you seem to get never ending requests from folks to put a mag through it or let their 13 year old son shoot it. ..... View Quote As far as shooting the Thompson goes, I learned very early on that one NEVER gives a first time Thompson shooter - regardless of how much shooting experience they have - a mag with more than ten rounds in it. They will invariably turn the Thompson into an anti-aircraft gun. Their subsequent shooting will probably be okay as they have got a "feel" for how the Thompson behaves. And for suppressed Thompson shooting (no personal experience): https://www.griffinarmament.com/1-375x24-cutts-compensator-mount-for-the-bushwhacker-46/ MHO, YMMV, etc. |
|
|
[Last Edit: jbntex]
[#14]
Originally Posted By SecondAmend: As far as shooting the Thompson goes, I learned very early on that one NEVER gives a first time Thompson shooter - regardless of how much shooting experience they have - a mag with more than ten rounds in it. They will invariably turn the Thompson into an anti-aircraft gun. Their subsequent shooting will probably be okay as they have got a "feel" for how the Thompson behaves. And for suppressed Thompson shooting (no personal experience): https://www.griffinarmament.com/1-375x24-cutts-compensator-mount-for-the-bushwhacker-46/ MHO, YMMV, etc. View Quote And yet for reasons that are a mystery to me the Thompson seems to always be the gun newbies want to shoot first. Its usually followed by the comment of "I can't believe how heavy this gun is" followed up by "how do I aim this thing" as they awkwardly try and shoulder it while trying to figure out where to put their head/cheek. Its definitely a guns you have to help folks figure out how to hold properly. Even folks who shoot and owns guns find the Thompson awkward the first time they try and shoulder it much less get their head in the right position to line up the sights. Its not uncommon for me to end up telling folks "just use the big U slot in the charging as the rear sight" and let them shoot half a mag semi auto to confirm point of impact and their ability to control it, then flip it to auto when they only have ~10rds left in the mag. A lot folks also struggle with the safety and fire selector (not turning them 180 degrees) or which one does what. Probably less than half can figure out how to install a magazine, and almost no one can figure out how to get the mag release to function. I usually just tell them I will install the mag for you and you most likely won't be able to figure out how to get the mag out, so just keep the gun pointed downrange and hand it back to me when its empty and I will remove the mag and rerack the gun. The best gun I have found for new shooters is the suppressed MP5K-N with 4 position 3rb pack. They are small, light, with almost no recoil, short stock LOP and you can graduate them to full auto through the mechanical burst setting. For some reason way the, stock, foregrip, and sights are set up on the K it seems like most new shooters can intuitively hold it up and shoulder it propertly and successfully align the front sight blade in the ghost-ring inside the rear drum sight and successfully shoot without much muzzle climb. The pictos on the grip frame also make it very easy to understand how the gun will operate (or won't operate) when you pull the trigger and the paddle for the mag is usually really easy to operate as well. |
|
|
[#15]
|
|
|
[#17]
Originally Posted By SecondAmend: As far as shooting the Thompson goes, I learned very early on that one NEVER gives a first time Thompson shooter - regardless of how much shooting experience they have - a mag with more than ten rounds in it. They will invariably turn the Thompson into an anti-aircraft gun. Their subsequent shooting will probably be okay as they have got a "feel" for how the Thompson behaves. And for suppressed Thompson shooting (no personal experience): https://www.griffinarmament.com/1-375x24-cutts-compensator-mount-for-the-bushwhacker-46/ MHO, YMMV, etc. View Quote How do you shoot with it? Do you find it hard to hit with? Obviously, it's a personal thing, but it's my favorite subgun to shoot. I shoot steel plate matches with it. I never win because I'm too slow, but I don't have any trouble hitting the targets. I'm slow with my UZI too, and that has a really great red dot on it. I'm going to have to do a "paper plate test" on myself now to see how good I actually am with the Thompson. I'm curious now. People always say that MAC10s are hard to shoot as well, but I loved mine. I would pull the shoulder stock out and hold it with a firm two handed grip on the pistol grip, like I was shooting a magnum pistol, it was really accurate. Very dependable too, it never jammed. |
|
|
[#18]
Here's a good video of some target shooting with the Thompson, give you an idea of it's shooting properties
Thompson Submachine Gun |
|
|
[#19]
I notice in the video that he uses that WWI-era tiny v-notch sight on the 28.
what I do is lift the ladder sight and use the peep at the lowest setting, for close in. But I like peep sights. The M1A1 model doesn't have the fancy Lyman ladder sight, it's just a fixed peep sight, with a notch on top for long range shooting. |
|
|
[#20]
Personally, I've never fired a rifle that feels as badly as the Thompson does.
