US Military: "Ok Auto Ordnance, one of the requirements is that the gun be 5 pounds or less. What can you do with this?" Auto Ordnance: "Well, how does twice as heavy as that sound?" US Military: "Were you listening to me at all?" Auto Ordnance: "No I wasn't, in the meantime, we went and made that 10 pound model in the .30 just like you asked. So, how many would you like? Why are you walking away? Where are you going?"
It'd be neat to see a firing comparison between the .45 ACP and .30 carbine Thompsons. (Too bad the museum won't let Ian have a little range time with it)
Fun Fact: this weapon appears in the first level of Wolfenstein the New order as the "SMG" . In the Canon it replaced the M1 and Sten in allied arsenals despite it's high cost as it was the only weapon capable of breaching the gap against the German Assault rifle, and as troops became extremely precious to the US and Britain after the Failed invasion of France resulted in the Extermination of the First and second US Armies and the Nazi counter invasions of Ireland and Canada.
@@CZ75A22 Maybe not. You have to consider a few factors: First, that the Thompson was still in mainline use by US and British troops, it's the weapon they were familiar with, and in widespread production and with spare parts. Consistency is not unimportant. Secondly; The Thompson is heavier than the M2. This isn't always a bad thing. The M1 and M2 are not meant as frontline assault rifles, they are meant as essentially upgraded sidearms for truck drivers, squad leaders, mortarmen and anybody else who doesn't have a rifle as their primary weapon. The .30 Carbine Thompson gives you a more durable design which can serve longer as an actual frontline weapon in more harsh combat conditions, which is a better choice for arming fewer but more troops than the cheaper but flimsier M2 which would be better for mass-issue to rear-echelons and support personnel. Personally, if I were designing the world I would've given the Allied troops a whole new "Assault Rifle" because the US would've certainly had the industrial capability to rapidly develop and adopt one, probably a scaled-up M1 Carbine, chambered in a cut-down .30-06 similar to the 8mm Kurz. I'm imagining a fictionalized Ruger Mini-30 chambered in .300 Blackout, in terms of its overall appearance and dimensions.
@@HellbirdIV I question the idea that the .30 carbine Thompson would be more durable than the M2 carbine--it was effectively just blowback operated, while the M2 actually had a locked breech, meaning that its action would be subjected to greater wear than that of the M2. Also, in war, a lot of materiel just ends up getting destroyed or captured anyway, so reducing that loss is another reason to go with the cheaper gun. There are reasons why the Thompson was fairly quickly phased out and this version never even went anywhere, after all. Also, In real life, the M1 carbine ended up in front-line use during WWII and the M2 had largely replaced the Thompson by the time of the Korean War, despite the fact that this wasn't the original intent of the M1 carbine, because it and the M2 were still sufficiently tough while being cheaper. Then again, in the Wolfenstein canon, the Allies lost, so, in that context, it makes sense for them to have made the mistake of using this version of the Thompson and not the M2 carbine.
Interesting. Since .30 Carbine is a light rifle round, effectively an “intermediate cartridge”, and the Thompson is capable of semi or full auto fire, Auto Ordnance basically created an assault rifle without intending to. Not a very good one since it’s a bit low powered, too heavy, and a bit short in barrel length, but still fits.
It’s an intermediate cartridge. Anyone who says pistol round is just repeating fudd lore. It’s a replacement for the 1911 just like a Glock is a replacement for pepper spray. That doesn’t mean a Glock = pepper spray. _____________ 110 grain .30 caliber round @ 2000 fps = pistol round But 110 grain .30 caliber round @ 2200 fps = .300 blackout the best cartridge ever developed. It’s 98% of the muzzle energy of 5.45x39, but it’s a pistol round. Got it. _____________ They traded 200 fps and about 20 yards of point blank range, for an assault rifle that weighed 5 lbs instead of 10. Not much of a trade off when you’re surrounded by semi auto 30-06 rifles. The US never adopted a cartridge like the 7.62x39 for a reason. The same reason the soviets abandoned it. They replaced the carbine round with 5.56.
@@darrengarcia4937 It makes a lot of sense over half a century later after the light rifle project developed into the AR15 with modern materials - Aluminum, Polymer - and a very high pressure cartridge. It works if you already designed the AR15 and 5.56... but it’s not going to replace the 5.56 for a reason - the same reason intermediates weren’t adopted - the same reason the .30 carbine wasn’t compromised to be something it’s never intended to be, or .300 blk will ever be. You have to know precisely what the design parameters are for the firearm. Shortening the OAL of the cartridge is necessary for lightening the firearm and ammunition, and for logistics purposes. This is the entire purpose of the T65/ eventually 7.62 NATO replicating .30-06 M2 Ball in a short action. Smaller firearm, smaller magazines, etc. You _could_ sacrifice the design for a slightly higher BC and 20-25 extra yards of point blank range... but the United States military wasn’t interested in that at all. Just like the US military was never really interested in submachineguns - the Thompson was pressed into service and the M3 grease gun was designed to fit the niche as cheaply as possible.
@@-John-Doe- there is a big issue with your argument. The reason intermediates werent adopted was because of the stupidity of the US Aquisitions. We decided on the 7.62 NATO round contrary to better performance out of the .280 and .270 british. You cant paint the US as a all-knowing and correct benchmark when they have a history of making stupid decisions. I.E. the M14, 7.62 NATO, Incorrect ammo types and cleaning kits for the M16, the terrible mods done to the M16A2, the M249 mag adapter.
@UCCoTBHMhI4wxaPknjDHh07Q because it was better in literally every way. Only reason the Russians cant is the fact that they are so poor. A stockpile of inferior 7.62x54 weapons and ammo from the USSR days keeps their army as a army. Its hard to change your vintage with a GDP like that. We could have done it in the 50s but we had stupid people in charge that stuck with the 7.62 NATO and M14 instead of the FAL or EM2 in .280 even though both rifles and calibers were better in testing than the .308 which the US tried to hide the evidence of. Only took a bunch of dead troops to realize how big of a pos the M14 was and to field the M16 even though they even tried to sabotage the 5.56 and M16.
It does not even have its own ammunition nor even placed in secret areas of levels. Hell after the new order it was reduced to nothing more than a background prop before again being reduced to non existent, and the German replacement was nice. However it's close but no cigar. Even in 2019, the pre order bonus was a complete cop out with only merely skins of the allies.
