The VISES of Garage Journal

[wrenchguy]

All you can really establish with a patent date is that the object wasn't made before that date.

In this case, though, since they claim there are some patents pending, you could search and see if you can find whether any patents related to the stand were granted at a later date. If they were, that would give you a theoretical date range. It could be a complicated search, because you don't know what those patents are specifically for. I'd start by looking through all the patents granted to Western and see if anything related to the vise stand was patented after 1904. The patents may not have been directly granted to Western, though... the inventor may have assigned their patent for Western to manufacture.

Since Western made their own line of vises, I'm not sure the Parker would be original, but it could have been added when the stand was new.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

I'm not knowledgeable enough to search patent stuff.

The model No.130 was offered without vise according to ad above. As you may know the shelf and thick yoke were drilled and tapped for the bolts used to fasten a particular vise. There aren't any nuts between the yoke uprights.
There was recent discussion here about unmarked Western vises. Googfu found me a youtube 1 with a great looking Western vise markings.
Do you still have yours? I remember it being posted here and PM. Was yours the larger tool tray model. Maybe I can help with repo parts. PM me if interested.

 

[Andy FitzGibbon]

I'm not knowledgeable enough to search patent stuff.

The model No.130 was offered without vise according to ad above. As you may know the shelf and thick yoke were drilled and tapped for the bolts used to fasten a particular vise. There aren't any nuts between the yoke uprights.
There was recent discussion here about unmarked Western vises. Googfu found me a youtube 1 with great Western vise markings.
Do you still have yours? I remember it being posted here and PM. Was yours the larger tool tray model. Maybe I can help with repo parts. PM me if interested.

Here is the May 1904 patent. As you can see, it was invented by someone named Elton Remsberg, and then assigned to the Western Mfg. Co.

https://patents.google.com/patent/US758779A/en

I had a quick look through other patents assigned to them, but nothing stuck out as being vise or stand related... mostly tool holders for lathes.

I never measured my stand to see which model it was. A buddy has it now. The Prentiss vise that was on it was attached with bolts and nuts. I don't think it was original to the stand, though it may have been added early in its life. I suspect if you ordered a stand without a Western vise mounted on it, you were probably expected to drill your own holes to mount your own vise.



Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[d42jeep]

Although collecting vises isn’t my thing, I’ve run across a few lately. These two I hung onto as users. Can anybody provide any information on either of them?
-Don

 

[1982fxr]

A Patent question for Patent knowledgeable guys.
Can a date range/era of manufacture be determined when a piece is marked like this ?
Reason I ask is I believe the 4x is original to the stand and think it's 1910's vintage.
Trying to get the stand&vise into the 100 year old club.
Its markings.

I think the rule of thumb is typically it was made within 20 years AFTER the patent date, since they are good for 20 years.

Maybe there were instances of items keeping the patent date after they needed it but I dont know why since it's always been a public system.

 

[Outlawmws]

Don - Look for an "MF" on the knob of the main screw of the clamp on. Millers falls made a lot of those.

 

[RTM]

Try these. The shape looks right, and the color had me thinking MF as well. Couple of later catalogs have these, but i don’t think they go much earlier

https://archive.org/details/MillersFallsCatalogNo49/page/n83/mode/1up

The 1938 catalog has one, and it’s an arched dynamic vs the vertical you have.

 

[d42jeep]

Don - Look for an "MF" on the knob of the main screw of the clamp on. Millers falls made a lot of those.

Try these. The shape looks right, and the color had me thinking MF as well. Couple of later catalogs have these, but if it think they go much earlier

https://archive.org/details/MillersFallsCatalogNo49/page/n83/mode/1up

The 1938 catalog has one, and it’s an arched dynamic vs the vertical you have.

Thanks, guys!
-Don

 

[Andy FitzGibbon]

I think the rule of thumb is typically it was made within 20 years AFTER the patent date, since they are good for 20 years.



Maybe there were instances of items keeping the patent date after they needed it but I dont know why since it's always been a public system.

I've seen several instances of it, especially on castings. I've always figured there's no good reason to bother modifying foundry patterns just to remove the patent date, since it's not a requirement to do so after the patent expires.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[wrenchguy]

The 1904 info you provided last night doesn't indicate brake/bearing to floor mechanism. Just the cart.
Maybe "Other Patents Pending" could be for the handle engaging brake setup?
Thanks.