The length of pull is too long for anyone who doesn't have long arms. the height of the sights compared to the stock makes you have to place the stock almost under your armpit, the weight isn't that heavy as a number but the balance is so poor it feels heavier than the M16/203 combo I carried in the Army. It you're one of the (few) persons that it fits, great for you, but those are few and far between. It's an awesome looking, reliable SMG that has an iconic look. That said, if I was in WWII I'd have traded or stolen about any other rifle to replace a Thompson, to include a Grease Gun, which feels and points far better for me. |
|
|
[#21]
It's a 1st generation submachine gun, they hadn't figgered out the ergonomics, the caliber, or the operating system. But it worked, and it was the best gun on the battlefield for 200 yds & in shy of a LMG or automatic rifle.
|
|
|
[#22]
Originally Posted By peachy: Regarding the shootability of the Thompson, has anyone ever tried to have a straight stock made for one? Seems like if you had the same stock shape with a flat comb, it would still position your eye in about the right spot for the sights but wouldn't make it want to rise so much. Might also be worth messing with the LOP. Since it is easily removed, you could have a stock for shooting and your traditional stock for collector value. View Quote Yes, it has been done. I had a fine gentleman who goes by Deerslayer over on the Thompson Board (Machinegunboards.com) make me one to match the 1923 Thompson (which never went anywhere). He did so for $200 and it makes a world of difference in shooting the Thompson. With the original stock, it's constantly trying to slide down off my shoulder, but with the 1923 stock with much less drop it acts like a normal stock and just sits there. It worked so well another Thompson shooter at my gun club sent away for one also. He can make one for you, too. I have also experimented with a custom stock with a very high comb for use with a red dot optic. It works, but looks a little silly. |
|
|
[#24]
When discussing buttstocks and shooting techniques for the Thompson, it's important to remember that John Thompson designed it to be a "trench broom" for use in the European trench battles of The War to End All Wars (later World War I). The first commercial Thompsons, the Model 1919, did not have buttstocks. It was the police and military - the target customers - who demanded that there be a buttstock. John Dillinger recognized that the Thompson was best used sans buttstock, and so the term for shooting from the hip without a buttstock came to be called "gangster style" when it was actually the original intent "trench warfare - military style".
MHO, YMMV, etc. |
|
|
[#27]
Originally Posted By Silverbear_51: Yes, it has been done. I had a fine gentleman who goes by Deerslayer over on the Thompson Board (Machinegunboards.com) make me one to match the 1923 Thompson (which never went anywhere). He did so for $200 and it makes a world of difference in shooting the Thompson. With the original stock, it's constantly trying to slide down off my shoulder, but with the 1923 stock with much less drop it acts like a normal stock and just sits there. It worked so well another Thompson shooter at my gun club sent away for one also. He can make one for you, too. I have also experimented with a custom stock with a very high comb for use with a red dot optic. It works, but looks a little silly. View Quote Thanks for sharing your experience! |
|
|
[#28]
Originally Posted By sleestakwhisperer: If you didn't watch this clip, you're missing out. It's great: https://vimeo.com/659063541?cjdata=MXxOfDB8WXww&utm_campaign=2470763&utm_source=affiliate&utm_channel=affiliate&cjevent=40c022d04a1811ef812801000a82b821&clickid=40c022d04a1811ef812801000a82b821 https://i0.wp.com/bamfstyle.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/millerleorobe-gun1-tommy2.jpg?resize=664%2C360&ssl=1 View Quote I need to get a couple of those movie drums. They sure last a lot longer than my 50's |
|
|
[#29]
Notice at $30,000 nobody bid on either one
|
|
|
[Last Edit: Radiolucent]
[#30]
How much do you get paid per click?
