KMScott
Well-known member
Fred Knox already posted this vise for the Spreadsheet. Thanks though and keep them coming.
The VISES of Garage Journal
- Thread starter mjozefow
- Start date
My Brother was given this Chas Parker yesterday, it is a 4 inch No. 994. Its frozen and the spindle might be bent. It is under load right now. It has been outside for a very long time. Dynamic jaw is missing. He gave it to me.
Attachments
Shiftless
Well-known member
Free is good but that’s going to be quite a project for you.
What is your plan?
As you know, Parker vise jaws are the most difficult to fabricate. The rust can be overcome with Evaporust or electrolysis. That will probably free things up too.
That jaw is what has me worried.
Shiftless
Well-known member
Are you a machinist or even close?
I wonder if anybody has done those up with a 3D printer.
That would be fine for really light use or for a display piece.
I wonder if anybody has done those up with a 3D printer.
That would be fine for really light use or for a display piece.
flyingblind
Well-known member
That looks really clean to me, surface rust. Copper jaw or pay for a repro. I would just make it into a soft jaw vise.
BlueBomber
Well-known member
Cross-posted from the Garage Sale thread...my $40 find in Connecticut, a Chas. Parker No 88. 
Missing one of the pipe jaws. I'm also guessing that's a homemade handle on the swivel lock screw. It otherwise appears to be in good shape, given its age. I like the deep jaw, but have no vise-less workbenches. I'll probably squirrel it away for the woodshop I'm going to build next year as it has a lot of character.
Missing one of the pipe jaws. I'm also guessing that's a homemade handle on the swivel lock screw. It otherwise appears to be in good shape, given its age. I like the deep jaw, but have no vise-less workbenches. I'll probably squirrel it away for the woodshop I'm going to build next year as it has a lot of character.
akasrick
Well-known member
It's neet the way they got the Chas. Parker. Co. to fit on the vise.Cross-posted from the Garage Sale thread...my $40 find in Connecticut, a Chas. Parker No 88.
Missing one of the pipe jaws. I'm also guessing that's a homemade handle on the swivel lock screw. It otherwise appears to be in good shape, given its age. I like the deep jaw, but have no vise-less workbenches. I'll probably squirrel it away for the woodshop I'm going to build next year as it has a lot of character.
akasrick
Is this actually cast steel, since it's meant as an anvil? Or just regular cast iron?I picked up a "Wards Deluxe Quality" Anvil vise this am; Homeowner's construction for the main screw and slide, the slide is riveted in place which is a first for me. 3-1/2" jaws, flat replaceable jaw plates, (Phillips head screws interestingly) 5" opening, the 3 pipe jaws (all present) are removable/replaceable, so like a combination vise that way. 17-3/4 lbs.
I'd class it a couple of cuts above the average exposed screw Homeowners vise. Of course the anvil is really an "Anvil shaped object" but for light hobby use (soft metals, thin bits of iron/steel, brass rivets, and the like, its fine. I'm thinking I'l clean it up mount it to a foot or 16" or 2X6, and C-clamp it when I need it for portable use. We do a lit of lantern/stove work on the Coleman camp outs. This would be a good one for that. $15 was more than I've paid for any homeowner's vise, but I don't think I got stung.
Casting marks are V111 adn V112 - Anyone know who made these for Wards adn When?
@KMScott - is this one for the Spreadsheet?
Outlawmws
Well-known member
Hopeless case! send it to me for proper disposal!
I'll give a double **** since you and your brother both got it for free.
Shiftless
Well-known member
Outlawmws
Well-known member
I have no idea, and I'm still clueless who made it - If Colombian, likely ductile rather than gray iron.
The anvil surface does have some chisel marks and dents, so it seems to have some give. It may be the anvil surface was a separate piece of steel or iron like they sometimes did for jaws, but no obvious indication of such.
At not over 18 lbs for the entire vise, its not an anvil anyway, so anything more than soft/thin metals is beyond it. you are not going to use it for even light forging, not even small knives for instance. Brass/copper rivets and grommets, flattening a small kink in thin sheet metal; that's its role.
I could see this in a leather workers shop, or a home hobbyist that works with sheet brass/copper, that sort of user. My daughter does copper and brass wire artwork so she would be a good candidate, but I've already given her a small 1 lb anvil (My dads) and a small Stanley clamp on vise.
The heaviest "Anvil" use would be to have one of those cutters that fit in the "hardie hole" (actually a pritchel hole, but its used as a Hardy in this case) and cut flat bar, and not very thick stuff either.
Shiftless
Well-known member
I second all of the things Outlaw said.
The only anvil vise I have is this Prentiss 622 shown here for comparison.
The only anvil vise I have is this Prentiss 622 shown here for comparison.
That’s a beauty Shift, it looks like it’s been lightly used. Prentiss called this vise the Triple Ser-vise. It was billed as a machinist vise, a pipe vise and an anvil all rolled into one.I second all of the things Outlaw said.
The only anvil vise I have is this Prentiss 622 shown here for comparison.
Last edited:
neophyte
Well-known member
Wards Master Quality vice
I am restoring a 3 1/2 " Wards Master Quality vice with pipe jaws. Anyone have any information about it ?
www.garagejournal.com
neophyte
Well-known member
This post with original specs say “Unbreakable Malleable Iron” for the Wards Deluxe Anvil vise.Wards Master Quality vice
I am restoring a 3 1/2 " Wards Master Quality vice with pipe jaws. Anyone have any information about it ?
I remember looking the vise up for some reason.
I think I recall a forum post, maybe here, that mentioned this vise model as having been a standard item used in one of the WWII Army repair kits issues for some vehicle, maybe a truck.
Outlawmws
Well-known member
Thanks for the link Neo. that 41 catalog says its new (in fall/winter 1941 - so likely stopped production for 3-4 years)
And this one has 3-1/3" jaws, - in 41 it's listed as either 3" or 4";
several other differences - the "Meatball on mine is pointed. the pipe jaw set screws are Square Head set screws not the straight blade min are, the jaw screws are straight vs mine are Phillips, and the rivet for the slide was not depicted. Granted all that could be artistic liberties, by the main screw heads is a stretch, and my jaw width is not listed.
The pop out ad shows "Malleable iron/Unbreakable, and possibly that was to keep anyone knowing it was maybe Columbian. - Even more likely to be the MFG.
Also unsurpassed to see the cut-off tool was included.
And this one has 3-1/3" jaws, - in 41 it's listed as either 3" or 4";
several other differences - the "Meatball on mine is pointed. the pipe jaw set screws are Square Head set screws not the straight blade min are, the jaw screws are straight vs mine are Phillips, and the rivet for the slide was not depicted. Granted all that could be artistic liberties, by the main screw heads is a stretch, and my jaw width is not listed.
The pop out ad shows "Malleable iron/Unbreakable, and possibly that was to keep anyone knowing it was maybe Columbian. - Even more likely to be the MFG.
Also unsurpassed to see the cut-off tool was included.
Outlawmws
Well-known member
Last edited:
Private Lugnutz
Well-known member
Nothing like your combo anvil, machinists', and pipe vise is included in the SNL J-5 (all clamps, vises, etc) or SNL G-27 (tool-sets), which includes various anvils and vises (DP, pipe, and machinists') for 2nd through 4th echelon repair depots. I also don't recall ever seeing anything like it in any vehicle manuals I have had a reason to go through. That would include 1/4-ton to 2.5 tons. To be objective, there were a lot of vehicles in WWII with manuals I have never looked through. And Signal Corps and Engineers had all kinds of kits, too. It doesn't seem like the kind of thing the Army would buy, to me, and if they did, it wouldn't come from WARD's, obviously, but I know you already know that. I'll poke around.
Outlawmws
Well-known member
Thx Lugz!
Shiftless
Well-known member
One of the WWII tool experts has spoken. Thanks Lugz
If Columbian made it, the US Military would have certainly bought from Columbian if Columbian made what they wanted. For some of the newer readers of this thread, let me insert here that tons of baby bullet vises and larger models were procured from Wilton for the war effort.
If Columbian made it, the US Military would have certainly bought from Columbian if Columbian made what they wanted. For some of the newer readers of this thread, let me insert here that tons of baby bullet vises and larger models were procured from Wilton for the war effort.
Last edited:
The drop-forged Kanca vise always intrigued me. Though it's still very light, but seems like a cool and useful design.
It was his ex Wife's Dads. He passed away about 4 years ago and her Mother in 22 and they are clearing everything out now. The vise was just sitting in the backyard. Nobody wanted it.Hopeless case! send it to me for proper disposal!
I'll give a double **** since you and your brother both got it for free.
Private Lugnutz
Well-known member
What's your source for this, Shifty?
As I have posted before on the 'Wilton Dating' thread, Wilton ads during wartime and in the postwar period make vague references to the war effort, Vogl also makes a generic reference to it in his testimony on the impact of federal taxation on small business in front of the Select Committee on Small Business, United States Senate, Eighty-fifth Congress, first session (1957), when introducing himself and the company's humble beginnings in 1941, and the history section of the Wilton website states that sales were "government only" during WWII, but there are no records of direct contracts between Wilton and any services or agencies in the War Production Board (WPB) contract books and the period ads themselves never mention any gov't agency, only companies, such as International Harvester and Buick. That has led me to infer that Wilton was supplying vises to other companies who were using them in their manufacturing plants. Part of the war effort, but an interesting nuance that often gets missed or mischaracterized, and much different than supplying "tons" of vises to the government, which is much more true of several other vise makers.
