To avoid these ads, REGISTER NOW!

Wilton Bullet Vise date stamping. show yours with or without EXP on slide

Outlawmws

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2011
Messages
39,232
Location
The Badlands
Those company dates also have questions Drives. While the incorporation dates may be '41, some patent application dates predate that as I recall. You don't have to be incorporated to be in business...

Remember, history is made by those that write it down... and its not always factual...
 
To avoid these ads, REGISTER NOW!

exmaxima1

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 25, 2011
Messages
6,341
Location
Midwest
LUG & ALL: EXMAXIMA has or had a 1945 Wilton C1 bullet vise and i think another member or two had them with 1945 stamped on the swivel's base or maybe it was on the lower part of the static jaw. my guess is that Wilton when they started date stamping vises were not sure where they were going to stamp them and cast them in the vise before stamping them on the bottom of their slides.

It's on the base of the static jaw. The casting also reads "Chicago", and NOT Pat Pending, so I would say it was not made in 1940.
 

Attachments

  • 1945a.jpg
    1945a.jpg
    145.6 KB · Views: 19
  • 1945b.jpg
    1945b.jpg
    140.5 KB · Views: 16
Last edited:

Private Lugnutz

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Messages
30,574
Location
The Authentic Jersey Shore
Wilton I'm pretty sure wasn't even a company until 1941
According to their website, that is correct, Drives.

Those company dates also have questions Drives. While the incorporation dates may be '41, some patent application dates predate that as I recall.
Not according to my research, which included the USPTO itself, as well as DATAMP. Earliest patent that was either applied for by Vogl or assigned to Wilton Tool Mfg Co was August 1, 1941. If you know of an earlier one, please cite it, Outlaw. (EDIT: I'll have much more to say about the patent later.)

Outlawmws said:
You don't have to be incorporated to be in business...
If you mean he was making and hand-selling vises for cash before 1941, that may be possible, but highly implausible, and almost impossible to prove. If you mean he was incorporated in some way less than fully, there would still be a record of it in a government or trade registry.

Outlawmws said:
Remember, history is made by those that write it down... and its not always factual...
While this is true (a good example is MAC: the history provided on The Tools Archive is more accurate than the history provided on their website), I have found no record of Wilton operating as Wilton Tool Mfg Co in the public domain earlier than 1941.

In fact, the earliest record of Wilton operating as Wilton Tool Mfg Co in the public domain that I have been able to find is January 1942, in Volume 11 of The Tool Engineer, published by the American Society of Tool Engineers. And take note that this publication was in print from 1935 to 1951, I found 1941 online, and there is no mention of Wilton Tool Mfg Co in it. That doesn't mean he was not in business in 1941. But it does mean his business was probably not prepared to run a blurb in the industry's trade magazine until January 1942.

Without an objective reason to doubt the company's stated history, there is no reason to take them at anything other than their word.
 
Last edited:

Private Lugnutz

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Messages
30,574
Location
The Authentic Jersey Shore
In other news, I have found a much earlier reference for a Wilton guarantee policy. It appears in Volume 11, the January 1942 edition of The Tool Engineer, a publication of The American Society of Tool Engineers, as mentioned above. It is not a 5-year guarantee, as we have seen as early as June 1947. It appears to be a one-year guarantee. At this time, I have only been able to recover a snippet from an on-line search (the entire periodical is not available), but it's enough to show a very early interest in guaranteeing his bullet vise.

Take note that the same snippet also provides customer details that do not exactly agree with the statement on the modern company's website that Wilton vises were sold "solely to the US Government." IH, Buick Aviation, and Atlas were commercial entities. They were manufacturing trucks, aircraft engines, and demolition equipment for the US Army and US Army Air Forces, but they were commercial entities. Unless the US Government was buying the vises direct from Wilton and supplying them as GFE to those companies due to Limitation Order L-216 preventing Wilton from selling them direct. I have yet to deep dive on L-216 for vises.

This will give you guys something to debate while I continue to delay my conclusions! :D
 

Attachments

  • January 1942 Wilton guarantee.jpg
    January 1942 Wilton guarantee.jpg
    75.3 KB · Views: 52
Last edited:
OP
D

drivesitfar

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
36,017
Location
Pacific Northwest
Lug: thanks for taking on this Wilton bullet vise project or maybe it's a fun Challenge for you too now that you own an old bullet!!

Ex: can you post a few pictures of your 1945 Wilton so Lug doesn't have to try and find it since it's definitely a bit different date stamping than what is normal for Wilton?

ALL: interesting that Wilton had a 1 year unlimited warranty in 1942 without date stamps so guessing maybe a receipt (young guys might not know what that is) maybe was your proof of purchase? also might give a little hint that Wilton didn't only sell vises to UNCLE SAM from 1941-1945?

i wonder if anybody that works at Wilton might have any records to post or just comment about as we try to figure this out?

the search for the truth continues!!!

anybody have an old Wilton bullet with either a date stamp on the slide or on their vise prior to 1965 please post it up if you have a minute to and it might be a good time to clean and re grease your vise.
 

Outlawmws

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2011
Messages
39,232
Location
The Badlands
FYI: earlier thread on the same topic from 6+ years ago: http://www.garagejournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=86615

As to the dates: Clearly a company does not get formed seconds or even minutes after the idea -not in 1941! Patent applications are not drawn up in a couple of hours, not to mention the design work, trial models, failed experiments, etc, that go on before a patent ever gets applied for.

So some questions that must be also considered in proposed timelines:

Pat applied for: Aug. 1941:
  • How much time elapsed before that patent was able to be flied from concept to application?
  • Would anyone design and apply for a patent without building at least one to prove the concept? While submitting a model had been gone for 50+ years, a model would be expected by any investors...
  • Patents are fairly legal documents, if this was his first,who was the lawyer? How much time did he need? How about the guy that made the patent drawings?

Company was formed 1941 (What month?):
  • Incorporation papers also take time
  • Lining up investors unless the founder was already wealthy...
  • Where was all the work done (see above) prior to the plant being selected for the official factory?
  • How much got built there before moving into the plant?

You have to consider what it took to start a major manufacturing facility like a foundry in the 40's in the post depression era, and during the early war years (for Europe) that fueled the US economy before Dec 7...

Today we almost take for granted the "notes on a napkin - lets start a company!" and getting investors to fund millions to make virtual companies.

It was not that way in 1941.

This is why I hold my position that SOMETHING existed prior to incorporation no matter what the "official beginnings of Wilton" is in their "history"...

Consider this: HP is a HUGE company. Where did they get started? In a garage in Palo alto, and it was a long time before they incorporated...

In 1939, Packard and Hewlett established Hewlett-Packard (HP) in Packard's garage with an initial capital investment of US$538.[11] Hewlett and Packard tossed a coin to decide whether the company they founded would be called Hewlett-Packard or Packard-Hewlett.[12] HP incorporated on August 18, 1947, and went public on November 6, 1957.

While HP's beginnings are well documented, so far NOTHING had surfaced earlier than the 1941 dates for Wilton.


So the "History" is incomplete...

Yes, I doubt the official Wilton history...
 
OP
D

drivesitfar

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
36,017
Location
Pacific Northwest
EX: thank you. i forgot you had a date stamped on the slide too.

Outlaw: the discussion never was about the official or UNOFFICIAL day that Wilton became a company. it's you (and a few other members) always saying the date stamps represent 5 years prior to the actual date stamped on the slides.

ALL: it's an interesting discussion and maybe we will figure it out so everybody is on board with the results of the findings and maybe Wilton will adopt this thread as part of their company's history.
 

Outlawmws

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2011
Messages
39,232
Location
The Badlands
Lug: Interesting find on the 1 year warranty in '42 and that vises may have been sold direct to "qualified" customers! (Even Sears limited tool sales to the war effort and its support..)

This might lend some credence to the undated vises being under the 1 year warranty, but I don't think supports the earliest dated vises adn an expiration date or a Mfg. date...

Maybe those earliest dates were the 1 year expiration? - Inconclusive...

What is the earliest stamped "EXP" date now? Hmm stil late 50's for bullets...
 
Last edited:

Outlawmws

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2011
Messages
39,232
Location
The Badlands
Outlaw: the discussion never was about the official or UNOFFICIAL day that Wilton became a company. it's you (and a few other members) always saying the date stamps represent 5 years prior to the actual date stamped on the slides.

Read again Drives; don't put words in my mouth. I keep saying its inconclusive either way...

And the actual dates vises were manufactured DO matter, as the dates could be in conflict. although with that new 1 year warranty timing, maybe not.
 
Last edited:

MasterOMayhem

Active member
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
44
Hi I have an Acme Bullet type of vise I restored its date is 6-47
 

Attachments

  • 2017-04-22 16.17.13.jpg
    2017-04-22 16.17.13.jpg
    148.7 KB · Views: 33
OP
D

drivesitfar

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
36,017
Location
Pacific Northwest
OUTLAW: are you saying that you weren't telling everybody that their 1947 stamped vises were made in 1942 before we started this thread? it's not all about you, but you seem to be holding on to the post stamp dating theory still as everybody else seems to be ok with what has been discovered with the dating posts here.

I do like that more information has come to light because of this discussion and sorry if i sound like i'm trying to prove you wrong which is definitely not the case. i just want to pass on information that i believe is the truth and it was hard to tell anybody their 1945 stamped vise was made in 1940 when Wilton wasn't a company then and the vise didn't have the Patent Pend on it's side.

ALL: to bring more into the discussion how about the fact that many of us think Wilton took YORK'S design as their own and made a US based company with that as their main vise? also another vise has shown up that has the quality of a Wilton bullet that has ACME cast on it's side so what's the story on the ACME vises? Wilton made their tradesman vises for Snap on, John Deere and several other companies, but used stickers for them so who made ACME?

thanks all who have posted their Wiltons with dates and anybody else have a theory please post and if you have old magazines or catalog pages to post that haven't been posted please take a picture and post them. i've taken pictures of my gramp's 1950's logging trucks sitting in a family album with my cell camera and they came up ok so snapping pictures of catalog pages should work if you have time.
 

Attachments

  • WP_20151225_023.jpg
    WP_20151225_023.jpg
    124.9 KB · Views: 21

Outlawmws

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2011
Messages
39,232
Location
The Badlands
No I'm not saying I never said that, as EVERYBODY had that as the conclusion long before this thread, including you.

If you recall I started a DB before BB surpassed me, and I bowed out. So I early on started doubting the original conclusions.

Your right, I DO keep pointing out that NO CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE EITHER WAY IS SUPPORTED.

I know that seems to annoy you as you want to make conclusions. A worthy goal, but we ain't there yet. You said you want to pass on the truth. Include that its conjecture then and not the TRUTH, and I won't be chiding you...

As more scraps of evidence pops up ALL "conclusions" seem to be further away from what any final answer might be. but without EVIDENCE, its all guesswork at best.

As to Acme, they were formed after Wilton and after the war from what I have seen, and I think it likely that Wilton made their bullets on contract while developing their own post war sales market.

OUTLAW: are you saying that you weren't telling everybody that their 1947 stamped vises were made in 1942 before we started this thread? it's not all about you, but you seem to be holding on to the post stamp dating theory still as everybody else seems to be ok with what has been discovered with the dating posts here.

I do like that more information has come to light because of this discussion and sorry if i sound like i'm trying to prove you wrong which is definitely not the case. i just want to pass on information that i believe is the truth and it was hard to tell anybody their 1945 stamped vise was made in 1940 when Wilton wasn't a company then and the vise didn't have the Patent Pend on it's side.

ALL: to bring more into the discussion how about the fact that many of us think Wilton took YORK'S design as their own and made a US based company with that as their main vise? also another vise has shown up that has the quality of a Wilton bullet that has ACME cast on it's side so what's the story on the ACME vises? Wilton made their tradesman vises for Snap on, John Deere and several other companies, but used stickers for them so who made ACME?
 
OP
D

drivesitfar

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
36,017
Location
Pacific Northwest
Outlaw: i'm certainly not ANNOYED and enjoying the process trying to figure this out. of course words on paper won't ever carry the same weight as one talking and discussing so let me take a minute and congratulate you for trying to find out the truth yourself. i think you are leaning towards the date stamps not being a 5 year post date prior to 1954 too and with Lug's new find on a years warranty i'm sure this is helping.

here's to us finding more facts or clues if that's all we are given. :thumbup:

ALL: I think the YORK connection might have some merit if we can maybe get some information from that company that might have some notes on what Wilton was doing in America. i know with WWII going on in Europe several years prior to the US getting in it that maybe trying to get information from a Czech company during those years will be even harder.
 

Private Lugnutz

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Messages
30,574
Location
The Authentic Jersey Shore
This is why I hold my position that SOMETHING existed prior to incorporation no matter what the "official beginnings of Wilton" is in their "history"
Outlaw,
With all due respect, you taking a position that doubts the Wilton history based on your postulation that some form of vise manufacturing must have existed prior to 1941 is a matter of opinion. Without substantiation, though, your opinion cannot undermine, challenge, or contradict facts. I hope you can acknowledge that. The fact, as of right now, is that the earliest historical record of Wilton Tool Mfg Co in the public domain is January 1942, in the trade periodical I cited above.

It's reasonable to conclude that the company existed prior to January 1942 because they would not advertised a product without some form of manufacturing enterprise in place, and the company's website says it was established in 1941. The only thing that can contradict that are facts showing that it was in operation earlier than 1941.

Outlawmws said:
so far NOTHING had surfaced earlier than the 1941 dates for Wilton.
Could not agree more.
 

Private Lugnutz

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Messages
30,574
Location
The Authentic Jersey Shore
(Even Sears limited tool sales to the war effort and its support..)
This was not a unilateral or patriotic gesture by Sears & Roebuck or any other OEM or distributor. Limitation Order L-216, beginning in January 1942, and ending in May 1945, released in schedules (per tool category), and amendments, controlled what tools could be sold commercially, by type and size.

Your right, I DO keep pointing out that NO CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE EITHER WAY IS SUPPORTED.
As a friendly heads-up, and spoiler alert, I don't agree. But I look forward to your review of my findings.
 
OP
D

drivesitfar

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
36,017
Location
Pacific Northwest
ALL: i seem to remember reading that the owner of Wilton was living in Czechoslovakia hence the YORK connection, so maybe his move to the US might give another clue that the company couldn't have started prior to 1941.

LUG: looking forward to seeing and or hearing what you've found when you have the time to post them. thanks in advance
 

exmaxima1

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 25, 2011
Messages
6,341
Location
Midwest
also another vise has shown up that has the quality of a Wilton bullet that has ACME cast on it's side so what's the story on the ACME vises? Wilton made their tradesman vises for Snap on, John Deere and several other companies, but used stickers for them so who made ACME?

Probably the same company that made them for Allied. Similar to Wilton's Cadet model (w/o end cap), but the key is not as long and has no date stamp.
 

Attachments

  • 0503171105.jpg
    0503171105.jpg
    140.5 KB · Views: 13
  • 0503171104.jpg
    0503171104.jpg
    141.6 KB · Views: 20

Outlawmws

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2011
Messages
39,232
Location
The Badlands
Lug, I don't disagree at all and if one reads my comments carefully I'm only saying these things must be considered, Not that any of them are fact. I asked key questions that need answers...

My point is that reality and written, and often accepted "history" is often far apart. So even with all known facts, and opinions and sometimes myths stated as facts, you have to accept that you may not have the full picture.

After a lifetime with an interest in history, its become very clear to me that history as documented is incomplete and open questions always exist. (Who killed JFK? we will never really know for sure...) Sure, its my opinion. I'm entitled to that.

Without substantiation, though, your opinion cannot undermine, challenge, or contradict facts.

Agree except on one point: My opinion cannot undermine, or contradict established facts. - agree. I'm completely at liberty to challenge any "fact" or conclusions, especially those based on incomplete or suspect information.

While it is my opinion that Wilton existed in some form prior to incorporation, its one based on many years working for industry and being involved with many companies both young and old.

Companies don't just "appear" on some lawyers incorporation paperwork; Back then it took bricks, mortar, molten steel and molds made from patterns turned out by craftsmen. It's those things that make a company possible, not the paper.

Don't get me wrong Lug; I'm all for getting to the facts and would love to see the goal achieved. but the road is a rocky one and has been traveled by many.

I think you have gotten more new significant factoids in the short time you have looked than has been found in several years now...


Outlaw,
With all due respect, you taking a position that doubts the Wilton history based on your postulation that some form of vise manufacturing must have existed prior to 1941 is a matter of opinion. Without substantiation, though, your opinion cannot undermine, challenge, or contradict facts. I hope you can acknowledge that. The fact, as of right now, is that the earliest historical record of Wilton Tool Mfg Co in the public domain is January 1942, in the trade periodical I cited above.

It's reasonable to conclude that the company existed prior to January 1942 because they would not advertised a product without some form of manufacturing enterprise in place, and the company's website says it was established in 1941. The only thing that can contradict that are facts showing that it was in operation earlier than 1941.



Could not agree more.
 
OP
D

drivesitfar

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
36,017
Location
Pacific Northwest
Ex: the Allied and this Taskmaster just are not the quality of an Acme from what i've seen and heard cause i've yet to see or touch one in person. hence me thinking wilton might have had an Acme contract?

All: here's a picture (a little blurry) of a taskmaster vise that looks a lot like your Allied doesn't it?
 

Attachments

  • 00909_9EdjqrxGKzi_1200x900.jpg
    00909_9EdjqrxGKzi_1200x900.jpg
    68.6 KB · Views: 24
To avoid these ads, REGISTER NOW!

Outlawmws

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2011
Messages
39,232
Location
The Badlands
Drives, I'm trying to NOT lean in any one direction on that as I have not seen enough evidence to do any leaning. So will you please stop trying to put words in my mouth?

Let the facts we can find speak for themselves.


Outlaw: i'm certainly not ANNOYED and enjoying the process trying to figure this out. of course words on paper won't ever carry the same weight as one talking and discussing so let me take a minute and congratulate you for trying to find out the truth yourself. i think you are leaning towards the date stamps not being a 5 year post date prior to 1954 too and with Lug's new find on a years warranty i'm sure this is helping.

here's to us finding more facts or clues if that's all we are given. :thumbup:
 

exmaxima1

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 25, 2011
Messages
6,341
Location
Midwest
Ex: the Allied and this Taskmaster just are not the quality of an Acme from what i've seen and heard cause i've yet to see or touch one in person. hence me thinking wilton might have had an Acme contract?

All: here's a picture (a little blurry) of a taskmaster vise that looks a lot like your Allied doesn't it?

Yep, that's it.
 

Private Lugnutz

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Messages
30,574
Location
The Authentic Jersey Shore
Okay, then without further ado, my shorthand reply is to say that I wholeheartedly agree with the conclusions bluebolt sprinkled throughout the thread whenever he posted summaries of his database efforts.

I will make several long replies after I post this for anyone who wants to know why I agree with him…
 

Private Lugnutz

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Messages
30,574
Location
The Authentic Jersey Shore
From the best analytical practices perspective, the sample size (259 vises) of the database is statistically relevant. Is it possible that it is not representative of the specimens at large out there (outside of GJ)? Yes, but not likely. Is it possible that there is a Wilton vise out there unrecorded in this database that would completely subvert the conclusions? Again, yes, but highly unlikely based on the volume of samples.

A number of logical conclusions can absolutely be drawn from the empirical facts (the actual date stamps on actual vises as faithfully recorded in bluebolt’s database) in context with the historical facts that have been discovered (January 1942 Tool Engineer journal advertisement, June 1947 Popular Mechanics advertisement, 1950 Wilton catalog).

I have been careful to separate the notes I have been making as I got into this into those two categories: facts, and the conclusions that can be logically drawn from those facts. If I speculate or make conjecture, I will point that out as well. Conclusions without supporting facts are unsubstantiated theory, and I will point those out when necessary to distinguish them from my conclusions.
 

Private Lugnutz

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Messages
30,574
Location
The Authentic Jersey Shore
FACT: There are thirty-five (35) Wilton vises in the database with a date stamp prefixed by the abbreviation “GUAR EXP.” Besides having the prefix in common, all of these date stamps also have the same (or a very similar) format: M-DD-YY (qty 32), M-DD-YYYY (qty 1), and M/DD/YYYY (qty 2). The earliest of these date stamps is 6-30-55 (on a Cadet). The earliest of these date stamps on a Bullet is 12-31-59 and the latest on a Bullet is 12-30-66.

FACT: All the GUAR EXP date stamps are either 6-30-YY or 12-31-YY (with the exception of the 12-30-66, which appears to be an anomaly.)

CONCLUSION: The prefix “GUAR EXP” followed by the date stamp is obviously an abbreviated reference to a “GUARANTEE EXPIRATION” date, as many others before me have concluded. That is face value information requiring only a working knowledge of English and mid-century American wholesale and retail practices, little to no interpretation, and no theory. It is almost certainly an end date for a 6-month range. In other words, whether one bought a vise in January, February, March, April, May or June of a given year in the GUAR EXP era, your vise was guaranteed through the end of June, a number of years earlier. Ditto for the July to December range.
 

Private Lugnutz

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Messages
30,574
Location
The Authentic Jersey Shore
FACT: With the GUAR EXP dates apparently articulating the last day in a 6-month range, and without a secondary source of information identifying the duration of the guarantee (1 year, 5 years, etc), there is no way to derive a manufacturing date from the actual GUAR EXP date stamp. For the original customer, that stamp on his vise and perhaps his receipt would’ve sufficed. For collectors, 60+ years later, a secondary source of information is required to establish when the guarantee started, which is a reasonable facsimile for a manufacturing date range (of 6 months).

FACT: As early as January 1942, Wilton was advertising the concept of an “unrestricted guarantee” for a “new vise.” As early as June 1947, Wilton appears to have extended the guarantee duration, advertising a “5 yr. guarantee” for a “Precision Vise” (image of a Bullet) or a “Bullet” vise by name. A page ostensibly scanned from a 1950 Wilton catalog appears to confirm that, advertising an “UNCONDITIONAL 5 YEAR GUARANTEE” for a bullet vise.

CONCLUSION: The GUAR EXP date stamps, all occurring in time after the “UNCONDITIONAL 5 YEAR GUARANTEE” Wilton advertised as early as 1947 in trade magazines and again in their own catalog in 1950 for bullet vises, almost certainly refer to a 5-year guarantee period. Therefore it is perfectly logical to conclude, based on the database and the historical record at this time, that a Bullet with an EXP GUAR date stamp (e.g., “EXP GUAR 12-31-59”), was made in the second half of the year, five years earlier (e.g., between 7-1-1954 and 12-31-54).

NOTE: I saw the annotations to a few 1- and 2-year guarantees for Cadet vises in bluebolt’s database, and I saw comments about these when I reviewed the thread. I don’t know what historical references bluebolt or anyone else is using to identify these GUAR EXP date stamps as 1- or 2-year guarantees, as the case may be, rather than the early (1942) 1-year guarantee or the later 5-year guarantee we have a historical record of. I’m assuming bluebolt or someone else has a different reference (e.g., a later catalog or a later advertisement). I consider this issue a red herring, though. It is irrelevant to the EXP GAUR date stamps on bullet vises and the issue of the earlier date stamps on bullet vises.
 

Private Lugnutz

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Messages
30,574
Location
The Authentic Jersey Shore
FACT: There are fifty-four (54) Wilton vises in the database with a date stamp that is NOT prefixed by the abbreviation “GUAR EXP.” The earliest of these data stamps is 8-45. The latest is 12-53.

FACT: This date stamp format for these era Wilton date stamps (M-YY) is much different than the date stamp format of the GUAR EXP date stamps (M-DD-YY, M-DD-YYYY, and M/DD/YYYY).

FACT: Manufacturing dates stamped on tools were very rare in this period across industry. Of those that existed, they rarely included the exact day. Sometimes they included a month and a year (see Bonney and J.P. Danielson). More often than not they included only the year (see Snap-On and Wright).

FACT: There are eight (8) Wilton vises in the GJ sample superset with a date stamp that is NOT prefixed by the abbreviation “GUAR EXP” that have a slightly different format than M-YY, and one that is more difficult to decipher. They are 1-945, 3-945, 4-945 (x3), 5-945, and 6-945 (x2).

CONCLUSIONS:

Others have postulated that the format of all these is M-(1)YYY with a missing “1”, i.e., to be read as 1-1945, 3-1945, and so on. I don’t disagree with the possibility, but I do find it odd. The rest of the date stamps in this period show no propensity to include the “9” let alone the “1”, and it’s an odd convention for any manufacturer to take (skip the “1”, but include the “9”) in a date stamp.

I have an alternate reading. It could be a date range. I think 1-945 could refer to ‘January to September 1945’. 3-945 would refer to March to September 1945. And so on. Note that September 1945 would be the end of the fiscal year. A plan to stamp a number of vises in a range of months through the end of the FY would require the manufacturing of fewer dies than the dies it would require to stamp keys every month. Although it amounted to that anyway for at least four of the months in that year, casting doubts on my alternative reading. On other hand, this idea of a date range seems to be consistent with the use of a date range (granted, slightly different in duration and periodicity) in the later GUAR EXP date stamps.

For the purpose of my analysis, the interpretation of this series of date stamps is inconsequential, and could be ignored as unknown. They could just as easily be included as a version of 1-45, 3-45, 4-45, 5-45, and 6-45, and it would have no impact on my findings other than to increase the sample size of these data stamps from fifty-four (54) to sixty-two (62) and expand the inclusive date range of these date stamps from ‘8-45 to 12-53’ to ‘1-45 to 12-53.’

Without the “GUAR EXP” prefix there is no objective reason or justification to read the 1-945 (or 8-45) through 12-53 date stamps at anything other than face value. At face value, finding “8-45” or “11-45” or “7-46” or “2-47” on any tool would lead any experienced tool collector to conclude that it was a date of manufacture. I saw the comments questioning whether these were stamped when the component was made, or when the vise was integrated, or when it was released from production to QA, or to sales, etc. These are all red herrings. The point is that without any other marking, it can only be reasonably read as some form of manufacturing period date, not any other kind of date. Reading these date stamps as guarantee expiration dates (in essence, early versions of the later dates with the GUAR EXP prefix, but without the GUAR EXP prefix) with the rationale that the later GUAR EXP date stamps demonstrate Wilton’s reason/policy for guarantee expiration date stamps on slide keys, is an unsubstantiated theory. It is illogical and unacceptable to assume that these are expiration dates without a GUAR EXP marking (or something to that effect), or without a secondary reference. This theory requires proof, not the other way around. No proof is necessary to read "8-45" as August 1945. Wilton’s policy could have evolved – and judging by the evidence in this database, it apparently did.
 

Private Lugnutz

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Messages
30,574
Location
The Authentic Jersey Shore
FACT: Forty-five (45) of the vises with the early date stamps without a GUAR EXP prefix occur after the earliest known record of a Wilton 1-year guarantee, and before the first established proof (June 1947 Popular Mechanics magazine) that Wilton had a 5-Year Guarantee on its “Precision” (so-called “bullet”) Vises”. They are 1-945 through 4-47.

FACT: Fifteen (15) of the vises with the early date stamps without a GUAR EXP prefix occur after the first established proof (June 1947 Popular Mechanics magazine) that Wilton had a 5-Year Guarantee on its “Precision” or “Bullet” vises and before Wilton started using a GUAR EXP date stamp (6-30-55). They are 9-47 through 12-53 (x2).

CONCLUSION: Without a GUAR EXP prefix or a secondary source of information proving that these dates were a guarantee expiration date, they can only be reasonably read at face value. At face value, the latest they could’ve been applied in the factory by Wilton is at some point during the manufacturing process, prior to their commercial distribution. In the context of the historical references to the Wilton guarantee, it’s reasonable to conclude at this time that the 1-945 to 4-47 vises were guaranteed for a year from those dates, and the 9-47 through 12-53 vises were guaranteed for 5 years from those dates. That conclusion requires no theory. Reading the dates as expiration dates requires theory.

FACT: There are NO vises in the database with an actual date stamp ending in 54 through 58 or 1954 through 1958.

CONCLUSION: The early Wilton manufacturing date, used as a unconditional 1- and then 5-year guarantee period start date at least as early as June 1947 through 1953, had only a month and year format. In 1954 they started stamping the EXPIRATION date of the unconditional 5-year guarantee, including a day in the stamp format. This is why there are no vises with any date stamp – either a date of manufacturing type of date stamp (with no GUAR EXP), e.g., 8-54, or a GUAR EXP type of date stamp, e.g., GUAR EXP 8-30-1954 – in this time frame. The vises made between 1954 and 1958 were stamped with GUAR EXP date stamps five years in advance.
 

Private Lugnutz

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Messages
30,574
Location
The Authentic Jersey Shore
FACT: Per Wilton’s website, the bullet vise was designed and the company was founded in the same year: 1941.
“The legend of Wilton begins in 1941, when Hugh W. Vogl, a Czech immigrant, founded the vise manufacturing company…”
“Throughout all the changes, over 73 years, the original bullet vise designed in 1941 by Hugh Vogl is still the largest selling industrial vise in the marketplace.”

FACT: The Wilton bullet patent (D131,498), applied for on August 1, 1941, and granted on March 3, 1942, was a Design Patent, not a Utility Patent. If someone commented on this already, I did not see it. It is significant. Under 350 US Code 171, it protects only the appearance, shape, and ornamental features of Vogl’s vise, not the construction, function, or use. The patent was less than 100 words and included no internal mechanical drawings. That’s the reason it was granted so quickly! And yes, 7 months is EXTREMELY quick. Utility patents in this same period – and I have studied MANY of them – typically took at least 3 years, some as long as 4 or 5 years.

FACT: Per Wilton’s website, Wilton had no commercial customers until after the war was over.
“From 1941 through 1945, the new Wilton 40S machinist vise was manufactured in Chicago and sold solely to the US Government.”
“Because Wilton vises were only sold to the government, and did not have a distribution network in place, the surplus of vises now flooded the marketplace from the government, and nearly forced Wilton out of business.”

Note: see my post upthread regarding January 1942 reference to commercial plants making equipment for the military and the war. My hunch is Wilton is referring to these as US Government contracts, or the vises may have been sold to the US Government and provided as GFE, as I noted.

FACT: There are no Wilton vises in the bluebolt database with a date stamp earlier than 1-945.

FACT: VE Day is 8 May 1945. VJ Day is 15 August 1945.

CONCLUSIONS:

The design patent indicates to me that Vogl was in a hurry. It’s very unusual that Vogl never applied for a utility patent at the same time, but a primary reason for applying for a design patent was the shorter lag time in getting some degree of protection before or as entering the manufacturing sector.

I would assume he had a working prototype when he applied, probably built in a small shop. I don’t think he would’ve gone into any production, even limited production, and certainly not for any government contracts, which would’ve exposed his product to industry, before applying for the patent, but that’s just conjecture. He may have had a lead on a contract and a lead on some crude limited production facility (on the corner of the street that gave the company on its name), but it certainly would’ve taken some time to get that going. If it started in 1941, I don’t see how it could’ve been early 1941, and there is no proof that it was any earlier than the patent. Incorporation details would be nice, but they are not instrumental to any conclusions above.

Whether one reads the “1-945” date stamp as January 1945, or a range (January to September 1945), the database makes it clear that Wilton was not date stamping vises until very late in the war. Why start date stamping in early 1945, before the end of the war? Perhaps they were already preparing for openly commercial business. In 1945, the Allied Forces were chasing the Nazis across Europe, victory was imminent, and the WPB was slowly relaxing restrictions on material and commercial sales restrictions on chucking equipment, vises, and hand tools. Limitation Order L-216 was fully revoked in May 1945.
 
Last edited:

Outlawmws

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2011
Messages
39,232
Location
The Badlands
NOTE: I saw the annotations to a few 1- and 2-year guarantees for Cadet vises in bluebolt’s database, and I saw comments about these when I reviewed the thread. I don’t know what historical references bluebolt or anyone else is using to identify these GUAR EXP date stamps as 1- or 2-year guarantees, as the case may be, rather than the early (1942) 1-year guarantee or the later 5-year guarantee we have a historical record of. I’m assuming bluebolt or someone else has a different reference (e.g., a later catalog or a later advertisement). I consider this issue a red herring, though. It is irrelevant to the EXP GAUR date stamps on bullet vises and the issue of the earlier date stamps on bullet vises.

There were supporting ads; they may have been in other vise threads however... I also recall seeing an ad for a 3 year warranty for the Cadets.

Agree, not applicable to the Bullets.
 
OP
D

drivesitfar

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
36,017
Location
Pacific Northwest
Lug: there are some catalog pages here of Wilton advertising the Cadet's 1, 2 & 3 year warranty and sorry i don't have them saved, but i'm pretty sure another member does that posted them to maybe post again with all your research.

thanks for taking this project on and we'll still be looking for more information.

ALL: Bluebolt if you have the posts or maybe it's on your Excel sheet of what you were thinking was the process for the date stamping it might be nice to post it again close to this information. or after i get back from a few errands i'll look it up and cut and paste it.

anybody want to post up their date stamps on their Wilton bullets please do since i know that the members of GJ own more than 250 of them.

thanks
 

Private Lugnutz

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Messages
30,574
Location
The Authentic Jersey Shore
That's my reading, FWIW to anyone else. I have no intention of persuading or dissuading anyone else.

Drives,

My Wilton bullet is stamped "2-47" and I am 100% convinced it was made in February 1947, that it probably had at least a 1-year guarantee, and perhaps a 5-year guarantee (advertised a few months later). I am a WWII collector. If I could ignore what I have learned, I'd read the date as a 5-year advanced date based on the later EXP GUAR dates. But I cannot do that with any good reason other than that fact that such a reading would benefit me and my vise.

Thanks again for pointing me in this direction.
 

Outlawmws

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2011
Messages
39,232
Location
The Badlands
Lug, Side note on the DB:

One hope was to get sufficient dates to be able to spot gaps in the time frame.

Such a gap could explain that if they went from a straight "date manufactured" to a Date Exp. system, there should be a 5 year (or whatever was the span) gap at the time of the switch. No gap could support it was always "Date Exp"

While not conclusive, it would be indicative, one way or the other if any gap seemed to exist.

From the DB Excel which I downloaded this AM and removed all non bullet references:
I also used Excel functions to get the gaps between any two dates so no "human" errors... this was all against Col "A" "Date"

Deleted and disregard, see later posts:
 
Last edited:

va.grouseman

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 26, 2011
Messages
4,965
Location
Southern-Central VA.
Originally posted by MasterOMayhem.

Hi I have an Acme Bullet type of vise I restored its date is 6-47
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------




MasterOM, I have two ACME Bullets and both of them are dated 6-47.---Must have been a lot of them produced that year.
 

Attachments

  • 100_2666.jpg
    100_2666.jpg
    147.4 KB · Views: 23
  • 100_2674.jpg
    100_2674.jpg
    143.3 KB · Views: 18
  • 100_2673.jpg
    100_2673.jpg
    143.7 KB · Views: 11
Last edited:

G-ManBart

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
2,059
Location
Michigan
Not that it really matters, but I'm pretty sure BB said the spreadsheet needed to be updated.

I know a number of posts that aren't represented so some of the gaps might get filled eventually.

As an example, I have three different bullets that have 12-30-66 markings...a 2", 3" and 4.5" swivel jaw. The SJ has "Guar Exp" on it as well.
 

Private Lugnutz

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Messages
30,574
Location
The Authentic Jersey Shore
Lug, Side note on the DB:

One hope was to get sufficient dates to be able to spot gaps in the time frame.

Such a gap could explain that if they went from a straight "date manufactured" to a Date Exp. system, there should be a 5 year (or whatever was the span) gap at the time of the switch. No gap could support it was always "Date Exp"

...[ ]...

No 5 year gap exists...
That's not correct. A 5-year gap does exist, precisely where I suspected it would.

You must have missed this:

A few observations.
1. There have still been no Bullet vises found with date stamps from 1954, 1955, 1956, 1957 or 1958.

And this:

FACT: There are NO vises in the database with an actual date stamp ending in 54 through 58 or 1954 through 1958.

CONCLUSION: The early Wilton manufacturing date, used as a unconditional 1- and then 5-year guarantee period start date at least as early as June 1947 through 1953, had only a month and year format. In 1954 they started stamping the EXPIRATION date of the unconditional 5-year guarantee, including a day in the stamp format. This is why there are no vises with any date stamp – either a date of manufacturing type of date stamp (with no GUAR EXP), e.g., 8-54, or a GUAR EXP type of date stamp, e.g., GUAR EXP 8-30-1954 – in this time frame. The vises made between 1954 and 1958 were stamped with GUAR EXP date stamps five years in advance.

EDIT: Make sure you're reading the database schema correctly. Column A (DATE) is arbitrary, not empirical. If there is an actual date stamp on a vise, it is entered into Column B (ACTUAL STAMP). Regardless of the actual date stamp format, it is always entered into Column A in that same row in MM/DD/YYYY format. If the key is blank (no date stamp of any kind), all Chicago vises are entered as 1/1/1941 in Column A, all Schiller Pak vises are entered as 1/1/1957 in Column A. bluebolt did that for Excel functional reasons (i.e., sorting). However, there are a number of vises with blank keys (no date stamp of any kind) that have dates in Column A. I have not asked him to explain those yet, primarily because they were completely inconsequential to my approach, and because I just hit him with a bunch of questions. I ignored all vises without an actual date stamp (removed them all, actually, in my own tab) and they did not affect my conclusions.
 
Last edited:
To avoid these ads, REGISTER NOW!
Top Bottom