Attached File Attached File Also the M1 and M1A1 are not "product improvement" in function. They lost functions like the quick detach stock and ability to use drums, because they were cost cutting modifications. Lack of useless Blish lock and more protection of the simplified later style 1928 rear sight are the only real "improvements". |
|
|
[#31]
|
|
|
[Last Edit: sleestakwhisperer]
[#32]
|
|
|
[#34]
Lol you posted spam ad tracking links that immediately got flagged by my ad blocker. No way you are so technology naïve you don't understand what I posted.
Also neither of those guns you posted are good deals, unless someone directly messaged the seller to buy it off site since gunbroker fee's include sales tax. |
|
|
[Last Edit: sleestakwhisperer]
[#35]
dupe
|
|
|
[#36]
My buddy has one and while it just works (and it’s a transferable re-weld) and is fun to shoot I would still rather have an MP40
|
|
|
[#37]
Originally Posted By ztug: Notice at $30,000 nobody bid on either one View Quote It's $30K for about $1K worth of gun. Sad to think that the only reason mg's are this expensive is legislation and politics. It's an artificially inflated price created by .gov interference. But then again, what isn't. |
|
|
[#39]
My only experience with a Thompson is a SBR'd semi-auto and a blank fire only full auto. I do enjoy shooting them both. But What I want is a FA M1919A4 to o with my SA 1919. But prices on them seem to have jumped quite a bit.
|
|
|
[#40]
Originally Posted By midmo: It's $30K for about $1K worth of gun. Sad to think that the only reason mg's are this expensive is legislation and politics. It's an artificially inflated price created by .gov interference. But then again, what isn't. View Quote Even without the NFA many are still nearly 100 year old artifacts of significance from many different respects. Like end of WWI wonder weapons, Law enforcement, notorious criminals and murders, extensive use by all of the allies in WWII in many significant operations and used extensively in literature, cinema and video games. Auto ord. and Philadelphia ord. are the only ones making anything close in the last 50 years and they leave a lot to be desired. I would say $5,000 gun so only inflated 6 times by the NFA. A Remington model 8 was in the $70 range in the 20's which was very expensive (Winchesters were $30 and cheap shotguns $6) and a Thompson was $200. Now a model 8 is $700-3000 and they have almost no significance compared to a Thompson. Need to repeal the NFA as it is now easier to get a MG (which are generally banned) in this state than an AR. |
|
|
[#41]
Originally Posted By sleestakwhisperer: I'm a project manager in heavy construction. I googled "spam ad tracking links" out of curiosity and I couldn't figure out what it is. I wonder if it actually has a meaning. As far as Thompsons go, I'll keep mine and you pass on them. Everyone walks away happy. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By sleestakwhisperer: Originally Posted By Radiolucent: Lol you posted spam ad tracking links that immediately got flagged by my ad blocker. No way you are so technology naïve you don't understand what I posted. Also neither of those guns you posted are good deals, unless someone directly messaged the seller to buy it off site since gunbroker fee's include sales tax. I'm a project manager in heavy construction. I googled "spam ad tracking links" out of curiosity and I couldn't figure out what it is. I wonder if it actually has a meaning. As far as Thompsons go, I'll keep mine and you pass on them. Everyone walks away happy. My dad works at Nintendo. Your gunbroker links are misleading and have hidden ad tracking. You know this, of course, since to insert that ad tracking link you have to manually insert it and then the text of the non ad tracked gunbroker link separately. Also only a retard would buy a MG directly off gunbroker. Way better to look on Sturm or Gunboards. The last MG I bought that I found on gunbroker I messaged the seller directly to avoid their BS fees. You can keep your overpriced Thompsons. You seem like a Rock Island Auction type buyer. |
|
|
[Last Edit: sleestakwhisperer]
[#42]
dupe
|
|
|
[#43]
Originally Posted By svt40: My only experience with a Thompson is a SBR'd semi-auto and a blank fire only full auto. I do enjoy shooting them both. But What I want is a FA M1919A4 to o with my SA 1919. But prices on them seem to have jumped quite a bit. View Quote One of the guys at my gun club let me shoot a belt fed that was on a really tall stand. It was fun, but we just sort of fired a few belts to make noise. What kind of target shooting is done with those kind of guns? |
|
|
[#44]
Originally Posted By sleestakwhisperer: One of the guys at my gun club let me shoot a belt fed that was on a really tall stand. It was fun, but we just sort of fired a few belts to make noise. What kind of target shooting is done with those kind of guns? View Quote In my experience, the most fun kind of target shooting with belt fed guns involves junk cars and old appliances. |