Auto-Ordnance missed a number of easy bets when they didn't pursue lighter and more compact versions of thier SMG. A stamped-metal SMG using a wire stock would've likely met the weight, and would likely have greatly reduced cost.
Wait wait hold up........its full auto, intermediate cartridge and has a detachable magazine......if adopted this would be the first assault rifle adopted.
Forgotten Weapons ahhhh okay i was mainly saying for the us and if it had been adopted. I understood it wasnt or wed have more and you would have done a video on it
+Robbie Dickson The Soviets never even thought of the concept of an assault rifle, though. In Soviet infantry doctrine, there were submachine-guns and rifles, nothing in between. And there's more to it than just a fancy name, the Soviets simply employed those weapons as rifles (and the AKs as SMGs). This also reflects in Soviet marksmanship training, the AK-47 was expected to be used at far lower ranges than the cartridge and the weapon actually permit, everything beyond that was meant to be engaged by "sharpshooters" (in US terms that specific role would be a marksman).
I was about to say the same. I always suspected that the Thompson in Wolfentein: TNO was chambered for something longer than a .45 ACP. It also shoots from a closed bolt.
The military didn't even test fire it? They could have at least done THAT. Sure, it didn't fit the bill for a carbine, but if the military was going to keep using the Thompsons it had, it would be interesting to see the merit of having one chambered in .30 Carbine versus .45 ACP. They might have found some use for it somewhere down the line.
I've thought the same thing. If it worked reliably there would have been a logic to switching to a .30 SMG and phasing out the .45 Thompsons. It would simplify the ammunition supply, since they'd only need small amounts of .45 for pistols, and the .30 Carbine rounds are quite bit lighter than the .45. I imagine they were scrambling to produce enough weapons at the time they didn't want to interrupt the production lines.
Charles Inglin But would it kill as well as a 45? At short range with a center mass shot, probably not. It just seems almost insulting that nobody in the military even test fired it after Auto Ordinance went to the trouble of designing and building a prototype.
I feel like Auto Ordnance just wanted a participation medal. I'm just think of that Family Guy clip about Ringo Starr's song. "We're gonna put this right here, right in this display case, that way we can see it everyday."
What a shock...a weapon that could have made the 30 carbine useful. It could have been America's PPSH...only costing 10 times as much. Seriously, a 30 carbine submachine gun with a huge magazine capacity could have been pretty effective. At double the velocity of the 45 acp it and even less recoil, it might have been better than the 45 acp...
Except you would be complete ignoring the contemporary American military doctrine with it's emphasis on individual accuracy as opposed to Soviet dedication to massed fire, which you see later in the development of the Armalite vs. Kalashnikov rifles.
The Thompson was adopted because US military early in WW2 suddenly felt the need of a SMG without having a purposedly designed gun. Had they had the same vision as the Russians, they would probably have mass-produced the Reising SMG: equally effective but lighter and much cheaper.
I have no argument with any of that. All I'm saying is that a Thompson in 30 carbine, with almost no recoil, a very high capacity magazine and twice the velocity of the 45 acp, may have been more effective than one in 45 acp, especially at medium ranges.
I love your channel Ian. You produce excellent content and your knowledge of firearms and their history is unmatched (in my opinion). With that said it's hard to understand why your subscriber count isn't closer to a million by now. Anyways, thanks for your time. Cheers.
I know it would probably never happen considering this is the only one ever made... But I would love a firing video of this and your opinion on how effective it would be. Competition for the sturmgewer perhaps?
There's no telling how many cool one-offs, like this one, have been built and are in closets because somebody's great uncle brought it home and simply kept it. I guess that's why yard sales are always interesting, you never know what came out of the closet. Great video!
For some reason, I still like the M1921 or M1928, Chicago Typewriter, where it still had the bolt action on top of the gun, with the original compensator on the end of the barrel, with the finned out barrel, and those historical cherry wood front & back grips with stock, & also the legit adjustable folding sight on the rear. Something about this gun just gets me everytime. I own both the Thompson M1A1, and the Thompson M1928 Chicago Typewriter AEG's, as well, both from Cybergun/CYMA/Thompson, Auto Ordinance out of Worcester, MA. Ive always had a fascination with these Thompson guns, & now I've got the collection, for AEG's, but still cool to me. Lol I've been really enjoying these videos my friend, on all the different types of Thompson's sub-machineguns. I'll definitely be tuning in, thanx again 🔫🔫👍🙏
Model 1905 winchester in 30. Carbine: I just picked up a 1905 for $200 that someone converted to 30 carbine. Never seen one or heard of it before but seems to work ok.
Another note: The recoil impulse of the .45 ACP cartridge, at 940 ft/sec, which is approximately what it did from a Thompson's 10 inch barrel, is about 43 J/s (43 kg.m/s). The 30 carbine would have done about 1800 ft/sec from a 10 inch barrel, I expect. That would have resulted in a recoil impulse of around 46 J/s. It should therefore have been quite possible to fire the 30 carbine round from the Thompson, using the standard Thompson bolt, adapted to the 45 ACP cartridge base. The rate of fire would have been somewhat higher than the already high rate of the standard gun and the muzzle blast and noise would have been spectacular!
Oh How I wish I had the Skill to build/convert a 1927 into a Semi-Auto version of this. I love Uncommon Military/Military style firearms especially experimental or custom versions in non standard calibers. I saw an FAL in 7.92×57mm that fed from MG15 Magazines, AK-47 in 7.62x25mm Tokarev that feeds from Ppsh41 drums and mags, HK MP5/10, etc. I have a Semi-Auto Sterling in 7.62x25mm that feeds from Pps43 mags. A 30Carbine Thompson would be epic.
I like the modern look of tommy's, rather than the musketoon look of the M-1. The problem of the weight due to the absent of applying the pressed steel sheet to the tommy's receiver. Same problem with early Ak-47.
I honestly believe a M2 is a exceptional "SMG", at least in experienced shooters hands, recoil can be a bit much for most shooters. For some reason I thought this would be in that class, completely forgot about the whole weighing 5kg, thats a deal breaker. Although it would have been more accurate and longer ranged then the 45.
