McBrownie
Well-known member
I am really enjoying following the outstanding the detective/historical work going on with the thread.
Thanks to all involved.
Thanks to all involved.
Wilton Bullet Vise date stamping. show yours with or without EXP on slide
- Thread starter drivesitfar
- Start date
OP
drivesitfar
Well-known member
McB: we are certainly getting closer to some answers aren't we? nice to see you posting, but i guess raising kids and working to feed them cuts into your GJ time.
LUG & JKB: you two are amazing and if there is more information you can find and have time to post I (we) appreciate it. keep up the great work. VERY WELL DONE!!
LUG & JKB: you two are amazing and if there is more information you can find and have time to post I (we) appreciate it. keep up the great work. VERY WELL DONE!!
PghJKB
Well-known member
Private Lugnutz
Just finished putting in the request to Google. It has taken them anywhere from three days to three weeks to provide a reply - in their defense, the three weeks was for eighteen books.
Will PM the instructions for the "unlock" request.
JKB
Private Lugnutz
Well-known member
Thanks, JKB.
Private Lugnutz
Well-known member
I said I would get back to you guys with Wilton WWII contract information. This is my source.
The War Production Board changed its name to the Civilian Production Administration shortly after the war ended. Note that their definition of "Major" is $50,000 or more in value. Note also these are federal contracts only, between military contract agencies of the federal government, including Army, Army Air Forces, Navy, and Treasury (which supplied to many other through the Federal Standard Stock Catalog), and manufacturers and suppliers.
There is NO listing for Wilton. That does not mean they did not have any wartime contracts. Again, I take them - and the blurb in that 1942 The Tool Engineer, for their word. If they had "War Department" contracts, as the journal blurb implied, they were less than $50,000. My hunch is they had contracts with OEM's.
Here is the page they would be on. (Edit: Contracts are listed in alphabetical order, by company name. If it's hard to read, there is a Wilton Mfg Co in Philly, making those indispensable jerseys and swimming trunks, followed by a Wilton Woolen in Maine making all kinds of cotton and woolen duck, etc, followed by a Wimpfenheimer. No other Wilton.)
The War Production Board changed its name to the Civilian Production Administration shortly after the war ended. Note that their definition of "Major" is $50,000 or more in value. Note also these are federal contracts only, between military contract agencies of the federal government, including Army, Army Air Forces, Navy, and Treasury (which supplied to many other through the Federal Standard Stock Catalog), and manufacturers and suppliers.
There is NO listing for Wilton. That does not mean they did not have any wartime contracts. Again, I take them - and the blurb in that 1942 The Tool Engineer, for their word. If they had "War Department" contracts, as the journal blurb implied, they were less than $50,000. My hunch is they had contracts with OEM's.
Here is the page they would be on. (Edit: Contracts are listed in alphabetical order, by company name. If it's hard to read, there is a Wilton Mfg Co in Philly, making those indispensable jerseys and swimming trunks, followed by a Wilton Woolen in Maine making all kinds of cotton and woolen duck, etc, followed by a Wimpfenheimer. No other Wilton.)
Attachments
Last edited:
Outlawmws
Well-known member
So playing silly numbers games and using the 15950 price list from post: http://www.garagejournal.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6479896&postcount=551
And allowing for inflation which basically makes 1945 dollars 75% of 1950 dollars:
A 4" vise with swivel cost $36 on 1950
So straight line it should be $27
$50K / $27 = 1851 "units" (vices) sold to the Gov. max.
So pretty low numbers especially if they bought many larger vises..
Just playing "what if"... means nothing other than the number sold direct to the Gov was low..
Lug, does that book list by individual contracts, or does it take a company and total all the contracts they might have had?
If the former then the numbers to the gov could be higher... Maybe a bunch of contracts at 1000 or so units each?
And allowing for inflation which basically makes 1945 dollars 75% of 1950 dollars:
A 4" vise with swivel cost $36 on 1950
So straight line it should be $27
$50K / $27 = 1851 "units" (vices) sold to the Gov. max.
So pretty low numbers especially if they bought many larger vises..
Just playing "what if"... means nothing other than the number sold direct to the Gov was low..
Lug, does that book list by individual contracts, or does it take a company and total all the contracts they might have had?
If the former then the numbers to the gov could be higher... Maybe a bunch of contracts at 1000 or so units each?
Private Lugnutz
Well-known member
The books list each and every contract for each company individually.
If you open the partial page I posted, look at the Wilson Corp, New York, NY, on the left hand side just above Wilton Mfg Co in Philly.
Column format left to right is:
Product Contract No. |A| | Value ($K) | Start Month | Start Yr | End Month | End Yr |
That's a major Signal Corps contractor. They had fifteen (15) contracts between 1940 and 1945 for tools, tool equipment tool sets, telephone equipment, etc. All Signal Corps contracts. (See the "SC" in the contract numbers.)
That's representative of most of the major tool mfgrs, supplying mainly to Treasury, Ordnance Dept, Quartermaster Corps, and Navy. And note that the overwhelming majority of tool mfgrs had multiple contracts in these books.
There are guys in our wing of the hobby, when they find out that their favorite tool Mfgr (e.g., Thorsen) is not included in these books, who take the position you're taking. 'Well, they must have had a lot of contracts less than $50,000.' My counter to that is, why didn't the same agency (e.g., US Army Ordnance Dept, QMC, Treasury, etc) use that approach with Williams, Bonney, Herbrand, etc, etc, just to name a few, who all had multiple contracts between 1941 and 1945?
In other words, the acquisition approach that the books demonstrate for many, many major tool mfgrs is several big contracts, not many little ones. So the guys who want to claim that Thorsen, for example, must have had many little ones are making an argument that requires an exception to the pattern. It's a stretch, in my opinion.
As I said upthread, and in my prior post, my hunch is Wilton was making vises for the war production OEM's mentioned in that Tool Engineer blurb (IH, Buick, and others). They may have had some small contracts, too.
EDIT: I didn't have anyone in mind with Thorsen, and I'm not picking on Thorsen. It was just an example of one of a small handful of notable mfgrs missing from the books.
If you open the partial page I posted, look at the Wilson Corp, New York, NY, on the left hand side just above Wilton Mfg Co in Philly.
Column format left to right is:
Product Contract No. |A| | Value ($K) | Start Month | Start Yr | End Month | End Yr |
That's a major Signal Corps contractor. They had fifteen (15) contracts between 1940 and 1945 for tools, tool equipment tool sets, telephone equipment, etc. All Signal Corps contracts. (See the "SC" in the contract numbers.)
That's representative of most of the major tool mfgrs, supplying mainly to Treasury, Ordnance Dept, Quartermaster Corps, and Navy. And note that the overwhelming majority of tool mfgrs had multiple contracts in these books.
There are guys in our wing of the hobby, when they find out that their favorite tool Mfgr (e.g., Thorsen) is not included in these books, who take the position you're taking. 'Well, they must have had a lot of contracts less than $50,000.' My counter to that is, why didn't the same agency (e.g., US Army Ordnance Dept, QMC, Treasury, etc) use that approach with Williams, Bonney, Herbrand, etc, etc, just to name a few, who all had multiple contracts between 1941 and 1945?
In other words, the acquisition approach that the books demonstrate for many, many major tool mfgrs is several big contracts, not many little ones. So the guys who want to claim that Thorsen, for example, must have had many little ones are making an argument that requires an exception to the pattern. It's a stretch, in my opinion.
As I said upthread, and in my prior post, my hunch is Wilton was making vises for the war production OEM's mentioned in that Tool Engineer blurb (IH, Buick, and others). They may have had some small contracts, too.
EDIT: I didn't have anyone in mind with Thorsen, and I'm not picking on Thorsen. It was just an example of one of a small handful of notable mfgrs missing from the books.
Last edited:
Private Lugnutz
Well-known member
BTW, some of us who moved from jeep kits to GMTKs are now moving into even higher echelon and specialist (e.g., machinist) tool-sets. And that's where the vises were. So I already plan to look up the vise mfgrs we have identified in manuals by name or illustration. Namely, Columbian, Morgan, Desmond Stephan, Stanley, and Palmgren. Where would I find here on GJ a concise list (i.e., without having to page through hundreds of pages of a thread) of ALL major 40's era American vise mfgrs? EDIT: Disregard. I found it on Drives' 101 thread.
EDIT 2: Those searches may provide more insight on the Wilton situation, too. Vises may not have been a tool that was bought in enough volume. We'll see.
EDIT 2: Those searches may provide more insight on the Wilton situation, too. Vises may not have been a tool that was bought in enough volume. We'll see.
Last edited:
My Wilton Cadet - given to me by a guy cleaning out his garage after I asked him if a Chinese made "Record" knockoff was for sale - his reply "no , I don't want to sell my bench vise but I have anther old vise buried in here that you can have"
Attachments
OP
drivesitfar
Well-known member
Lug: thanks for keeping on the trail trying to solve Wilton's story (or MYSTERY) about their vises and vise date stamping methods. TWERTSY just mentioned that he has been searching up all vise patents and he has even more vise companies on a list on his tool website so you might want to PM or email him or go on his website if you need more. thanks again for doing all this work and a very interesting story to say the least.
JO: first off WELCOME TO GJ. good job restoring the Wilton Cadet and nice story. are those small holes on the jaws a prior owner's work or do they look factory made?
JO: first off WELCOME TO GJ. good job restoring the Wilton Cadet and nice story. are those small holes on the jaws a prior owner's work or do they look factory made?
Private Lugnutz
Well-known member
Between bluebolt's database and the recent research, I'm confident we now have a few things solved definitively:
(1) Wilton was established as a company and started making vises in 1941.
(2) Their first-ever guarantee was one year, offered as early as February 1942.
(3) They didn't start stamping a date on a vise until January 1945 and that was a manufacturing date, not a guarantee expiration date.
What I'm doing now is more selfish to my niche. I am trying to resolve the discrepancy between this phrase on Wilton's website...
"...sold solely to the US Government."
...this phrase in the February 1942 Tool Engineer trade journal blurb...
"used by various defense plants, such as International Harvester, Buick Aviation, Atlas Powder Corp., War Department and others..."
...and the CPA Major War Supply Contracts records, which show zero (0) Wilton contracts.
I don't want to muck up your thread with a lot of info about other vise mfgrs, so I'll just say in summation that Columbian, Desmond Stephan, Morgan, Reed, Parker, and Prentiss are all in the CPA Major War Supply Contracts records, with several contracts each, worth a total value of well over $250,000, each.
I'm not calling Hugh Vogl a liar. I'd just like to figure out which agency in the "US Government" was buying his vises (as opposed to the US Army Ordnance Dept, US Army Quartermaster Corps, and Navy, which were buying vises from the others cited above) for the "defense plants" listed in his ad.
EDIT: Let me know if you consider this extraneous to your thread. I have no problem keeping it to myself.
Last edited:
Outlawmws
Well-known member
I don't think any of that info is extraneous to the thread at all.
And I wasn't trying to take position, I was asking for clarity. Thanks for the explanation.
And I wasn't trying to take position, I was asking for clarity. Thanks for the explanation.
Last edited:
OP
drivesitfar
Well-known member
LUG: i appreciate all you've done and are continuing to do and i think if you want to add history of the other companies if you think it ties in all the better for those of us that like all these vises.
you didn't mention Rock Island and i thought they might have had a contract with Uncle Sam too for WWII. or maybe that is why Rock Island was slowly making fewer vises and going out of business several years later.
keep up the great work and i wouldn't consider your posts mucking up the thread. also you bringing up other companies or other stories might spark another member's or lurker's memory so they can add a piece of information they know first hand or that they've found or saved on their laptops.
thanks
you didn't mention Rock Island and i thought they might have had a contract with Uncle Sam too for WWII. or maybe that is why Rock Island was slowly making fewer vises and going out of business several years later.
keep up the great work and i wouldn't consider your posts mucking up the thread. also you bringing up other companies or other stories might spark another member's or lurker's memory so they can add a piece of information they know first hand or that they've found or saved on their laptops.
thanks
Private Lugnutz
Well-known member
You're welcome, and my apologies, Outlaw. I have a hair trigger on that subject from some guys in my hood who are often too busy looking for excuses rather than other proof.
Private Lugnutz
Well-known member
Okay, I'm not going to post an image excerpt for all these - hopefully the photo of the books and the Wilton excerpt I posted will suffice for substantiation. Here's a summary of what I found.
Columbian Vise Mfg Co, Cleveland, OH, had four (4) contracts with ORD and Navy from 1942 to 1945 for a total of $358K.
Desmond Stephan Mfg Co, Urbana, OH, had four (4) contracts with QMC and Navy from 1943 to 1945 for a total of $297K.
Morgan Vise Co, Chicago, ILL, had one (1) contract with ORD and Morgan Vise Co, Bradley, ILL, had one (1) contract with Navy from 1942 to 1943 for a total of $483K.
Parker, Charles, Co, Meriden, CONN, had umpteen contracts with US Army Corps of Eng, 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 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.
Most of the contracts were for "VISES," some were more explicit (e.g., "MACHINISTS VISES", "MACHINSTS BENCH VISES," etc)
The following had no contracts listed:
Athol
Hollands
Littlestown
Palmgren
Rock Island
Wilton
Columbian Vise Mfg Co, Cleveland, OH, had four (4) contracts with ORD and Navy from 1942 to 1945 for a total of $358K.
Desmond Stephan Mfg Co, Urbana, OH, had four (4) contracts with QMC and Navy from 1943 to 1945 for a total of $297K.
Morgan Vise Co, Chicago, ILL, had one (1) contract with ORD and Morgan Vise Co, Bradley, ILL, had one (1) contract with Navy from 1942 to 1943 for a total of $483K.
Parker, Charles, Co, Meriden, CONN, had umpteen contracts with US Army Corps of Eng, 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 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.
Most of the contracts were for "VISES," some were more explicit (e.g., "MACHINISTS VISES", "MACHINSTS BENCH VISES," etc)
The following had no contracts listed:
Athol
Hollands
Littlestown
Palmgren
Rock Island
Wilton
Dakare36
Member
Any info on this 2" Wilton bullet would be very much appreciated! Thanks!
va.grouseman
Well-known member
Dakare, It's a real find.---Don't see many of them.---They bring crazy money on EBay.---If it's not yours, you need to make it yours.---I have one and Zoomie has a couple and a few of the other guys have one but there's not many of them.---Great find.---And that one looks pristine to.---If it's yours, you did very good.---Very good first post.
OP
drivesitfar
Well-known member
Dak: first off WELCOME TO THE FORUM!!
did you do the restore on your made in 1946 Chicago baby bullet? i think VA meant to say that he only knows of a few of the clamp on attachments for baby bullets that you have cause the BABY BULLET vises are not that rare.
nice find and what are your plans for using it cause I use mine with a power arm and with an equally rare clamp that is sort of a quick adjust for the power arm. here's a picture of my clamp.
nice find and good restoration if you or the person that did it.
did you do the restore on your made in 1946 Chicago baby bullet? i think VA meant to say that he only knows of a few of the clamp on attachments for baby bullets that you have cause the BABY BULLET vises are not that rare.
nice find and what are your plans for using it cause I use mine with a power arm and with an equally rare clamp that is sort of a quick adjust for the power arm. here's a picture of my clamp.
nice find and good restoration if you or the person that did it.
Attachments
Dakare36
Member
Dakare, It's a real find.---Don't see many of them.---They bring crazy money on EBay.---If it's not yours, you need to make it yours.---I have one and Zoomie has a couple and a few of the other guys have one but there's not many of them.---Great find.---And that one looks pristine to.---If it's yours, you did very good.---Very good first post.
Thank you for the information.
Yes it is mine, I picked it up at a flea market a few months ago for $80. I did a quick paint job on it but that's it. Do you think it is worth completely restoring it? I was considering tig welding all the low spots/dents and re machining the back flat surface. I'm not sure if this would hurt or help the value.
OP
drivesitfar
Well-known member
DAK: if you are able to do all that restoration yourself that sounds great. also shining up the steel to a mirror finish is popular if you want more resale value. check Ebay for pricing, but you've got a lot of wiggle room at that price. or if you live close to me i'll trade you for something quite a bit bigger cause i could use another Baby for another bench.
check out the VISE REPAIR 101 thread to see some of the ways to spiff up your vise or the main vise thread in the general tools section.
cheers
check out the VISE REPAIR 101 thread to see some of the ways to spiff up your vise or the main vise thread in the general tools section.
cheers
Dakare36
Member
I have a welding/fabrication/machine shop, I also have a lot of auto body experience so restoration wouldn't be an issue.
But unfortunately I have my eye on a new fixture table which is quite pricey and I don't really have the time to do a complete resto on this little guy, so it will be going on eBay the way it sits. Wish I could keep it, but a 2" vise doesn't make me any money sitting in the shop.
Thank you very much for the info, I was confused when it just had the year stamped and not the month, all others I have seen have both.
OP
drivesitfar
Well-known member
DAK: it wouldn't be the first time a vise was stamped incorrectly or one that had a number or all the numbers worn off.
what is your location and if you put it in your GJ profile it can help if you need more help on some specific questions. also if i was close to you I might consider buying your baby bullet or trading you for a bigger vise you can make money with if shipping wasn't involved.
VA just asked me if the base on your baby bullet has a hole in it so did you take any pictures of it while it was apart and can you post them of the top of the clamp and the bottom of your baby bullet so we can see if maybe Wilton did something special for this style of vise?
cheers and good luck
what is your location and if you put it in your GJ profile it can help if you need more help on some specific questions. also if i was close to you I might consider buying your baby bullet or trading you for a bigger vise you can make money with if shipping wasn't involved.
VA just asked me if the base on your baby bullet has a hole in it so did you take any pictures of it while it was apart and can you post them of the top of the clamp and the bottom of your baby bullet so we can see if maybe Wilton did something special for this style of vise?
cheers and good luck
va.grouseman
Well-known member
Here's the subject that me and Drive were discussing earlier.---Any input from any other member is appreciated and incouraged.
It appears that on mine at least the #820 Baby Bullet was custom fitted to the table clamp.---I'll post the pics and you fellows can draw your own conclusions.
First some pics of them fully assembled, then dismantled.
It appears that on mine at least the #820 Baby Bullet was custom fitted to the table clamp.---I'll post the pics and you fellows can draw your own conclusions.
First some pics of them fully assembled, then dismantled.
Attachments
Last edited:
va.grouseman
Well-known member
va.grouseman
Well-known member
A few more pics for close comparison.---Don't let the 5th pic confuse you.---I just set the lock-down bar on top of the base, but it actually goes down inside of the base and as you can see the body has an offset/step-down, that goes down to meet the bar.
Attachments
Last edited:
va.grouseman
Well-known member
Outlawmws
Well-known member
OP
drivesitfar
Well-known member
OUTLAW & ALL: i haven't been keeping up on all the variations of the castings such as PAT. PEND, CHICAGO, SCHILLER PARK and their variations like with a 14 zip code on the Chicago ones and wondering if any of you are. i know there have been Wilton baby bullets date stamped into the 1980's with Chicago on their sides so Wilton must have made more than a few at that factory before moving to Schiller Park in 1950's.
care to list all the different versions maybe with some pictures? also were there any SCHILLER PARK baby bullets made or were they all made in Chicago and sold years later? does Wilton make a baby bullet now and i'm guessing not, but i haven't checked their catalog or looked for a new vise for more than a while now?
VA: great posts and i hope they maybe solve some more mysteries or details about these old Wilton vises. thanks
DAK: if you would like to post pictures of your clamp on Wilton baby bullet if you have time that would be great.
care to list all the different versions maybe with some pictures? also were there any SCHILLER PARK baby bullets made or were they all made in Chicago and sold years later? does Wilton make a baby bullet now and i'm guessing not, but i haven't checked their catalog or looked for a new vise for more than a while now?
VA: great posts and i hope they maybe solve some more mysteries or details about these old Wilton vises. thanks
DAK: if you would like to post pictures of your clamp on Wilton baby bullet if you have time that would be great.
Outlawmws
Well-known member
Drives look at BB's DB for a reasonable listing of different markings.
KMScott
Well-known member
Wilton did not make to many 820's with the shoulder machined in the static, at least what I have seen, way to much work. Interesting to see these different options. the clamp on seems to follow the way most bases were made. I was asked to build several for a customer and decided to build mine a different way. Like the old saying more then one way to skin a cat. The clamp-on is limited to how much it swivels because of it being a two piece.
Attachments
va.grouseman
Well-known member
Awsome Awesome work KM.---More detailed than cast and far more durable.---My hat is off of my balding head to you sir.
Dakare36
Member
Drive I am in California near San Jose, I would be interested in trading with you but we might be pretty far away. Here are some pictures of the clamp and the bottom of the vise.
Outlawmws
Well-known member
Interesting; Dakare's 46 used the 360 deg. swivel, like the bench mount and VA's 62 didn't...
va.grouseman
Well-known member
How about that Outlaw.---Two different base designs.---And to, it looks like Wilton welded or cast over the center hole in each vises bottom.---What do you recon that was for?
So it looks like Dakare36's base would have fit on my early model 820 after all.---Wonder when they changed the design?
I believe I see Dakare's vise is on EBay now.
So it looks like Dakare36's base would have fit on my early model 820 after all.---Wonder when they changed the design?
I believe I see Dakare's vise is on EBay now.
KMScott
Well-known member
So it looks like Dakare36's base would have fit on my early model 820 after all.---Wonder when they changed the design?
Look at that design, might not be the same diameter as yours VA but again Wilton could not design a swivel base and stick to it. Dakares looks like one of the early ones. VA, this one would make a pair for ya.
Dakare36
Member
How about that Outlaw.---Two different base designs.---And to, it looks like Wilton welded or cast over the center hole in each vises bottom.---What do you recon that was for?
So it looks like Dakare36's base would have fit on my early model 820 after all.---Wonder when they changed the design?
I believe I see Dakare's vise is on EBay now.
Yep, you should be able to recognize the pictures, I put it on with what I thought was a high reserve, but now I'm thinking it should have been higher. I'm starting to hope it doesn't sell. Now I'm wanting to completely restore it and hang on to it for a while. I doubt I'll ever come across another one.
Do any of you guys actually use your baby wiltons? If so what for?
va.grouseman
Well-known member
Yea KM, I like things in pairs, if I don't have to take out a mortgage to get it.---Dakare's might push me into mortgage territory.
OP
drivesitfar
Well-known member
DAK: i use my baby bullet for a lot of the small things i work on, but i have a power arm so i can get the part/piece into almost any position i want to get it in. a lot of gunsmiths and jewelers use the Baby bullets and that is why they are so popular. plus the fact it is Wilton Bullet quality in a small package which might be the best design Wilton made and not sure why they quit making them unless abusers were returning them for free ones under warranty.
good luck in your auction and i might have met you if you weren't a 12 hour drive away.
if it sells keep your eyes open for another baby bullet with a power arm or use a friend's and see how you like it and report back.
good luck in your auction and i might have met you if you weren't a 12 hour drive away.
if it sells keep your eyes open for another baby bullet with a power arm or use a friend's and see how you like it and report back.
I think carefully smoothing out dents/dings is okay, but welding and machining will do nothing but hurt the value if you disclose it to the buyer. As it sits a number of us would quickly pay hundreds of dollars for it without a second thought.