|
|
[#45]
Originally Posted By sleestakwhisperer: One of the guys at my gun club let me shoot a belt fed that was on a really tall stand. It was fun, but we just sort of fired a few belts to make noise. What kind of target shooting is done with those kind of guns? View Quote No interest in target shooting. I'd use it for WWII reenactments. Would be much better than the semi I currently run. Much more fun way to burn down the 10k DAG blanks I have. Bah I would take it to the local range and shoot up some 7.62x39 for fun. I was thinking they were still in the $15k range for the weapon only. All I can find are guns in the $20k+ range with tripods belt loaders and a lot of stuff I already have. |
|
|
[#46]
Originally Posted By sleestakwhisperer: https://images.saymedia-content.com/.image/c_limit%2Ccs_srgb%2Cq_auto:eco%2Cw_462/MTc2Mjg5MzI1NzY2ODEyODQ1/top-hairdos-from-the-80s.webp View Quote I loved the Thompson Twins. But I sold my rewatt Savage built M1A1, because I tended to shoot it twice a year, the weekend before the monthly February local subgun match and the match. We usually had a Thompson division that month. I like to tinker so I bought a M10 with an Uzi magwell grip and a M11/NINE. The seller of the M10 was also in line for the S.A.B.R.E. upper and gave me his spot in line. Both have Lage uppers, plus a .22lr kit for the M11/NINE. With transferable guns being tens of thousands of dollars, most collectors can’t afford a dozen different guns. So most collectors need the few that they can afford, to be able to do more than run a couple of mags and be set aside to cool. A registered sear or a registered receiver that can have multiple configurations so the fun can continue tend to have increasing market value. With this market pressure guns such as the Thompson or MP40 just have not had the demand/price pressure that the M16, DIAS, Lightning Link, HK sear or registered trigger frames or even Mac style registered receivers have had. In the early 2000s an acquaintance bought a M11/NINE for $900 plus the stamp. Over 20 years later there is a 5.56X45 commercially available upper based on AR parts with a retail cost of $3,200. With over 17,000 of the M11/NINE registered, there would tend to be incentives to develop more conversion products that could be developed as “uppers” for the Mac style machine guns. OP, I certainly believe that you are correct in your assessment. From a historical perspective the Thompson models are a better “value” than the more modular options of transferable machine guns compared to pricing in the past. But Baby Boomers my age and older were raised watching “Rat Patrol” on TV and WW II movies. When I lived in Las Vegas, the Armorer for the biggest machine gun rental establishment ran the local subgun match. Ten years ago he said that the three most popular machine gun rentals were the MP5, M4, and the AK-47. None of which are WW II guns. This thread is interesting, but I think the current trend in market value will more than likely continue. Not just the Thompson but all the fixed barreled machine guns market values will continue to lag behind the modular options. To me as far as value, the Mac style family of registered receivers represents almost 20% of transferables. This family of machine guns are still below the teens. Where as, the others I mentioned have a market value around the $30,000 to $45,000 range. Can medium to full power rifle caliber belt fed options be available in the future for the Mac style family? Only time will tell. But there certainly is more market pressure to develop options for the family of firearms that represents the biggest number at the lowest price. Scott |
|
|
[Last Edit: sleestakwhisperer]
[#48]
dupe
|
|
|
[Last Edit: sleestakwhisperer]
[#49]
Originally Posted By canon3825: I loved the Thompson Twins. But I sold my rewatt Savage built M1A1, because I tended to shoot it twice a year, the weekend before the monthly February local subgun match and the match. We usually had a Thompson division that month. I like to tinker so I bought a M10 with an Uzi magwell grip and a M11/NINE. The seller of the M10 was also in line for the S.A.B.R.E. upper and gave me his spot in line. Both have Lage uppers, plus a .22lr kit for the M11/NINE. With transferable guns being tens of thousands of dollars, most collectors can’t afford a dozen different guns. So most collectors need the few that they can afford, to be able to do more than run a couple of mags and be set aside to cool. A registered sear or a registered receiver that can have multiple configurations so the fun can continue tend to have increasing market value. With this market pressure guns such as the Thompson or MP40 