 

[tool_scrounge]

I've seen several instances of it, especially on castings. I've always figured there's no good reason to bother modifying foundry patterns just to remove the patent date, since it's not a requirement to do so after the patent expires.

Google "False patent marking litigation". At least these days it is a bad idea not to removed expired patent numbers from products.

 

[akasrick]

Although collecting vises isn’t my thing, I’ve run across a few lately. These two I hung onto as users. Can anybody provide any information on either of them?
-Don

A while back there was a discussion about vises with "V" numbers.

https://www.garagejournal.com/forum/showthread.php?p=6526412#post6526412

akasrick

 

[Outlawmws]

Google "False patent marking litigation". At least these days it is a bad idea not to removed expired patent numbers from products.

False Patent Marking
Marking a product with a patent that does not cover the product can create liability for the patent owner for false marking.4 Other examples of false marking include marking a product with a patent number without consent of the patent owner, using a patent number on an unpatented product, or marking a product with the phrase “Patent Pending” when there is no patent pending. Therefore, ensure the marking—whether on the product, packaging, labeling, or website—is accurate and the patents cover those products. Marking a product with an expired patent is no longer considered false marking under current patent laws, however, about 10 years ago, a wave of qui tam lawsuits were filed against manufacturers for allegedly falsely marking their products with expired patents. Qui tam suits (sometimes referred to as whistleblower suits) permit a citizen to file a lawsuit on behalf of the U.S. government with any monetary damages awarded split between the citizen bringing the lawsuit and the U.S. government. In a well-publicized lawsuit, Solo Cup (the manufacturer of the iconic red plastic party cup) was sued for falsely marking 21 billion cup lids with expired patents.5 The citizen asserted each falsely marked lid was an offense of false marking and since statutory damages were based on each offense, the citizen who filed the lawsuit argued for damages in excess of $10 trillion (the entire U.S. economy in 2020 is estimated to be about $22 trillion). The courts eventually found no violation of patent marking laws and Solo Cup avoided being penalized. Fortunately, this abuse of the patent marking laws was curbed as Congress revised the law in 2011 to omit expired patents as an example of false marking. False marking lawsuits can no longer be filed by ordinary citizens and only the government is permitted to pursue these suits. False marking suits have significantly dropped since then.

 

[RTM]

Good to know. I’d always assumed that if the patent date was on there, it was made less than 20 years or so from that date. I Guess for tools we care about, that’s probably still true. Thanks for the look up.

 

[d42jeep]

A while back there was a discussion about vises with "V" numbers.

https://www.garagejournal.com/forum/showthread.php?p=6526412#post6526412

akasrick

Thanks. I think you’ve nailed it. Milwaukee it is. I like the Wards connection.
-Don

 

[akasrick]

Thanks. I think you’ve nailed it. Milwaukee it is. I like the Wards connection.
-Don

Thx
Do the jaw inserts take a magnet?
Some of the more informed members could date with that info.

akasrick

 

[ncgun99]

C2 complete. It was actually in pretty good shape. Someone took a grinder to the back of it though messing up the name on the Schiller Park casting. Guessing they were trying to figure out how to get the pins out.



Sent from my iPhone using Garage Journal

 

[ed4banger]

C2 complete. It was actually in pretty good shape. Someone took a grinder to the back of it though messing up the name on the Schiller Park casting. Guessing they were trying to figure out how to get the pins out.

Its not that difficult to shape new letters from JB Weld and a dremel, I've done it on a couple occasions.

 

[d42jeep]

Thx
Do the jaw inserts take a magnet?
Some of the more informed members could date with that info.

akasrick

The magnet sticks to the jaw inserts. Thanks again for the info.
-Don

 

[Andy FitzGibbon]

Google "False patent marking litigation". At least these days it is a bad idea not to removed expired patent numbers from products.

Probably is a greater danger now vs. 100 years ago.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[Andy FitzGibbon]

The 1904 info you provided last night doesn't indicate brake/bearing to floor mechanism. Just the cart.

Maybe "Other Patents Pending" could be for the handle engaging brake setup?

Thanks.