Birtman Electric Company ("Rock Island"), Rock Island, Ill., had six (6) contracts with the Navy from 1941 through 1945 for a total of $686K.
Columbian Vise Mfg Co, Cleveland, OH, had four (4) contracts with the Army Ordnance Dept (ORD) and Navy from 1942 to 1945 for a total of $358K.
Desmond Stephan Mfg Co, Urbana, OH, had four (4) contracts with the Army Quartermaster Corps (QMC) and Navy from 1943 to 1945 for a total of $297K. A Desmond Stephan machinists' vise is used as an example in the 1945 SNL G-27.
Grand Specialties Co., Chicago, ILL, had one (1) contract with the ORD in 1944 worth $139K.
Morgan Vise Co, Chicago, ILL, had one (1) contract with the ORD and Morgan Vise Co, Bradley, ILL, had one (1) contract with Navy from 1942 to 1943 for a total of $483K. A Morgan machinists' vise is used as an example in the 1945 SNL G-27.
Parker, Charles, Co, Meriden, CONN, had umpteen contracts with US Army Corps of Engineers, the ORD, and Navy for tools, machine tools, tooling, fittings, etc worth $2.205M total. Vises were not referenced explicitly for any single contract, but it's hard to imagine a "TOOLS" contract with Charles Parker not including vises.
Prentiss Vise Co, Watertown, NY, had four (4) contracts with the ORD and Navy from 1942 to 1944 for a total of $475K.
Reed Mfg Co, Erie, PA, had three (3) contracts with QMC from 1942-1944 for a total of $208K.
The following makers had no contracts listed:
Athol
Hollands
Littlestown
Palmgren
Wilton
That could mean they had contracts less than $50K in value, which were too small for the WPB to track, or as I surmised above, they were supplying vises to other mfgrs for use in defense plants.
Last edited:
Shiftless
Well-known member
Lugz:
Thanks for the extra information relating to vises sold to the military.
You are the expert on things relating to wartime tools. I was only relaying information I have read here showing those little baby bullets with the separate raised anvil pieces as being included in specialized tool kits for the US military, (Army if I remember correctly)
I also recall reading about the earliest 4 inch Wilton bullet machinist vises having no date stamped into the keyway because they were sold to the military without any warrantee.
I will certainly defer to any written evidence to the contrary and I apologize in advance if I have posted misinformation.
Here is a pic I grabbed from the web showing the early design I am referring to.
Thanks again
Thanks for the extra information relating to vises sold to the military.
You are the expert on things relating to wartime tools. I was only relaying information I have read here showing those little baby bullets with the separate raised anvil pieces as being included in specialized tool kits for the US military, (Army if I remember correctly)
I also recall reading about the earliest 4 inch Wilton bullet machinist vises having no date stamped into the keyway because they were sold to the military without any warrantee.
I will certainly defer to any written evidence to the contrary and I apologize in advance if I have posted misinformation.
Here is a pic I grabbed from the web showing the early design I am referring to.
Thanks again
I know Canedy Otto is known more for its blacksmithing and drill press heritage, but I found and decided to restore a CANEDY OTTO MFG CO. 2 1/2 Bench Vise. It has 2 5/8" jaws, opens 2" and weigh 8 lbs. 5 oz. Its manufacturing location is noted as Chicago HTS. ILL.
Attachments
Last edited:
Shiftless
Well-known member
I have purchased more than one vise that was just sitting in the dirt in the backyard. The most notable one that I remember was a Reed 4C.
Private Lugnutz
Well-known member
Glad to help!
I don't know about that - I have certainly done my share of research.
Please point me to it. I have not seen that.
It's true that none of the Wilton's made between 1941 and late 1945 have a date stamp on the keyway, but I have never seen anything showing military sales without a guarantee as the reason. The date stamps were manufacturing dates, not guarantee expiration dates, and the GUAR EXP dates only appeared later for a short period of time. Wilton was clearly selling vises to private companies during WWII and ads in commercial trade mags during WWII state the guarantee, 1 year at first, then 5 years. Whether they were using a receipt or what, we don't know. But there is no evidence that they sold any vises to the government, let alone that they only sold vises to the government, and there is no evidence that the lack of a date stamp means a former government customer vise.