just have not had the demand/price pressure that the M16, DIAS, Lightning Link, HK sear or registered trigger frames or even Mac style registered receivers have had. In the early 2000s an acquaintance bought a M11/NINE for $900 plus the stamp. Over 20 years later there is a 5.56X45 commercially available upper based on AR parts with a retail cost of $3,200. With over 17,000 of the M11/NINE registered, there would tend to be incentives to develop more conversion products that could be developed as “uppers” for the Mac style machine guns. OP, I certainly believe that you are correct in your assessment. From a historical perspective the Thompson models are a better “value” than the more modular options of transferable machine guns compared to pricing in the past. But Baby Boomers my age and older were raised watching “Rat Patrol” on TV and WW II movies. When I lived in Las Vegas, the Armorer for the biggest machine gun rental establishment ran the local subgun match. Ten years ago he said that the three most popular machine gun rentals were the MP5, M4, and the AK-47. None of which are WW II guns. This thread is interesting, but I think the current trend in market value will more than likely continue. Not just the Thompson but all the fixed barreled machine guns market values will continue to lag behind the modular options. To me as far as value, the Mac style family of registered receivers represents almost 20% of transferables. This family of machine guns are still below the teens. Where as, the others I mentioned have a market value around the $30,000 to $45,000 range. Can medium to full power rifle caliber belt fed options be available in the future for the Mac style family? Only time will tell. But there certainly is more market pressure to develop options for the family of firearms that represents the biggest number at the lowest price. Scott View Quote Thanks for this commentary. It's obvious that something is driving the price of the multi-caliber guns up faster than the one-trick-ponies, and you could be 100% right as to why. The only counter-point I could make is that WWII is the most dramatic and colorful historic event in human history, and it absolutely fascinates people, especially gun collectors. Dramatic history is the basic engine of collecting anything: the imagination of the collector supplies the value. I'm sure you've had someone ask you how much an old 22 or hardware store shotgun is worth, and you have to disappoint them by telling them $100. Then they say, "But it's got a 1873 patent date on it!" No collector cares that a factory in Patterson NJ rolled out 10,000 mediocre shotguns for Sears to sell to farmers. There's no "historicity" there. These young guys might not have watched "Rat Patrol", but they definitely are buying WWII guns like there is no tomorrow. Baby Boomers are dying off at a rate of 5,000 per day, and yet Garand and M1 Carbine prices are sky high, literally the highest I ever saw. When I was a kid, you'd go to a gun show and see M1 Carbines for $50. WWII guys in general did not like military guns, they liked fancy sporting guns. If you hunted with an 03 Springfield, they would call that a "poor man's gun." There are chapters in old gunsmithing books that detail how to "sporterize" (and ruin) military guns. All the commercial guns that WWII guys bought were really high finished. Actually kind of tacky. The rifles had super high gloss stocks, white spacers, pistol grip caps, engraving, and ebony foretips. The value of military guns really zoomed with the Boomers in the 1980s. Boomers have a shitload of money and they drive the prices of everything up. Like muscle cars. So if Boomers are kicking the bucket in droves, and the prices are still going up, there must be lots of new blood coming in. I had a 9mm MAC10 that took those crappy plastic M11/9 mags, and so I had an UZI grip put on it. WOW, what an improvement. After that it literally never jammed. Great gun. It was pretty accurate too. I would pull the stock out and hold it with both hands on the grip like a pistol and it was actually pretty easy to hit with. It was a tough gun, too. One time I fired it so much that it turned the Rem Oil to soot and stopped running. When I handed it to my brother, he got one of those whitish-yellow burns on his hand, like a soldering iron would do. Right as it stopped running, there was a round in the chamber. So I yanked the bolt back and the round ejected and it cooked off in midair. The girl in the shooting range booth next to me said, "Ow! Something hit me!" She got tagged with shrapnel. So that's a word to the wise: let the gun sit a while before ejecting a misfire. Not that anyone ever thinks to do it. I sure don't. |
|
|
[#50]
Disappointed no one has put in the mpeg with Captain Picard going ham with a Thompson.
|
|
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.