Could be. All the other patents that came up as being assigned to Western did not relate to anything on the vise stand. It's possible that their name wasn't on any further related patents, or possibly the patents were never granted.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[d42jeep]

I normally pretty much ignore vises at estate sales but Shiftless has me watching a little more carefully. I spotted this vise bolted to a workbench and thought that it was kind of cool looking so I inquired about the price. It was so low I thought that he was kidding so he and I unbolted it. I noticed some V marks on the castings that I just learned about on this thread so I assume that it’s another Milwaukee. The jaws are a little under 5” wide.
-Don

 

[propmaker]

I normally pretty much ignore vises at estate sales but Shiftless has me watching a little more carefully. I spotted this vise bolted to a workbench and thought that it was kind of cool looking so I inquired about the price. It was so low I thought that he was kidding so he and I unbolted it. I noticed some V marks on the castings that I just learned about on this thread so I assume that it’s another Milwaukee. The jaws are a little under 5” wide.
-Don

That Vise has a great look to it! Nice find

 

[Smitty]

C2 complete. It was actually in pretty good shape. Someone took a grinder to the back of it though messing up the name on the Schiller Park casting. Guessing they were trying to figure out how to get the pins out.



Sent from my iPhone using Garage Journal

You did a beautiful job restoring that C2, it looks great. The missing letters could be the work of an overzealous worker at the factory. I have a couple with the same problem.

 

[Smitty]

You did a beautiful job restoring that C2, it looks great. The missing letters could be the work of an overzealous worker at the factory. I have a couple with the same problem.

Sent from my iPad using The Garage Journal mobile app

 

[Shiftless]

Very interesting...how could things like that get past quality control?

Did Wilton have a factory seconds outlet?

 

[jimmyin3D]

Looking into a new bench vise and saw some Morgan Milwaukee Vises model 87 and 88. I was wondering if they had a connection to Chas Parker Vises. They look extremely similar minus the jaw area.

Does anyone have the Morgan combination vises like the 87 or 88? How is it? I’m trying to decide between the Morgan 87 or an Athol 624N and wondering which would better fit my needs. I use my current vise for automotive work, general use, and sometimes wood. My vise now wobbles when the swivel is held down and decided to get rid of it.

Price wise they are about the same, the Morgan’s have a taller jaw area with pipe jaws but I wouldn’t use it for pipes. The Morgan’s also are beefier around the jaw area. The Athol is a tried and true design.

Help me decide!

 

[CRSINMICH]

d42jeep: You have a Milwaukee Tools vise. Here's a shot of where a decal with that information used to be. The vise itself can be spiffed up but it's fairly light duty.

 

[d42jeep]

d42jeep: You have a Milwaukee Tools vise. Here's a shot of where a decal with that information used to be. The vise itself can be spiffed up but it's fairly light duty.

Thanks for the info. Yours looks great.
-Don

 

[ncgun99]

Sent from my iPad using The Garage Journal mobile app

Smitty, thanks. That is interesting. Pretty neat to see the exact same flaw on another C2.
Wasn’t sure about the brown but I like the way it turned out.

 

[kwhunter]

Very interesting...how could things like that get past quality control?

Did Wilton have a factory seconds outlet?

The vise is a work implement not a luxury item; having a letter or two ground off does not make is unusable or unsellable.

 

[txlonghorn1989]

Looking into a new bench vise and saw some Morgan Milwaukee Vises model 87 and 88. I was wondering if they had a connection to Chas Parker Vises. They look extremely similar minus the jaw area.
...

Price wise they are about the same, the Morgan’s have a taller jaw area with pipe jaws but I wouldn’t use it for pipes. The Morgan’s also are beefier around the jaw area. The Athol is a tried and true design.

Help me decide!

I'd be all in on the Athol.

 

[txlonghorn1989]

I normally pretty much ignore vises at estate sales but Shiftless has me watching a little more carefully. I spotted this vise bolted to a workbench and thought that it was kind of cool looking so I inquired about the price. It was so low I thought that he was kidding so he and I unbolted it. I noticed some V marks on the castings that I just learned about on this thread so I assume that it’s another Milwaukee. The jaws are a little under 5” wide.
-Don

Nice find Don. Be careful you're on another slippery slope!

 

[ChefRex]

Looking into a new bench vise and saw some Morgan Milwaukee Vises model 87 and 88. I was wondering if they had a connection to Chas Parker Vises. They look extremely similar minus the jaw area.

Does anyone have the Morgan combination vises like the 87 or 88? How is it? I’m trying to decide between the Morgan 87 or an Athol 624N and wondering which would better fit my needs. I use my current vise for automotive work, general use, and sometimes wood. My vise now wobbles when the swivel is held down and decided to get rid of it.

Price wise they are about the same, the Morgan’s have a taller jaw area with pipe jaws but I wouldn’t use it for pipes. The Morgan’s also are beefier around the jaw area. The Athol is a tried and true design.

Help me decide!

Why not both? What's your current vise?

 

[ed4banger]

Looking into a new bench vise and saw some Morgan Milwaukee Vises model 87 and 88. I was wondering if they had a connection to Chas Parker Vises. They look extremely similar minus the jaw area.

Does anyone have the Morgan combination vises like the 87 or 88? How is it? I’m trying to decide between the Morgan 87 or an Athol 624N and wondering which would better fit my needs. I use my current vise for automotive work, general use, and sometimes wood. My vise now wobbles when the swivel is held down and decided to get rid of it.

Price wise they are about the same, the Morgan’s have a taller jaw area with pipe jaws but I wouldn’t use it for pipes. The Morgan’s also are beefier around the jaw area. The Athol is a tried and true design.

Help me decide!

I have an 87, but its just a shelf queen. Morgans are a pretty well made vise, no relation to Parkers as far as I know.

 

[Outlawmws]

Looking into a new bench vise and saw some Morgan Milwaukee Vises model 87 and 88. I was wondering if they had a connection to Chas Parker Vises. They look extremely similar minus the jaw area.

Does anyone have the Morgan combination vises like the 87 or 88? How is it? I’m trying to decide between the Morgan 87 or an Athol 624N and wondering which would better fit my needs. I use my current vise for automotive work, general use, and sometimes wood. My vise now wobbles when the swivel is held down and decided to get rid of it.

Price wise they are about the same, the Morgan’s have a taller jaw area with pipe jaws but I wouldn’t use it for pipes. The Morgan’s also are beefier around the jaw area. The Athol is a tried and true design.

Help me decide!

I have an 87 and an 88. 87 is 46 lbs, the 88 is 65. Both are good solid vises. Athol makes some of the best vises out there however? I also vote both. different vises for different uses.

 

[rusty65]

My vote is for the athol that Morgan looks beat handle bent like a pretzel. And possibly missing pieces. I don’t see a lock down for the swivel on the Morgan.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Old Radar]

I scored this Wilton 835 with swivel base early this month and posted it on the Garage Sale Thread. I did a thorough cleaning and removed the grime, rust and two layers of paint to get down to the metal. I took the advice of several members on this thread and used Sculpt Nouveau’s Black Metal Oil for the finish—I really like the way it turned out. The only real issue with the vise is it has a non-Wilton swivel lock, so if anyone has a spare, please contact me! The screw handle was also a bit bent when I got it but I was able to get it mostly back toward straight. The date stamp is inconclusive. I think it's a 6-69, but it could easily be a 6-68.

Before:





After shots in next post.

 

[Old Radar]

After shots:





Notice here that in addition to the cast-in 'M' in the dynamic jaw, there is a small 'N' cast in at the bottom of the static jaw where some vise styles have a jaw support.

 

[jimmyin3D]

I'd be all in on the Athol.

I know I love the look and style of the Athol!

Why not both? What's your current vise?

I have a 6” craftsman that wobbles when the swivel base is turned down. It’s extremely frustrating to use haha. I don’t have space for both, I have space for a “larger vise” where my current vise is on top of a solid metal cabinet. I plan to get a smaller stationary vise for my work bench like a paramo/record no. 1,2,3 or similar.

I have an 87, but its just a shelf queen. Morgans are a pretty well made vise, no relation to Parkers as far as I know.

Okay, I saw some pictures so I thought they used the same molds or something. The Morgan Milwaukee vises are all 1970 and newer correct?

I have an 87 and an 88. 87 is 46 lbs, the 88 is 65. Both are good solid vises. Athol makes some of the best vises out there however? I also vote both. different vises for different uses.

Yeah I don’t have space for two of these “larger” vises. 1 style like this and a smaller stationary one for my work bench.

My vote is for the athol that Morgan looks beat handle bent like a pretzel. And possibly missing pieces. I don’t see a lock down for the swivel on the Morgan.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

True this 88 is more beat up and is missing both turn down handles. Here is the 87 that I was also looking at. Around the same price and has all the parts. It just needs to get cleaned up.

And thank you all for the replies and information!

 

[67vetteguy]

I still have this restoration urge. I know it is only a drill press vise but it is a 5 inch REED that was rusty and in the scrap steel pile. This was a quick and enjoyable restoration that took about 4 hours total. Thanks for looking.