No reason to apologize for anything. I wasn't challenging you. Just curious for the source of your statement for the reasons I stated - no Wilton WPB contracts with any military service or gov't agency on record.
pretty sure teh handle on the swivel lock is original. My Parker is identical in design. it was convenient for restoring, since you can polish up the knob and the bar separate
Shiftless
Well-known member
Lugz:
Thanks for the point by point elaboration. If I can find the specific posts or solid references to what I was referring to, I will get back to you.
One line from the Wilton tool.com website history page stuck in my mind so I quote it here:
”From 1941 through 1945, the new Wilton 40S machinist vise was manufactured in Chicago and sold solely to the US Government. Most vises were used in munitions factories or in manufacturing of equipment used during WWII.”
Maybe only a fraction of those vises manufactured during that time period went into tool kits issued to enlisted men or otherwise put to use outside of factories.
Thanks for the point by point elaboration. If I can find the specific posts or solid references to what I was referring to, I will get back to you.
One line from the Wilton tool.com website history page stuck in my mind so I quote it here:
”From 1941 through 1945, the new Wilton 40S machinist vise was manufactured in Chicago and sold solely to the US Government. Most vises were used in munitions factories or in manufacturing of equipment used during WWII.”
Maybe only a fraction of those vises manufactured during that time period went into tool kits issued to enlisted men or otherwise put to use outside of factories.
Last edited:
four.cycle
Well-known member
Private Lugnutz said:
(emphasis added)
Most interesting, and that makes much more sense than the myth it seems to dispel.
OoH, I want one of them one of these days. Tough to find.
KMScott
Well-known member
Nope, those are original. I use to make and sell them. They fit inside a pocket on the swivel body so it will miss the Static body.
Attachments
Private Lugnutz
Well-known member
That's what I was referring to here...
Again, there is no record of Wilton having sold vises under contract to the US Government during WWII, the way there is a record of the other vise mfgrs selling vises under contracts to the US Government during WWII, and the second part of their own statement contradicts the first part. Conversely, the second part of that statement is in agreement with ads they were running in trade mags at the time. If they were used in munitions factories, they were most likely purchased by the companies making the munitions and vehicles and other equipment. Making their "solely to the US Government" claim awfully misleading.
Vises that were part of tool-sets being deployed to the ETO and PTO would've been purchased by technical services, i.e., ORD, QMC, Corps of Engineers, etc, just as they were purchasing them from Birtman, Columbian, Morgan, etc., as I summarized above.
Wilton's website and Vogl's statements don't jibe with what the WPB contracts books show. That's all I am saying. It's possible the ORD, QMC, COE, etc bought vises from Wilton in smaller lots, on smaller than $50K contracts, for some reason. I would have to call it unlikely, since there is so much precedence to the contrary. It's asking a lot of us to ignore the approach they took with all the other vise makers. But that's one explanation. The other explanation is they weren't supplying directly to the US Government, despite their claim, and given their own ads citing specific war production companies they were supplying vises to, and the second part of their own website claim, I think that explanation makes the most sense.
But I'm always open to more information.
Shiftless
Well-known member
Thanks again Lugz.
The current management at Wilton seems to be uninterested in accurate historical information. Their own website seems to contain demonstrably untrue information.
The current management at Wilton seems to be uninterested in accurate historical information. Their own website seems to contain demonstrably untrue information.
Shiftless
Well-known member
They are hard to find. I sold mine to a guy who owned and managed a shop fabricating custom diesel exhaust systems. He told me that the “gorillas” who worked for him have broken just about every vise he has had in his shop and wanted something that would hold up to hard use.
I told him that if they broke this one I’d be very surprised.
BTW, the buyer showed up in my driveway in a very nice sounding 3/4 ton diesel powered Ford Excursion.
FourthQuarter
Well-known member
Outlawmws
Well-known member
Shift, there are also the original ads I now own, collected by the VP, and later the president of Columbian, that clearly show advertisements to the "public" and likely, post the war restrictions, to manufacturers needing them for supporting the war effort.
These also refute the "no guarantee", theory. I've posted these in the Wilton EXP/N thread and that thread cleared up several popular theories and claims, and those ads certainly refutes Wilton's claim in their "history" about selling only to the gov. Marketing wrote that and the Marketing "industry's" ability to keep from embellishing, if not outright lying, is well established...
These also refute the "no guarantee", theory. I've posted these in the Wilton EXP/N thread and that thread cleared up several popular theories and claims, and those ads certainly refutes Wilton's claim in their "history" about selling only to the gov. Marketing wrote that and the Marketing "industry's" ability to keep from embellishing, if not outright lying, is well established...
Last edited: