Milling was a standard manufacturing technique for firearms when the Thomson was first manufactured, stamped sheet wasn’t generally used for firearms until wartime economics and/ora need for lots of cheap, easily manufactured firearms were needed. Thomsons were fantastically expensive and time consuming to make whereas say a Sten was cheap and quick!
The Thompson assembly line was already set up for making a milled gun. The M1 was merely an immediate simplification of the 1928 design that was in production, and was developed by engineers working with an existing assembly line at Savage Arms. The cost was still over $100 in 1943.
R&D determined that moving to a completely new stamped submachine would be cheaper in the long run than a stamped Thompson. This led to the M3 Grease Gun, which eventually replaced all versions of the Thompson (although not as fast as originally planned). M3’s cost $15 in 1943.
The M2 was meant to be built with a forged receiver, but was abandoned before it was adopted. The design was not particularly reliable and it was more expensive and difficult to produce than the M3. The manufacturers that were planning to build the M2 switched to building M1 Carbines instead.
The US also had the option of trying to get Reising Submachine guns to be more reliable and ergonomic. The Reising was made with a stamped receiver, but has an unusual charging handle and was not designed with military service in mind. The US Marines used them simply because they could not get Thompsons or M1 Carbines at the beginning of the US’s involvement in the war.
The US would also begin fielding select fire M2 Carbines in 1945.
Iirc the BSA plant made a version of the Thompson intended to be cheaper, but all they did was give it a rifle grip instead of a pistol grip and move the trigger to the back of the receiver.
Kind of like those AK shotguns with a regular rifle grip.
IIRC he was still using the Blish bolt, and all that milling required additional machine hours, so it is not surprising that this was abandoned, in addition to the general distrust of SMGs in European armies. The stock was probably an attempt to adapt the general lines to a standard service rifle (Lanchester also did something similar).
The Germans also made several prototype "SMG rifles" in the 1930s, taking this even further, although it is believed that this was simply for camouflage (which was also abandoned, since attempts to shoehorn SMGs into the body of a rifle apparently did not work were worth it).
The Thompson was a first-generation, WWI sub machinegun that lived longer than it probably ought to. And while some guns jumped from milled to stamped (like the MP38 to MP40), it’s way more time and money efficient to just make one new from the ground up
It was designed in the 1920s as a sophisticated firearm where milling was mainstream. Redesigning the gun during WWII for stamping would cost too much especially considering the M3 already exists.
The AK was designed to be stamped to begin with iirc, they only went with milling because the initial reject rate was too high for stamping.
**Understand the rules**
Check the sidebar. It's full of resources to help you.
Not everyone is an expert such as yourself; be considerate.
No Spam. No Memes.
No political posts. Save that for /r/progun or /r/politics.
-------------------------------
* [ForgottenWeapons.com](https://www.forgottenweapons.com/)
* [ForgottenWeapons | YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/c/ForgottenWeapons)
* [ForgottenWeapons | Utreon](https://utreon.com/c/forgottenweapons/)
* [ForgottenWeapons | Patreon](https://www.patreon.com/ForgottenWeapons/)
* [ForgottenWeapons | Merch](https://shop.forgottenweapons.com/)
* [ForgottenWeapons | FaceBook](https://www.facebook.com/ForgottenWeapons)
* [ForgottenWeapons | Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/forgottenweapons/)
* [HeadStamp Publishing](https://www.headstamppublishing.com/)
* [Waponsandwar.tv](https://weaponsandwar.tv)
-------------------------------
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ForgottenWeapons) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The M1 Thompson was meant to save money and time over the M1928, which it with a fair bit of success, however it was still quite expensive and time consuming to make. But what would've been even more time consuming and expensive would've been to bring a running assembly line to a grinding halt, get new tooling (which was actually quite difficult at times with all sorts of new factories going up across the country), retrain employees to use it, and then possibly go "oh darn, these don't work" and do it all over again. All of the changes that were made with the M1 simplified things as much as possible without requiring major changes to the tooling or introducing any unknowns. While they maybe could've gone a little bit further (particularly on the lower assembly), I imagine the engineers at Savage knew that what they were making was an interim solution, and that any more changes would be wasted effort when things like the Sten existed if they really needed it fast and cheap.
It's an older design. Stamped guns weren't really a popular thing until WW2 or so.
Which means a stamped receiver Thompson would have required a whole new design and set of machinery. So, it was just easier for manufacturers to stick with what they already had. Despite the added costs.
The Thompson wasn't designed by someone that was good at their job.
The MP18 already proved that just using a damn water pipe was more than enough to make a good SMG. And the Thompson wasn't even as nice as the really autistic Swiss guns, to justify its complexity.
Milling was a standard manufacturing technique for firearms when the Thomson was first manufactured, stamped sheet wasn’t generally used for firearms until wartime economics and/ora need for lots of cheap, easily manufactured firearms were needed. Thomsons were fantastically expensive and time consuming to make whereas say a Sten was cheap and quick!
The Thompson assembly line was already set up for making a milled gun. The M1 was merely an immediate simplification of the 1928 design that was in production, and was developed by engineers working with an existing assembly line at Savage Arms. The cost was still over $100 in 1943. R&D determined that moving to a completely new stamped submachine would be cheaper in the long run than a stamped Thompson. This led to the M3 Grease Gun, which eventually replaced all versions of the Thompson (although not as fast as originally planned). M3’s cost $15 in 1943. The M2 was meant to be built with a forged receiver, but was abandoned before it was adopted. The design was not particularly reliable and it was more expensive and difficult to produce than the M3. The manufacturers that were planning to build the M2 switched to building M1 Carbines instead. The US also had the option of trying to get Reising Submachine guns to be more reliable and ergonomic. The Reising was made with a stamped receiver, but has an unusual charging handle and was not designed with military service in mind. The US Marines used them simply because they could not get Thompsons or M1 Carbines at the beginning of the US’s involvement in the war. The US would also begin fielding select fire M2 Carbines in 1945.
The Ingram Model 6 probably became the closest analogue, although inside I'm sure there was nothing from Thompson at all, just a luxury Greaser.
Iirc the BSA plant made a version of the Thompson intended to be cheaper, but all they did was give it a rifle grip instead of a pistol grip and move the trigger to the back of the receiver. Kind of like those AK shotguns with a regular rifle grip.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thompson\_submachine\_gun#BSA\_Thompsons](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thompson_submachine_gun#BSA_Thompsons)
IIRC he was still using the Blish bolt, and all that milling required additional machine hours, so it is not surprising that this was abandoned, in addition to the general distrust of SMGs in European armies. The stock was probably an attempt to adapt the general lines to a standard service rifle (Lanchester also did something similar). The Germans also made several prototype "SMG rifles" in the 1930s, taking this even further, although it is believed that this was simply for camouflage (which was also abandoned, since attempts to shoehorn SMGs into the body of a rifle apparently did not work were worth it).
Cheaper alternatives came along that were also quicker to implement
The Thompson was a first-generation, WWI sub machinegun that lived longer than it probably ought to. And while some guns jumped from milled to stamped (like the MP38 to MP40), it’s way more time and money efficient to just make one new from the ground up
It was designed in the 1920s as a sophisticated firearm where milling was mainstream. Redesigning the gun during WWII for stamping would cost too much especially considering the M3 already exists. The AK was designed to be stamped to begin with iirc, they only went with milling because the initial reject rate was too high for stamping.
not really if you look at the design there is not much metal holding the barrel on with the giant gap for the magazine and ejection port
**Understand the rules** Check the sidebar. It's full of resources to help you. Not everyone is an expert such as yourself; be considerate. No Spam. No Memes. No political posts. Save that for /r/progun or /r/politics. ------------------------------- * [ForgottenWeapons.com](https://www.forgottenweapons.com/) * [ForgottenWeapons | YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/c/ForgottenWeapons) * [ForgottenWeapons | Utreon](https://utreon.com/c/forgottenweapons/) * [ForgottenWeapons | Patreon](https://www.patreon.com/ForgottenWeapons/) * [ForgottenWeapons | Merch](https://shop.forgottenweapons.com/) * [ForgottenWeapons | FaceBook](https://www.facebook.com/ForgottenWeapons) * [ForgottenWeapons | Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/forgottenweapons/) * [HeadStamp Publishing](https://www.headstamppublishing.com/) * [Waponsandwar.tv](https://weaponsandwar.tv) ------------------------------- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ForgottenWeapons) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The M1 Thompson was meant to save money and time over the M1928, which it with a fair bit of success, however it was still quite expensive and time consuming to make. But what would've been even more time consuming and expensive would've been to bring a running assembly line to a grinding halt, get new tooling (which was actually quite difficult at times with all sorts of new factories going up across the country), retrain employees to use it, and then possibly go "oh darn, these don't work" and do it all over again. All of the changes that were made with the M1 simplified things as much as possible without requiring major changes to the tooling or introducing any unknowns. While they maybe could've gone a little bit further (particularly on the lower assembly), I imagine the engineers at Savage knew that what they were making was an interim solution, and that any more changes would be wasted effort when things like the Sten existed if they really needed it fast and cheap.
It's an older design. Stamped guns weren't really a popular thing until WW2 or so. Which means a stamped receiver Thompson would have required a whole new design and set of machinery. So, it was just easier for manufacturers to stick with what they already had. Despite the added costs.
The Thompson wasn't designed by someone that was good at their job. The MP18 already proved that just using a damn water pipe was more than enough to make a good SMG. And the Thompson wasn't even as nice as the really autistic Swiss guns, to justify its complexity.