REED R Series. Post your Reed date stamps.
- Thread starter AngryBeaver
- Start date
drivesitfar
Well-known member
You only have to look back a few posts to see a member’s Reed with a 1895 patent in its side so yours is not the oldest but a 2.5 Incher is not common so don’t beat on it.
I’ve seen and own a few great reeds and yours looks pretty nice so maybe the battleship grey ones were sold to the navy? Or schools?
Welcome and congrats on finding a couple nice old reeds
I’ve seen and own a few great reeds and yours looks pretty nice so maybe the battleship grey ones were sold to the navy? Or schools?
Welcome and congrats on finding a couple nice old reeds
From what I have found is massey vise was purchased by Morgan vise. The 36 clincher and the 160 Morgan are almost identical. Hollands has a very **** transition into the jaws. Very nice lines. I think Ridge tool bought Hollands foundry?
DCRUTT
Well-known member
DCRUTT
Well-known member
Beerhippie
Well-known member
What month would be zero?
Patrickm82
Well-known member
I would say more likely the 420 is the date
drivesitfar
Well-known member
DC: if you can show full view of your 104 it might help us help you? Round hub or hockey puck style tell us a range and there are other things too that changed throughout the years for Reed.
Your date might be 10 26 with the 1 faded out?
Your date might be 10 26 with the 1 faded out?
DCRUTT
Well-known member
Here are more pics of the 104.
I’m thinking maybe the 420 is the fate and the 026 May have been added later for some reason. There’s definitely no “1” worn off I front of the 026.
Thanks!
Attachments
Beerhippie
Well-known member
Usually, the heavier stamping is an assembly number--meant to keep fitted parts together. The faint numbers are the date.
DCRUTT
Well-known member
DCRUTT
Well-known member
DCRUTT
Well-known member
Because the same number is on both jaws…does that mean it’s an assembly number rather than a date?
Beerhippie
Well-known member
The date should also be on both--but often so faint you'll struggle to see it through any dirt or paint.
DCRUTT
Well-known member
More on my Reed 31. Latest patent date is 1914. I believe I found the build date on both jaws. I’ve attached pics. I think it is 918. Open for opinions. I may have posted these on another thread but this is where I meant to. Thanks.
Attachments
Recent purchase, Reed 204R, good condition, date code (2-43). I have been looking for a Reed for awhile and finally found one locally for a good price. Posted up on the big vise thread too with a question about the jaws. Are they forge welded? Almost looks like a repair but given the good condition of the actual jaws, I am guessing it came from the factory that way. Thoughts?
Attachments
Last edited:
PsRumors
Well-known member
Tom Graham
Well-known member
Last weekend, I picked up an older Reed 104 4” vise (pre-R version.) It has two sets of (mmyy date) stamped “628” (June 1928) on the non-logo’d/ non-named side of each jaw.
It has the 3-hole fixed base, a (center drilled) round, “meatball”-style nose on the spindle and It uses the older collar inside the slide rather than the split nut retainer.
As opposed to being too short (as some others have seen,) the spindle length was a generous 1-1/4” too long for the dynamic jaw slide. Surely it wasn’t initially sold this way. We’ve assumed the original spindle with handle was replaced with this longer (too long) spindle early in the vise’s life (still before the transitionary period to R’s). I used a small cut-off saw to trim the spindle to the appropriate length. The spindle is long enough to still extend beyond the nut when the slide is fully opened.
As some others had found, the retainer pin for the main nutscrew was missing. The main nut screw was marked Reed on one side and 2306-4-4 1/2 on the other.
For the paint color, this is my first experiment with a matte black that I had seen used on a pair of Holland vises (16H and 13H) that I had seen on FB. It is Kimball Midwest Rustmaster Plus Black.
It has the 3-hole fixed base, a (center drilled) round, “meatball”-style nose on the spindle and It uses the older collar inside the slide rather than the split nut retainer.
As opposed to being too short (as some others have seen,) the spindle length was a generous 1-1/4” too long for the dynamic jaw slide. Surely it wasn’t initially sold this way. We’ve assumed the original spindle with handle was replaced with this longer (too long) spindle early in the vise’s life (still before the transitionary period to R’s). I used a small cut-off saw to trim the spindle to the appropriate length. The spindle is long enough to still extend beyond the nut when the slide is fully opened.
As some others had found, the retainer pin for the main nut
For the paint color, this is my first experiment with a matte black that I had seen used on a pair of Holland vises (16H and 13H) that I had seen on FB. It is Kimball Midwest Rustmaster Plus Black.
Last edited:
Weissbier
Active member
Here’s my 203 1/2 with 3 patent dates. I’ve been slowly cleaning it and found 1441 (large and clear) on both jaws, but I haven’t found any smaller date stamps. However, underneath the dynamic jaw I found this potential date stamp. The best I can figure is that it says 12 14. But obviously the 14 is in smaller font which is strange. Did they put date stamps underneath like this? Any input appreciated!
Attachments
Beerhippie
Well-known member
There are usually two sets of number. The one that's usually most clearly stamped is an assembly number to keep all the fitted p[arts together. The fainter one is usually the date--mo.yr. So I doubt that your vise was made in the 14th month of '41. 1241 sounds plausible, but the date stamps I've seen were on the jaw towers opposite the patent.
Weissbier
Active member
Agreed that 1441 is an assembly number. I have not found any smaller date stamps on either side of the jaws. I’m gonna keep looking, but the one underneath the dynamic jaw is the only potential date stamp I found. Does anybody have a date stamp under their dynamic jaw?
Last edited:
aggiegrads
Well-known member
The date stamps are very faint. I found assembly numbers in the usual places, but the date codes are barely readable. I am letting a tiny spritz of oven cleaner sit and try to remove 100+ years of gunk so I can finally date my 405-1/2.
i don’t think that your vise is clean enough to be able to read the date stamps, or even the assembly stamps.
Weissbier
Active member
aggiegrads
Well-known member
Nice. I was able to clean mine up and get a positive ID on the date stamps as well.
Weissbier
Active member
What is your date?
aggiegrads
Well-known member
Ok, I was able to find and positively confirm the date codes on my 405-1/2. To start, there is only one patent number in the casting: Nov 3, 1908.
Most vises I have seen have three patent dates in the casting. Mine does not have the 1912 or 1914 patent date in the casting.
The assembly number is 18. You can easily see that number on the main body, the slide, and the swivel jaw.
On the main body, only the top of the date code is visible. The first digit could be a 2,3,6,8,9, or 0. Same possibilities for the last digit. The middle digit is most likely a 1 - the stamp and spacing both support this. To confirm, I took some green scotch brite to the slide. Success!
I can clearly make out 910. This is consistent with what I can see on the body, so I am pretty confident in the code. The only other possibility that I can think of is 1016 (stamped upside down and missing the 1) but you can clearly see the serif on the top of the 1 and there is no evidence of a missing one in either casting.
I don’t recall seeing a date code earlier than September 1910. Might this be the oldest known date code?
Most vises I have seen have three patent dates in the casting. Mine does not have the 1912 or 1914 patent date in the casting.
The assembly number is 18. You can easily see that number on the main body, the slide, and the swivel jaw.
On the main body, only the top of the date code is visible. The first digit could be a 2,3,6,8,9, or 0. Same possibilities for the last digit. The middle digit is most likely a 1 - the stamp and spacing both support this. To confirm, I took some green scotch brite to the slide. Success!
I can clearly make out 910. This is consistent with what I can see on the body, so I am pretty confident in the code. The only other possibility that I can think of is 1016 (stamped upside down and missing the 1) but you can clearly see the serif on the top of the 1 and there is no evidence of a missing one in either casting.
I don’t recall seeing a date code earlier than September 1910. Might this be the oldest known date code?
Attachments
"Sometime in mid 1958 standoff pads were added to the bottom of the swivel bases."I've thought for awhile now that I've seen date stampings on the Reed R series. Well, actually on a lot of Non R models also.
After having more than a dozen of these, I don't think they are assembler's stamps. I've had too many 44-58 date stamps that just seem too coincidental. So... let start a date thread to try and gather some pictures of date stamps.