This video slipped past me, great work Ian ( all the way from UK) Shame Call of Duty WW2 never used it, even if just in multiplayer. Would be very interesting to see how it fired. Keep up the good work Ian.
Interesting idea. The only other 30 Carbine SMG i have ever heard of is a Dominican Republic one from i think the early 60's. It's mentioned in Military Small Arms of the 20th Century. I don't remember the designation, and my books are in storage. I have heard of Thompsons in 38 Super also. That was probably a nice combo- less recoil, more velocity, and fairly flat shooting. Love the videos.
The Tennessee brick printer. 30 carbine is such a cool idea in thompson format. I love that the design is good and needed a little work but we could of had renewed thompsons
I feel like there was a missed opportunity to say "Your Garand has a BAR with it. Why leave your carbines behind?" They could easily get away saying this could be a package *with* the rifle that actually fit the requirements.
Hello Ian, Forgotton Weapons has become one of my favorites on TH-cam. Does the current Auto-Ordnance / Thompson producer produce a semi-automatic version of the Thompson for the .30 Carbine cartridge? If not, this might be interesting, you think?
Sadly, no. This is the only prototype in existence. They rejected the carbine due to high manufacturing cost. The US at that time is not in war yet, but they're slowly entering.
What would be interesting here - would be firing this - and seeing how it behaved. I noticed no Cutts Compensator on this one. Obviously - there was the M2 Carbine which could fire these rounds on full auto so - it might be fine - but that would be an interesting comparison, one of these and an M2. Since this may be a one of a kind weapon - I don't imagine them letting anyone fire it. .
you said that there was alot of variation on magasine capacity during the trails. 5 to 50 rounds. which guns had 50rounders? could you show any if they are anything special? :)
+secondswell the game was based in an alternate future where the nazis were winning,I remember that the magazine looked longer like the one here,I suppose that the advantage of various parts being interchangeable may have made them opt to adopt this weapon at that point to get the guns out there quicker than whole new m1 or m2 carbines from scratch,so could fit with the lore of the game that it was a last ditch to get guns in the hands of soldiers as fast as possible
i hope they make new wolfenstein game with the resistance fight the nazi with this thompson submachine gun. chambered in .30 carbin that have been enhanced with da't yichud technology
As a "light" rifle it was a failure, but someone could have said "wait, why don't we just adopt this as our submachine gun? Instead of this same gun in .45ACP?"
I know you are dying to test fire that, LoL. I am thinking at that weight recoil would be very mild. The 600 yard marking on the rear sight may even be correct with that cartridge. I would like to see Auto Ordnance bring it out as a semi auto carbine. I think it would be cute.
Honestly id prefer that over a M1-Carbine Grease Gun or regular Thompson if i was a WWII soldier , It may be heavy but even by then its a proven design beefed up in a bigger caliber
This is an extremely interesting gun. The M1 carbine cartridge is would actually be an excellent SMG cartridge and this gun apparently proved that it could work in an unlocked, blow-back weapon. The M2 carbine was not really successful because it was too light and combined with the exceedingly high rate of fire, it was very poorly controllable. This 12 pound SMG might have been quite an effective gun, in any case much more effective than the .45 version, if the rate of fire could have been reduced to no more than 600 rpm. Also, the barrel would have to be at least 12 inches long; the .30 carbine round does not like short barrels. It is a great pity that Ian could not shoot this thing. I expect the rate of fire would also have been very high though.
Mind that the .30 carbine originated from a family of cartridges developed for the Winchester 1905 and 1907 blowback carbines, and it was not the most powerful of them ( the .351 Winchester Self-Loading of the model 1907 was). The experiments done during the war determined that a 570gr bolt was enough to safely fire even proofloads, so it was entirely feasible to design a six pound rifle in .30 carbine using the blowback system (the Winchester model 1905 weighted 7lbs, and the model 1907 8lbs). The problem is that the Thompson SMG is an heavy design in itself. Unfortunately, if you want to make it select fire, the more practical way to slow down the ROF in a blowback design is to enhance the weight of the bolt (that's why WWII 9mm SMGs had bolts that weighted nearly 700gr, that were clearly an overkill only to fire the 9mm para safely).
So this one still has the Blish lock right? Would the added power of .30 carbine over 45 ACP have necessitated keeping this locking mechanism as opposed to the M1A1 which was adapted to straight blowback?
I wonder what the rate of fire is/would have been. I've read that some M3 grease guns chambered for .30 carbine were developed for testing, but never adopted, partly due to the absolutely ridiculous change in cyclic rate.
Rather interesting, odd weapon. Makes sense, but if I had been told before seeing this video that a .30 Thompson existed, I would have thought it was a conversion done as a one off by a individual.
Given that the bulk of the weight was from that giant milled steel receiver, it likely would have to have been constructed out of sheet metal like the M-3 just to come close to meeting the weight requirement. Even the M-3 was too heavy by specs.
+Matt Dickson You can't make this weapon much lighter, due to the operating design. If you make receiver (which is responsible for a significant chunk of the weapon's weight) any lighter, the weapon stops working.
The M3 is surprisingly heavy for what it is, seeing pictures of them I always thought that they were fairly light, then I got to fire one once and I was surprised at how heavy it actually was. On the plus side, the recoil was surprisingly mild for something that fires .45 ACP and considering the reputation the Thompson had for harsh recoil.
I'm willing to bet that it's heavy weight has got to make the recoil very light. It's basically an assault rifle. I bet the Army would have put them to good use.
.30 Carbine is about 3 times as powerful as .45 ACP so it wouldn't surprise me if it had more recoil. If my memory is correct I think one of the figures on .30 Carbine shows that at 100 yards it's as powerful as a .357 Magnum (which has slightly more muzzle energy than .45 ACP) at the muzzle.
No, I would think you should be comparing it to the recoil of the other .30 -Carbine chambered guns. Whether or not this had worse recoil than the original .45 version, isn't the point. The fact it was so much heavier than the Army's requirement, means it should have significantly LESS recoil than any of the other submissions, which were light enough to meet the specification. Now of course, that's just talking about weight generically. In reality, it's not that simple, because distribution of the weight in a different longer-barreled gun, would make up some of the difference in terms of recoil (and/or muzzle climb, i.e. "angular momentum"), since the Thompson was notably short overall.
Yes thats a good point. I think for the thompson its the type of recoil versus the severity of the recoil due to the weight distribution. It may kick the same as the other guns in the trial but im sure it was a lot harder to keep on target due to the rise etc
3 times more punch than a .45 ACP means about what, 1500 Joules/1000ft.lbs at the muzzle..? That would put .30 carbine in between a 7,92x33 Kurz and a 7,62x39 in terms of muzzle energy.. More like twice as powerful.. And a typical .357 Mag 158gr load out of a 6" barrel puts out about 650-700 Joules/500ft.lbs at the muzzle which is about 200ft.lbs more than a .45 ACP 230gr fmj out of a 5" barrel... Thats almost twice as much energy not slightly.. And that's mathematics applied in physics not an opinion :)
Isn't .30 carbine too high pressure wise to work reliably in a open bolt blowback design? I recon it would require a much heavier bolt and/or stiffer recoil spring compared to a standard .45 ACP gun
Hmmm… Many folks have decried the M1 Carbine's lack of stopping power… Right or Wrong-doesn't need to be debated at this point in time… But imagine if the military had asked for a .357 caliber autoloading round-same velocity, same sectional density as the M1 .30 Carbine cartridge, but with a bit more weight and bullet cross-sectional area-a cartridge much like the much like the .351 WSL cartridge. I wonder how popular the M1 Carbine might have been. My guess is that there would still be many hunting and private social engineering weapons being produced in that caliber. …..RVM45
Ian, The .45 ACP was the only cartage that could be used in the blowback System, I wonder if they went back to the Blish lock System for the .30 short? I would like to know what system this used.
so that'll be the chicago printing press.
Ha ha too funny
there you go!
Yeeesssss!
Now That is funny.
What about a Tommy gun in 5.56? Or in 30-06/7.62 NATO?
US Military: "Ok Auto Ordnance, one of the requirements is that the gun be 5 pounds or less. What can you do with this?"
Auto Ordnance: "Well, how does twice as heavy as that sound?"
US Military: "Were you listening to me at all?"
Auto Ordnance: "No I wasn't, in the meantime, we went and made that 10 pound model in the .30 just like you asked. So, how many would you like? Why are you walking away? Where are you going?"
Wait you said under 11 pounds. We thought you said under one hundred and eleven pounds
No one in particular Auto Ordnance: But the recoil would be lower on this 10 pound gun nooooo!!!!
@@bennettfender1546 with Thomson rate of fire?
Why are you running? Why are you running?
Thomposon: "Oh five POUNDS? Whoa whoa I thought you said Five KILOGRAMS!"
It'd be neat to see a firing comparison between the .45 ACP and .30 carbine Thompsons.
(Too bad the museum won't let Ian have a little range time with it)
Little do they know ian is the museum
Yeah wonder if it's more controlled in full auto than the m2 carbine
Just so you know, this is the only prototype in existence
Rambonii probably much more controllable considering the weight alone.
@@Rambonii im sure it is
Fun Fact: this weapon appears in the first level of Wolfenstein the New order as the "SMG" .
In the Canon it replaced the M1 and Sten in allied arsenals despite it's high cost as it was the only weapon capable of breaching the gap against the German Assault rifle, and as troops became extremely precious to the US and Britain after the Failed invasion of France resulted in the Extermination of the First and second US Armies and the Nazi counter invasions of Ireland and Canada.
Wow i never knew that! Thats awesome, thanks for the info.
I never heard anything about that, but in my headcannon the Thompson used in the New Order was the "Thompson M1946".
It would've made more sense if they'd just issued the more affordable M2 Carbine..
@@CZ75A22 Maybe not. You have to consider a few factors: First, that the Thompson was still in mainline use by US and British troops, it's the weapon they were familiar with, and in widespread production and with spare parts. Consistency is not unimportant.
Secondly; The Thompson is heavier than the M2. This isn't always a bad thing. The M1 and M2 are not meant as frontline assault rifles, they are meant as essentially upgraded sidearms for truck drivers, squad leaders, mortarmen and anybody else who doesn't have a rifle as their primary weapon.
The .30 Carbine Thompson gives you a more durable design which can serve longer as an actual frontline weapon in more harsh combat conditions, which is a better choice for arming fewer but more troops than the cheaper but flimsier M2 which would be better for mass-issue to rear-echelons and support personnel.
Personally, if I were designing the world I would've given the Allied troops a whole new "Assault Rifle" because the US would've certainly had the industrial capability to rapidly develop and adopt one, probably a scaled-up M1 Carbine, chambered in a cut-down .30-06 similar to the 8mm Kurz. I'm imagining a fictionalized Ruger Mini-30 chambered in .300 Blackout, in terms of its overall appearance and dimensions.
@@HellbirdIV I question the idea that the .30 carbine Thompson would be more durable than the M2 carbine--it was effectively just blowback operated, while the M2 actually had a locked breech, meaning that its action would be subjected to greater wear than that of the M2. Also, in war, a lot of materiel just ends up getting destroyed or captured anyway, so reducing that loss is another reason to go with the cheaper gun. There are reasons why the Thompson was fairly quickly phased out and this version never even went anywhere, after all. Also, In real life, the M1 carbine ended up in front-line use during WWII and the M2 had largely replaced the Thompson by the time of the Korean War, despite the fact that this wasn't the original intent of the M1 carbine, because it and the M2 were still sufficiently tough while being cheaper.
Then again, in the Wolfenstein canon, the Allies lost, so, in that context, it makes sense for them to have made the mistake of using this version of the Thompson and not the M2 carbine.
Interesting. Since .30 Carbine is a light rifle round, effectively an “intermediate cartridge”, and the Thompson is capable of semi or full auto fire, Auto Ordnance basically created an assault rifle without intending to. Not a very good one since it’s a bit low powered, too heavy, and a bit short in barrel length, but still fits.
It’s an intermediate cartridge.
Anyone who says pistol round is just repeating fudd lore.
It’s a replacement for the 1911 just like a Glock is a replacement for pepper spray. That doesn’t mean a Glock = pepper spray.
_____________
110 grain .30 caliber round @ 2000 fps = pistol round
But 110 grain .30 caliber round @ 2200 fps = .300 blackout the best cartridge ever developed.
It’s 98% of the muzzle energy of 5.45x39, but it’s a pistol round. Got it.
_____________
They traded 200 fps and about 20 yards of point blank range, for an assault rifle that weighed 5 lbs instead of 10.
Not much of a trade off when you’re surrounded by semi auto 30-06 rifles.
The US never adopted a cartridge like the 7.62x39 for a reason. The same reason the soviets abandoned it.
They replaced the carbine round with 5.56.
@@-John-Doe- except the .300 BLK makes alot of sense considering its BC is also better and has heavier grain bullets.
@@darrengarcia4937 It makes a lot of sense over half a century later after the light rifle project developed into the AR15 with modern materials - Aluminum, Polymer - and a very high pressure cartridge.
It works if you already designed the AR15 and 5.56... but it’s not going to replace the 5.56 for a reason
- the same reason intermediates weren’t adopted
- the same reason the .30 carbine wasn’t compromised to be something it’s never intended to be, or .300 blk will ever be.
You have to know precisely what the design parameters are for the firearm.
Shortening the OAL of the cartridge is necessary for lightening the firearm and ammunition, and for logistics purposes.
This is the entire purpose of the T65/ eventually 7.62 NATO replicating .30-06 M2 Ball in a short action. Smaller firearm, smaller magazines, etc.
You _could_ sacrifice the design for a slightly higher BC and 20-25 extra yards of point blank range... but the United States military wasn’t interested in that at all.
Just like the US military was never really interested in submachineguns - the Thompson was pressed into service and the M3 grease gun was designed to fit the niche as cheaply as possible.
@@-John-Doe- there is a big issue with your argument. The reason intermediates werent adopted was because of the stupidity of the US Aquisitions. We decided on the 7.62 NATO round contrary to better performance out of the .280 and .270 british. You cant paint the US as a all-knowing and correct benchmark when they have a history of making stupid decisions. I.E. the M14, 7.62 NATO, Incorrect ammo types and cleaning kits for the M16, the terrible mods done to the M16A2, the M249 mag adapter.
@UCCoTBHMhI4wxaPknjDHh07Q because it was better in literally every way. Only reason the Russians cant is the fact that they are so poor. A stockpile of inferior 7.62x54 weapons and ammo from the USSR days keeps their army as a army. Its hard to change your vintage with a GDP like that. We could have done it in the 50s but we had stupid people in charge that stuck with the 7.62 NATO and M14 instead of the FAL or EM2 in .280 even though both rifles and calibers were better in testing than the .308 which the US tried to hide the evidence of. Only took a bunch of dead troops to realize how big of a pos the M14 was and to field the M16 even though they even tried to sabotage the 5.56 and M16.
The weapon for the Allied force in the beginning of Wolfenstein: New Order.
Unfortunately, it was only used in the first level.
@@justincholos.balisang6884 waited the while game for it to return :(
@@alexjones8239 yeah I loved it
Really liked the design of the Thompson Carbine of that game
Shame it only lasted 1 level
It does not even have its own ammunition nor even placed in secret areas of levels. Hell after the new order it was reduced to nothing more than a background prop before again being reduced to non existent, and the German replacement was nice. However it's close but no cigar. Even in 2019, the pre order bonus was a complete cop out with only merely skins of the allies.
Why do you not have a slick little carrying case full of dozens of different kinds of snap caps? Sounds like a job for Patreon!
Auto-Ordnance missed a number of easy bets when they didn't pursue lighter and more compact versions of thier SMG. A stamped-metal SMG using a wire stock would've likely met the weight, and would likely have greatly reduced cost.
Agreed. And with a shorter barrel several inches short, like the Grease gun.
Well they did build something else that actually met the contract.
Mil: Your gun is too heavy, too complicated, and too expensive.
AO: Here's the same gun with a different cartridge so we're good now?
I was really interested in this one after Ahoy's video
Very good timing!
Indeed, what a coincedence.
Yeah hahahaha
Mayur I just finished watching Ahoy's Thompson video. 😀
you do a phenomenal job on these videos Ian. Nobody does historical firearms videos like this. Very impressive.
Wait wait hold up........its full auto, intermediate cartridge and has a detachable magazine......if adopted this would be the first assault rifle adopted.
Sure, but it wasn't adopted, and it was decades after the first such guns that were also not adopted.
If we're going to those lenghts, the Russians had the first ever, the Fedorov Avtomat.
Forgotten Weapons ahhhh okay i was mainly saying for the us and if it had been adopted. I understood it wasnt or wed have more and you would have done a video on it
it was full auto, and the russians classified 6.5 arisaka as an intermediate cartridge
+Robbie Dickson The Soviets never even thought of the concept of an assault rifle, though. In Soviet infantry doctrine, there were submachine-guns and rifles, nothing in between. And there's more to it than just a fancy name, the Soviets simply employed those weapons as rifles (and the AKs as SMGs).
This also reflects in Soviet marksmanship training, the AK-47 was expected to be used at far lower ranges than the cartridge and the weapon actually permit, everything beyond that was meant to be engaged by "sharpshooters" (in US terms that specific role would be a marksman).
2 dislikes? How? How can you say "aw that sucks, dislike." to cold information? Baffling.
Fat fingers
Probably disliked that Ian didn’t get to shoot it.
Would actually be fun to see it vs the M1A1 Thompson in a match.
I guess the version of the Thompson in Wolfenstein: the new order is real in some fashion.
I was about to say the same. I always suspected that the Thompson in Wolfentein: TNO was chambered for something longer than a .45 ACP. It also shoots from a closed bolt.
Yes, and it was also because the 45.ACP wasn’t making it through German armour
But it contains 40 rounds
Is it possible for that mag to fit 40?
@@guts-141 if they changed the mag to double stack then 30-40 would be perfectly doable
@@derpcon4212 Quad stack 😎
The military didn't even test fire it? They could have at least done THAT. Sure, it didn't fit the bill for a carbine, but if the military was going to keep using the Thompsons it had, it would be interesting to see the merit of having one chambered in .30 Carbine versus .45 ACP. They might have found some use for it somewhere down the line.
I've thought the same thing. If it worked reliably there would have been a logic to switching to a .30 SMG and phasing out the .45 Thompsons. It would simplify the ammunition supply, since they'd only need small amounts of .45 for pistols, and the .30 Carbine rounds are quite bit lighter than the .45. I imagine they were scrambling to produce enough weapons at the time they didn't want to interrupt the production lines.
Charles Inglin But would it kill as well as a 45? At short range with a center mass shot, probably not. It just seems almost insulting that nobody in the military even test fired it after Auto Ordinance went to the trouble of designing and building a prototype.
.30 Carbine virtually identical to .357 magnum other than the diameter, so yes, it would kill a Nazi just fine. Especially if it were full auto.
Is it going to be controllable though? By itself, a .30 carbine is not hard to handle, but what about when being fired at 700 rpm?
.30 Carbine and .45 ACP aren't all that different in recoil. .30 is probably going to be a touch snappier, but it's a 12 pound gun, it'll be fine.
I once read that about 50 of these were requested by the FBI for their agents. Anyone know about anything in that line?
Obscure Fact: 'The Owen Gun Story' references a Owen Gun chambered in 30 Carbine performing satisfactory.
Now that would've been a jungle gun
I feel like Auto Ordnance just wanted a participation medal. I'm just think of that Family Guy clip about Ringo Starr's song. "We're gonna put this right here, right in this display case, that way we can see it everyday."
What a shock...a weapon that could have made the 30 carbine useful. It could have been America's PPSH...only costing 10 times as much. Seriously, a 30 carbine submachine gun with a huge magazine capacity could have been pretty effective. At double the velocity of the 45 acp it and even less recoil, it might have been better than the 45 acp...
Except you would be complete ignoring the contemporary American military doctrine with it's emphasis on individual accuracy as opposed to Soviet dedication to massed fire, which you see later in the development of the Armalite vs. Kalashnikov rifles.
So you're saying that the thompson in 45 acp meets that doctrine and a Thompson in 30 carbine wouldn't?
The Thompson was adopted because US military early in WW2 suddenly felt the need of a SMG without having a purposedly designed gun. Had they had the same vision as the Russians, they would probably have mass-produced the Reising SMG: equally effective but lighter and much cheaper.
I have no argument with any of that. All I'm saying is that a Thompson in 30 carbine, with almost no recoil, a very high capacity magazine and twice the velocity of the 45 acp, may have been more effective than one in 45 acp, especially at medium ranges.
What about the M2 carbine?
I love your channel Ian. You produce excellent content and your knowledge of firearms and their history is unmatched (in my opinion). With that said it's hard to understand why your subscriber count isn't closer to a million by now. Anyways, thanks for your time. Cheers.
I know it would probably never happen considering this is the only one ever made... But I would love a firing video of this and your opinion on how effective it would be. Competition for the sturmgewer perhaps?
We need a Thompson in 45-70
😅
There's no telling how many cool one-offs, like this one, have been built and are in closets because somebody's great uncle brought it home and simply kept it.
I guess that's why yard sales are always interesting, you never know what came out of the closet.
Great video!
For some reason, I still like the M1921 or M1928, Chicago Typewriter, where it still had the bolt action on top of the gun, with the original compensator on the end of the barrel, with the finned out barrel, and those historical cherry wood front & back grips with stock, & also the legit adjustable folding sight on the rear. Something about this gun just gets me everytime.
I own both the Thompson M1A1, and the Thompson M1928 Chicago Typewriter AEG's, as well, both from Cybergun/CYMA/Thompson, Auto Ordinance out of Worcester, MA. Ive always had a fascination with these Thompson guns, & now I've got the collection, for AEG's, but still cool to me. Lol I've been really enjoying these videos my friend, on all the different types of Thompson's sub-machineguns. I'll definitely be tuning in, thanx again 🔫🔫👍🙏
Model 1905 winchester in 30. Carbine:
I just picked up a 1905 for $200 that someone converted to 30 carbine. Never seen one or heard of it before but seems to work ok.
One of my favorite museums ever. I haven't been there in years.
They just added this weapon the game Enlisted and it is SICK!!! I wanted to watch the history on it after I used it.
Another note: The recoil impulse of the .45 ACP cartridge, at 940 ft/sec, which is approximately what it did from a Thompson's 10 inch barrel, is about 43 J/s (43 kg.m/s). The 30 carbine would have done about 1800 ft/sec from a 10 inch barrel, I expect. That would have resulted in a recoil impulse of around 46 J/s. It should therefore have been quite possible to fire the 30 carbine round from the Thompson, using the standard Thompson bolt, adapted to the 45 ACP cartridge base. The rate of fire would have been somewhat higher than the already high rate of the standard gun and the muzzle blast and noise would have been spectacular!
Oh How I wish I had the Skill to build/convert a 1927 into a Semi-Auto version of this. I love Uncommon Military/Military style firearms especially experimental or custom versions in non standard calibers. I saw an FAL in 7.92×57mm that fed from MG15 Magazines, AK-47 in 7.62x25mm Tokarev that feeds from Ppsh41 drums and mags, HK MP5/10, etc. I have a Semi-Auto Sterling in 7.62x25mm that feeds from Pps43 mags. A 30Carbine Thompson would be epic.
I like the modern look of tommy's, rather than the musketoon look of the M-1.
The problem of the weight due to the absent of applying the pressed steel sheet to the tommy's receiver. Same problem with early Ak-47.
This guy is seriously the coolest person on TH-cam!!
I honestly believe a M2 is a exceptional "SMG", at least in experienced shooters hands, recoil can be a bit much for most shooters. For some reason I thought this would be in that class, completely forgot about the whole weighing 5kg, thats a deal breaker. Although it would have been more accurate and longer ranged then the 45.
Im just going to wait patiently for a video on a M3 in 30 carbine
Fun fact
There's also one in 30-06 That also took BAR mags
(Write munancho to find the video)
This video slipped past me, great work Ian ( all the way from UK) Shame Call of Duty WW2 never used it, even if just in multiplayer. Would be very interesting to see how it fired. Keep up the good work Ian.
Closest you can get is Wolfenstein The New Order first level
It's a nice gun
Awesome video! I plan to definitely make it out to that museum one day!
Interesting idea. The only other 30 Carbine SMG i have ever heard of is a Dominican Republic one from i think the early 60's. It's mentioned in Military Small Arms of the 20th Century. I don't remember the designation, and my books are in storage. I have heard of Thompsons in 38 Super also. That was probably a nice combo- less recoil, more velocity, and fairly flat shooting. Love the videos.
The Tennessee brick printer. 30 carbine is such a cool idea in thompson format. I love that the design is good and needed a little work but we could of had renewed thompsons
I feel like there was a missed opportunity to say "Your Garand has a BAR with it. Why leave your carbines behind?" They could easily get away saying this could be a package *with* the rifle that actually fit the requirements.
Another cool video! Hope you're enjoying your time here in Wyoming!
4:30 I know it’s probably just reusing machining profiles but it has the grooves for a drum magazine. Wonder if one was ever made?
WOW...never knew about that one. I bet 30 carbine feels like 22lr out of a Thompson!
a well done video as always.
thanks ian.
Ian, have you ever encountered a Thompson SMG in 38 Super (rather than 45 ACP)?
Finally a reason to use those adjustable long range sights
Hello Ian, Forgotton Weapons has become one of my favorites on TH-cam.
Does the current Auto-Ordnance / Thompson producer produce a semi-automatic version of the Thompson for the .30 Carbine cartridge?
If not, this might be interesting, you think?
Sadly, no. This is the only prototype in existence. They rejected the carbine due to high manufacturing cost. The US at that time is not in war yet, but they're slowly entering.
What would be interesting here - would be firing this - and seeing how it behaved. I noticed no Cutts Compensator on this one. Obviously - there was the M2 Carbine which could fire these rounds on full auto so - it might be fine - but that would be an interesting comparison, one of these and an M2.
Since this may be a one of a kind weapon - I don't imagine them letting anyone fire it.
.
Always loved this gun! thx for all your reviews, pretty entertaining.
A Thompson in .30 Carbine.... This thing must almost zero muzzle climb.
Really want to see this .30 Carbine Thompson shooting!
If giants existed, they could buy a few thousand of those.
you said that there was alot of variation on magasine capacity during the trails. 5 to 50 rounds.
which guns had 50rounders? could you show any if they are anything special? :)
You should go to ForgottenWeapons.com and search for "light rifle". I have a whole bunch of pages on all the entrants.
+Forgotten Weapons Thanks Ian, will do! sounded interesting which such high capacity for the time :)
So what gun won the trials ultimately?
The Winchester, which became the M1 Carbine.
Given the choice for the same job, which would you pick? M1 Carbine or this Thompson?
M1 Carbine. I'm not really a fan of the Thompson.
even if this were a perfected weapon? as in functionally and mechanically i mean. You wouldnt prefer the expanded capacity and select fire?
i thought he meant the m1 garand - my error.
Enlisted just drop this baby
Yes
Yeee
I know it probably sounds kinda stupid... but an m-3 grease gun in 30 carbine sounds AWSOME!
Car-bean and car-byne are interchangable.
Bendik Eidshaug It's a fine line between Carmine and carbine :)
I dont see any fine line. Maybe you are mistaking it for a "b"?
+Bendik Eidshaug He was making a joke and a rhyme.
What other firearms would this specific one be competing against other that the M1 Carbine in military testing?
Savage Carbine, Woodhull carbine, Garand carbine, Hyde Carbine, Browning carbine, Bergman Carbine, Reising carbine
www.forgottenweapons.com/light-rifle-program/
This is the second time a video has been released at approximately the same time as an Ahoy video about that gun.
YES! Thompson in .30 carbine sounds awesome! Way more power than 45acp!
Didn't they basically have this weapon in the wolfenstein game not long ago?
Anthony Williams I knew i saw this weapon before, but i couldn't remeber where i saw it
+secondswell the game was based in an alternate future where the nazis were winning,I remember that the magazine looked longer like the one here,I suppose that the advantage of various parts being interchangeable may have made them opt to adopt this weapon at that point to get the guns out there quicker than whole new m1 or m2 carbines from scratch,so could fit with the lore of the game that it was a last ditch to get guns in the hands of soldiers as fast as possible
Wolfenstein the new order?
i hope they make new wolfenstein game with the resistance fight the nazi with this thompson submachine gun. chambered in .30 carbin that have been enhanced with da't yichud technology
@@T0rrente18 why would you use a 30 cal Thompson with da yidcut technology and not nazi weapons which is better than 1940s weapon technology
I remember seeing an old picture of a 30-06 prototype. I remember the gap for the magazine was huge. I suspect it was trying to compete with the BAR.
I have an Infield M1 Carbine. I love it, and plan on picking up an Auto Ordinance reproduction M1 Carbine at some point.
As a "light" rifle it was a failure, but someone could have said "wait, why don't we just adopt this as our submachine gun? Instead of this same gun in .45ACP?"
I know you are dying to test fire that, LoL. I am thinking at that weight recoil would be very mild. The 600 yard marking on the rear sight may even be correct with that cartridge. I would like to see Auto Ordnance bring it out as a semi auto carbine. I think it would be cute.
I really thought that the stamp next to him was on the wall, until I saw his hand pass behind it.
In an Alt History world.
"This Thompson Submachine gun was used in the famously failed assault in the Deathhead Keep in 1946..."
I hade no idea they even made one in that cartridge
if someone buys it, you should try to convince the owner to let you get some shooting footage of it (if it actually fires)
It's at a museum, not for sale.
I saw this video, noticed nothing with the thumbnail, and then audibly went "Holy shit that is a wide boy"
the receiver is even cut for drums. very optimistic for not being adopted.
questions, it was that heavy due to machine parts and not stamped parts? and wood stock and forend, maybe?
Now that is COOL! I wonder how a modern reproduction would work in the range?
WOULD love to own that! Great video, thanks!
I suspect that would actually be a very usable, controllable carbine. I wouldn't, however, want to carry it for long.
Honestly id prefer that over a M1-Carbine Grease Gun or regular Thompson if i was a WWII soldier , It may be heavy but even by then its a proven design beefed up in a bigger caliber
Wonder what the handling and performance would have been like vs a .45ACP 1928 Thompson...
This is an extremely interesting gun. The M1 carbine cartridge is would actually be an excellent SMG cartridge and this gun apparently proved that it could work in an unlocked, blow-back weapon. The M2 carbine was not really successful because it was too light and combined with the exceedingly high rate of fire, it was very poorly controllable. This 12 pound SMG might have been quite an effective gun, in any case much more effective than the .45 version, if the rate of fire could have been reduced to no more than 600 rpm. Also, the barrel would have to be at least 12 inches long; the .30 carbine round does not like short barrels. It is a great pity that Ian could not shoot this thing. I expect the rate of fire would also have been very high though.
Mind that the .30 carbine originated from a family of cartridges developed for the Winchester 1905 and 1907 blowback carbines, and it was not the most powerful of them ( the .351 Winchester Self-Loading of the model 1907 was). The experiments done during the war determined that a 570gr bolt was enough to safely fire even proofloads, so it was entirely feasible to design a six pound rifle in .30 carbine using the blowback system (the Winchester model 1905 weighted 7lbs, and the model 1907 8lbs). The problem is that the Thompson SMG is an heavy design in itself.
Unfortunately, if you want to make it select fire, the more practical way to slow down the ROF in a blowback design is to enhance the weight of the bolt (that's why WWII 9mm SMGs had bolts that weighted nearly 700gr, that were clearly an overkill only to fire the 9mm para safely).
I'm wondering if it is closed-bolt or open-bolt; and what locking mechanism is used. I like the idea of .30 carbine SMG.
So this one still has the Blish lock right? Would the added power of .30 carbine over 45 ACP have necessitated keeping this locking mechanism as opposed to the M1A1 which was adapted to straight blowback?
I wonder what the rate of fire is/would have been. I've read that some M3 grease guns chambered for .30 carbine were developed for testing, but never adopted, partly due to the absolutely ridiculous change in cyclic rate.
Ian, how about doing a piece on that FBI Thompson conversion to 10mm?
God tier TH-cam channel
Rather interesting, odd weapon. Makes sense, but if I had been told before seeing this video that a .30 Thompson existed, I would have thought it was a conversion done as a one off by a individual.
had they made it lighter and cheaper they could have stopped the adoption of the grease gun
Yeah, something as simple as a wire stock or removed altogether could have saved a fair bit of weight.
The wood doesn't weigh that much, it's the massive chunk of steel that the receiver is made out of that gives them all that weight.
Given that the bulk of the weight was from that giant milled steel receiver, it likely would have to have been constructed out of sheet metal like the M-3 just to come close to meeting the weight requirement. Even the M-3 was too heavy by specs.
+Matt Dickson You can't make this weapon much lighter, due to the operating design. If you make receiver (which is responsible for a significant chunk of the weapon's weight) any lighter, the weapon stops working.
The M3 is surprisingly heavy for what it is, seeing pictures of them I always thought that they were fairly light, then I got to fire one once and I was surprised at how heavy it actually was. On the plus side, the recoil was surprisingly mild for something that fires .45 ACP and considering the reputation the Thompson had for harsh recoil.
Hmm... that's (probably) a 20 round magazine, given Auto-Ordinance's past history of 'standard' mag capacity.
I'm willing to bet that it's heavy weight has got to make the recoil very light. It's basically an assault rifle. I bet the Army would have put them to good use.
This used to be my favorite gun in WW2 shooters
I wonder if any drum mags exist for it? It has the cuts for one.
It was a twenty rounder. You can look at it and tell it's about 10 down and side-by-side.
That would be fun to shoot - thanks Ian!
the Thompson and the Grease Gun are the Modular engines of the gun world. 3 great engines, all tooled with the same steps.
Protoype 30.06 Thompson to this: *"Pathetic"*
Does a drum exist for it?
I assume one was made, since it have the cuts for one?
Do you know if it still used the Blish system? Was it literally the same inside, just scaled up?
Would the recoil on this be higher or lower than on a standard thompson? Im not a cartridge expert lol.
.30 Carbine is about 3 times as powerful as .45 ACP so it wouldn't surprise me if it had more recoil.
If my memory is correct I think one of the figures on .30 Carbine shows that at 100 yards it's as powerful as a .357 Magnum (which has slightly more muzzle energy than .45 ACP) at the muzzle.
So it would have been an atrociously recoil heavy gun and probably would have failed the trials even if it was half the weight? lol
No, I would think you should be comparing it to the recoil of the other .30 -Carbine chambered guns. Whether or not this had worse recoil than the original .45 version, isn't the point. The fact it was so much heavier than the Army's requirement, means it should have significantly LESS recoil than any of the other submissions, which were light enough to meet the specification.
Now of course, that's just talking about weight generically. In reality, it's not that simple, because distribution of the weight in a different longer-barreled gun, would make up some of the difference in terms of recoil (and/or muzzle climb, i.e. "angular momentum"), since the Thompson was notably short overall.
Yes thats a good point. I think for the thompson its the type of recoil versus the severity of the recoil due to the weight distribution. It may kick the same as the other guns in the trial but im sure it was a lot harder to keep on target due to the rise etc
3 times more punch than a .45 ACP means about what, 1500 Joules/1000ft.lbs at the muzzle..? That would put .30 carbine in between a 7,92x33 Kurz and a 7,62x39 in terms of muzzle energy.. More like twice as powerful.. And a typical .357 Mag 158gr load out of a 6" barrel puts out about 650-700 Joules/500ft.lbs at the muzzle which is about 200ft.lbs more than a .45 ACP 230gr fmj out of a 5" barrel... Thats almost twice as much energy not slightly.. And that's mathematics applied in physics not an opinion :)
if they had used polymer for grips and stock, and shaved off some metal here and there, it'd have been an interesting monster ^.^
Isn't .30 carbine too high pressure wise to work reliably in a open bolt blowback design? I recon it would require a much heavier bolt and/or stiffer recoil spring compared to a standard .45 ACP gun
Hmmm…
Many folks have decried the M1 Carbine's lack of stopping power…
Right or Wrong-doesn't need to be debated at this point in time…
But imagine if the military had asked for a .357 caliber autoloading round-same velocity, same sectional density as the M1 .30 Carbine cartridge, but with a bit more weight and bullet cross-sectional area-a cartridge much like the much like the .351 WSL cartridge.
I wonder how popular the M1 Carbine might have been.
My guess is that there would still be many hunting and private social engineering weapons being produced in that caliber.
…..RVM45
why does it seem the US military missed so many great opportunities for updated weapons
Because the army keeps asking companies for better small arms but never wants to pay for them...
Ian,
The .45 ACP was the only cartage that could be used in the blowback System, I wonder if they went back to the Blish lock System for the .30 short? I would like to know what system this used.