Post up your vintage Champion deArment/Channellock tools

[d42jeep]

Whenever I see a hammer with a red head I check the brand since several of my Channellock hammers have red heads. I spotted this one at a Tahoe estate sale on Saturday. It turned out to have the early Champion DeArment logo with the anvil. Others have been posted upthread. The friction tape covered a small crack in the original handle. I’m planning on glueing it since the handle is otherwise decent and tight.
-Don

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Congrats, Don. I believe that's your first anvil logo, right?

 

[d42jeep]

Congrats, Don. I believe that's your first anvil logo, right?

Thanks, Lugz. I actually had one quite a while back on a Stillson pipe wrench but it wasn’t all that clearly stamped. The anvil actually appears in two places on the Stillson.
-Don

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Okay, your first on a hammer, then! I was tracking RTM, me, and Royce, all on hammers.

I see what you mean about it not being clear, but I think old stamped and forged-in "raised lettering" logos that have been worn down from use over time add appeal to the overall effect when you know what it is despite the smooshedness, and that one is a good example. You get to point to it and say, "That says DeArment" right there.

 

[d42jeep]

I finished the restoration of my anvil logo ball pein hammer. After sanding, it received two coats of water based polyurethane followed by a couple rubdowns with fine steel wool. It’s ready to go back to work.
-Don

 

[CHRIII]

By mistake I posted these Channellock No. 537 slip joint pliers to the "More than just adjustable wrenches, post up your vintage Crescent tools" thread.

I don't remember if they were my Dad's or if I picked them up somewhere. They are in my garage tool bag.

I have no idea of how old they are.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Snagged a No. 410 (Heavy Duty General Utility) this morning. It's a little fugly. I'm going to have to clean it up more aggressively, and then re-arrange my Lugzsonian display. I currently have a No. 420 hanging over the 1942 catalog cover, where the No. 410 belongs. And while I am at it, find a place for a ball-pein hammer, too.

 

[d42jeep]

Here are comparison shots of the 1933 patent version and the 1953 patent version of the 410s.
-Don

 

[d42jeep]

I found a pair of Channellock slip joint pliers yesterday. They came out of the evaporust this morning, looking much better.
-Don

 

[d42jeep]

I added my new handle pattern pliers to the rest of the tools with handle patterns. I also went through the 1953 patent 420s that have been building up and selected some to go on eBay.

 

[Lesserstore]

I picked this up a couple days ago at a pawn shop. According to AA and the patent markings this little 426 was made between 1963-65.

 

[4xdog]

Here's some of the oldest Champion DeArment / Channellock stuff I have. This has been around all my life -- possibly some of it bought by my dad in the late 40s/early-mid 50s, and possibly his father's from even earlier.

I cannot count the number of times my brother and I used that small sledge/engineer hammer as kids. And the smooth-jaw 415 pliers still get used -- they're quite useful.

 

[Oregon rock crusher]

Here are comparison shots of the 1933 patent version and the 1953 patent version of the 410s.
-Don

Here are two more 410's with the 33' Canadian patent date. One pair list the Canadian patent before the US and the other list the US patent first. Not sure what that means but found it somewhat interesting. Ed.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Here's that No. 548 I picked up this morning, Don. It's not a Champ De, but it does have the "arrow flight" grips you're fond of. I'm going to have to re-think my board.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Well, now I'm really going to have to re-think my board layout. Picked up two more non-duplicates (3048-1/2 linemans' and 3026 needle nose) this morning at the flea.

 

[d42jeep]

Gotta like those handle patterns!
-Don

 

[Private Lugnutz]

They are stylish!

I prefer to find them with the early arrow pattern, or smooth (for its vagueness), only because I think all these later arrow patterns are postwar, but beggars can't be choosers, or something like that, and I'll take what I can get for now.

When did they stop using the arrow pattern? Do we even know?

 

[d42jeep]

I think they are quite early. The handle patterns are visible on the 420s shown in the 1944 catalog. All of my handle pattern 420s have the 1933 patent. They were long gone by 1953.
-Don

It would have been handy if they had put the patent dates on all of my handle pattern tools, but unfortunately they didn’t.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

The handle patterns are visible on the 420s shown in the 1944 catalog.

The grip pattern is visible on quite a few of the pliers in the 1944 catalog, Don. But only the early arrow flight pattern. The one with the many broken lines. We know those are wartime up through at least 1944.

I am asking about the later arrow flight pattern grip. It does NOT appear on any pliers in the 1944 catalog, as far as I can tell, nor would it, unless they were using both patterns at the same time, which I doubt. That's why I consider all those pliers postwar. Do you have pliers with the later grip that also have the 1933 CAN. PAT date and the 1934 US patent number? I don't.

So, what I am wondering is...
(1) when they transitioned from the early broken-lined arrow flight pattern to the later arrow flight pattern, and
(2) when they stopped making pliers with the later flight pattern grip altogether

In other words, I think all the pliers with the later grip were made after 1953. But until when? How much later could some of them be before they started putting plastic, composite, or rubber grips on them?

 

[four.cycle]

Earliest document I have for "Channellock/Champion De'Arment" is 1949, and none of the stuff I have shows the handle patterns (which is typical for "pliers" catalog or advertising illustrations.)

 

[d42jeep]

Looks like they mostly were gone by the time the plastic handles came into use if catalog artwork is to be trusted.
-Don

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Thanks, Don. Very helpful. What's most interesting is narrowing down the transition. Looks like they replaced the early arrow flight grip with the later arrow flight grip some time between 1947 and 1953.

 

[d42jeep]

I picked this cool box up from Roy that originally held a half dozen 410 Channellocks. Now I have to dig some out to fill it up. Here are pictures of the box and some 410 pictures and information.
-Don

 

[d42jeep]

Loaded up the box for a picture.
-Don

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Purdy!

 

[Username already in use]

Been looking for a pair of these midget pliers for a while now. Has the 1933 patent on them.
They will likely end up in my wartime Bonney ignition roll.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Congrats on that find, UNAIU.

 

[d42jeep]

If you check post #101 upthread, I did some dating research on the Channellocks with the handle patterns.
-Don

 

[d42jeep]

I believe that the quality dropped off significantly when they went from the bolt and nut to the rivet on the groove joint pliers. I picked up three 1953 patent dated 420s at a Tahoe garage sale on Saturday. I found a pair today that had plastic handles but still had the bolt and nut.
-Don

 

[AntiqueBen]

I'm a little confused about my pair of 440's. They are stamped with the patent numbers that put them in the second generation dated 1953. But I'm not seeing the 440's show up until the "blue handle era" from '65 forward??

 

[AntiqueBen]

I was lucky enough to find an early pair of 410's marked "Pat. Appl'd For" a while back. I think these were stamped this way from '32-'34 until they received the patent. I have another pair that has the same "parrot" shape but has no markings anywhere. They have no tongue & groove, only slip joint style. They are very similar to the first type of Channellocks. Anyone have an idea on who may have manufactured these??

 

[d42jeep]

I'm a little confused about my pair of 440's. They are stamped with the patent numbers that put them in the second generation dated 1953. But I'm not seeing the 440's show up until the "blue handle era" from '65 forward??

Here are some shown pre rivet with plain handles in 1969. The plastic grip was optional.
-Don

 

[AntiqueBen]

Wouldn't the model from the '60's have the later patent dates? I'm guessing they wouldn't be stamped 1953?

 

[Private Lugnutz]

I think your blue handle reference is a red herring. If your No. 440 was made after 1965, it should have the 1965 patent number stamped on them. More importantly, it should exhibit the construction features ("the undercut on the tongue element greater than the undercut on the groove elements") of the 1965 patent. Have you read it (3,192,805)? And have you inspected your pliers? Also, what is your source and how much confidence do you have in it that the No. 440 was not introduced before 1965? Based on the evidence on hand (i.e., your pliers with no 1965 patent stamp), the simplest explanation is that it was introduced before 1965.

EDIT: A quick IA/ITCL search shows a page from a 1962 cat showing no No. 440 and a 1965 cat showing a No. 440. It's possible they were introduced in 1963 or 1964. The next question would be whether or not Channellock started making them with the improved design without stamping them PAT PEND. You'd have to compare the shape of the tongue-and-groove elements to pliers you are sure are from the 1953 patent era.

 

[AntiqueBen]

Great info. I'll check them out & get back to you.

 

[AntiqueBen]

I have a pair of 420's dated 1953 I can compare them to. I'm trying to better understand the difference between the two??

 

[Private Lugnutz]

I can't help there, sorry. The patent drawings and description are fairly explicit, but I don't have any 1965 or later pliers to compare to.

 

[AntiqueBen]

So, I compared my 440's to a pair of genuine 1953 420's. I know that the 1963 patent changed something with the tongue & groove, but when I compare these two side by side, they are exactly identical. The only exception is the 420's have 5 grooves & the 440's have 7 grooves, but that is to be expected. The only other difference I can find is the 420's are marked with the 3 letters "AWO" and the 440's are marked with two letters "CD or GC." Otherwise all the tooling & construction are identical. I guess my first question is, I didn't think a pair of 440's existed during the era it is stamped with?? If the 440's construction is identical to the 1953 era (and they are), then they obviously don't have the changes that were made on the later patent in '63. I attached several pics. Does anyone see anything I might have missed?? Should these things exist??

 

[d42jeep]

I’m not sure that the minor difference in the two designs would even be visible. Reading the patent granted in 1965 information explains the difference in detail.

US3192805A - Pliers - Google Patents

i don’t recall seeing the 1965 patent number stamped on any of my groove joint pliers although I never specifically looked for it. Does anyone have an example of the ‘65 patent number shown on the tool?
—Don

 

[AntiqueBen]

Here is a pic of an example of 420's with the '65 patent mark from AA. The only info or pics I can find of the 440's have the blue handle. The few times I've found a pic of 440's without the blue handles, the blue handles had been removed and there were no patent dates. I don't believe any of the blue handled tools have patent dates...I could be wrong though. Does any of yours? I'm wandering what date Channellock officially released the 440 model?? I also found an early ad for the 440's in 1961, but they are shown with the blue handle & no rivet yet.