When Reed went to the R series, they had a 10 year unconditional warranty and they had a 20 year warranty on the major parts of the vise. When they went to the R series, they had a forged nut instead of a cast nut. according to this sales ad, they went to a steel nut in 1942...
when sears sold the reed made vises, they offered a 10 year warranty... so, without a receipt how could you tell it was within the 10 year window??? had to have a date stamp. Reeds Warranty was 10 years from the date of manufacture for all cast parts and 25 years for all other parts excluding handles...
From what I've seen and when I started actually taking pictures of the "stamps" it seems that prior to 1954 the stamps where on the left hand side as you were standing in front of the dynamic jaw with the handle/spindle in front of you. after 1952, they were on the right side. Both the Dynamic and Static are stamped. after 1952, the stamp size is larger approximately 1/4" stamps where as the older stamps were approximately 1/8". Stamps are on the Lower right hand side of both the static and the Dynamic. usually the stamp on the dynamic is below the right side of the Pat number. the swivel lockdown hides this. these stamps are usually very lightly stamped and using a knotted wire wheel would remove or damage the stamping.
Maybe this post will evolve into the older reeds, but I'm not certain the stamps on those are related to dates. I have only had a handful of older non R series reeds and haven't been a solid evidence that the random stampings are actually dates. I don't have pictures of all of them, but heres a few...
Craftsman Built Reed 5185 (reed 203 1/2 R) 1/45 or 7/45 small stamp. LH side
Reed 104R 7/53 stamp LH side large stamp
Reed 214R 7/56 stamp RH side large stamp
Reed 203R 7/58 stamp RH side large stamp
reed 2C 4/44 date stamp LH side large stamp.
reed 1C 5/56 RH side large stamp
Reed 204R 6/55 RH side large stamp
Reed 204 1/2 R 7/56 RH side large stamp
Reed 202 1/2 R 4/46 LH side small stamp
craftsman 5185 (reed 203 1/2 R) 1 or 7 of 45. meatball style spindle
Reed 2C. 1 or 4 of 44. Meatball style spindle. interesting that this one has a cast nut..... which according to the later reed sales ad, should be a forged steel nut....
reed 203 7/58 hockey puck style spindle
reed 104R 7/53 hockey puck spindle
Reed 214. 7/56. hockey puck spindle
Post you R series date stamp pictures and see if my theory is actually a date stamping or not....
Very thorough discussion and great info on Reed's changes as time passed. But I'm curious---What is a stand off pad?
I dont see any other references to "stand off pad" anywhere on the net.
(I'm restoring a lightly used Reed 214R filer vise and looking for that date stamp as well. I suspect I've got a 1950s vise --(swivel base and sligle lockdown clamp)
thanks in advance.
I have an old Reed 104 that I picked up years ago for $10 at a garage sale. I’m cleaning it up to mount it on my new workbench, and am curious to know how old it is. There are two sets of numbers on both the static and dynamic jaws. A 234 that’s easy to read, as well as a very faint either 312 or 812. Any thoughts? BTW, first post, and what an awesome forum!
Attachments
rocksnstumps
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2024
- Messages
- 157
Well the patent date cast in of Dec 24, 1912 rules out a 312 or 812 having any meaning of being related to a date such as 3/1912 or 8/1912. Too early.
And the 234 on both static and dynamic and heavily stamped tends to remind me of casting numbers not a date. My 104 has a faint 1222 stamped only on the static jaw which I take as the date stamp Dec 1922. On both the static and dynamic jaws are a much deeper stamp of 13. Having the same stamp on static and dynamic would make sense for assembly purposes not so much a date stamp. But others on here claim to have date stamps on both jaws.
And the 234 on both static and dynamic and heavily stamped tends to remind me of casting numbers not a date. My 104 has a faint 1222 stamped only on the static jaw which I take as the date stamp Dec 1922. On both the static and dynamic jaws are a much deeper stamp of 13. Having the same stamp on static and dynamic would make sense for assembly purposes not so much a date stamp. But others on here claim to have date stamps on both jaws.
Last edited: