I knew of them from somewhere. Not sure where. But in 15 years of diligently flipping them rightside up at flea markets hoping to find one - and you know how many Ford script MDF's and aftermarket knockoffs are out there to flip! - me neither!In 45 years of avidly noticing Ford wrenches, I have never seen another one of these.
Those are cylinder head bolt or nut and sparkplug wrenches. The bigger one is for a Ford Model A, and the smaller one could be for 18 mm or 14 mm plugs during the 1930s. They're copies of the Ford wrenches that came in the car's tool kit.There's no way that pre-Sears (1927) "Craftsman" marked tools hasn't already been discussed on at least one of the popular tool forums.
I highly doubt it. The topic has come up before, but usually in other threads (e.g., Long C, etc).I'm assuming there's a thread somewhere for companies that used the Craftsman name prior to Sears trademark.

Hi Lugz. Nice Ad, I've never seen that before. So I looked and did find a short thread on the Papaw's wrench site titled "Marion Wrench Co. that has some info on both of those companies.....Kind of surprised there's no (Sears) Craftsman experts weighing in.I highly doubt it. The topic has come up before, but usually in other threads (e.g., Long C, etc).
The only two I know about are the Cushman Company, Inc. (Champaign, Ill.) 'Craftsman' tools, which were quite varied and could present some interesting confusions, and the Marion-Craftsman Company (Conneaut, Ohio) tools, which were less diverse, maybe only a pipe wrench or farm implements, if I recall.
The Marion-Craftsman connection is notable because that's purportedly who Sears bought the rights from.
I have no idea if there was any issue with Cushman, do you?
![]()
Hi X. I would say the center of gravity for Craftsman expertise here on GJ is Long C. We don't have a separate thread for the earliest legitimate Sears, Roebuck & Co pre-Long C Craftsman tools, with circle Craftsman wavy logos (they show up in places like the 'Axes' thread) or early plain block logo (which shows up on the 'Long C' thread), let alone a thread to distinguish those earliest Sears pre-Long C Craftsman tools from the Non-Sears Cushman 'Craftsman' and Marion-Craftsman and Craftsman Tool Co tools (those adjustables have shown up on my 'Oddfellows' thread) that were made prior to that.Kind of surprised there's no (Sears) Craftsman experts weighing in.
Or they do know they're out there and they have little interest BECAUSE they couldn't easily find a definitive source otherwise I think someone would swoop in just to be first to answer ( without citing references of course) like what happens on plenty of threads..........or...maybe the right person just hasn't seen this thread yet.I just think it's a case of either not knowing they're out there or little to no interest.
The Ford basic part number is 17017. The prefix identifies the type. 40-17017 is for 18 mm plugs. 01-7017 is for 14 mm plugs. and 52-17017 is for the V8-60. A-17017 is for the 7/8"they look like the Ford 5893 and 2335 or whatever those wrenches are that are in the booths of every antique mall in America. My point is that I'm assuming there's a thread somewhere for companies that used the Craftsman name prior to Sears trademark. Sounds like you are saying these wrenches postdate the introduction of the Model A is that right?
I guess I can see that. As a sort of novelty, I suppose. Yeah. My point, though, is that I don't think they fit in to the Craftsman collectors ouvre at all. Since they're prior to Sears Craftsman and don't have any connection to the Sears line. I think in their minds Cushman and the Marion-Craftsman Tool Co just happened to have also used a common name for a man who uses tools as part of his trade in building fine things first, but in the dark ages. It's not as if Craftsman collectors consider the Cushman and Marion-Craftsman tools to be the first era in their collecting timeline. That Craftsman timeline starts with Sears, Roebuck. And like I said, most of the Craftsman collectors here don't even bother with the first generation pre Long C stuff. Mainly probably because it wasn't automotive.For one of those guys I'd think that somewhere along the line the existence of these wrenches would be made known and they'd want to know where they fit or don't fit in.
I guess I can see that. As a sort of novelty, I suppose. Yeah. My point, though, is that I don't think they fit in to the Craftsman collectors ouvre at all. Since they're prior to Sears Craftsman and don't have any connection to the Sears line. I think in their minds Cushman and the Marion-Craftsman Tool Co just happened to have also used a common name for a man who uses tools as part of his trade in building fine things first, but in the dark ages. It's not as if Craftsman collectors consider the Cushman and Marion-Craftsman tools to be the first era in their collecting timeline. That Craftsman timeline starts with Sears, Roebuck. And like I said, most of the Craftsman collectors here don't even bother with the first generation pre Long C stuff. Mainly probably because it wasn't automotive.
I do agree that I can see some of those guys finding it interesting. Theoretically, let's say someone in Minnesota was using the Snap-on name in the the teen's to make a farm tool with interchangeable heads and sold the rights to the name to Mssrs. Johnson and Seidemann of Milwaukee for their socket wrench set idea. I guess Snappy collectors might want to know that and maybe have the tool as a curioso piece, but I don't think the tool would be considered part of the collectors' niche, brand or timeline.
Great. But in your first post you were saying you think the both of the wrenches in the original post postdate Sears acquiring the Craftsman name? Is that right? You can see where I'm going with this.The Ford basic part number is 17017. The prefix identifies the type. 40-17017 is for 18 mm plugs. 01-7017 is for 14 mm plugs. and 52-17017 is for the V8-60. A-17017 is for the 7/8"
thread Model A. The 52 prefix is probably the rarest one for obvious reasons.
Agreed. I'm actually struggling for the perfect word for them. They wouldn't be core to the collection, and not even IN the collection, really. And technically, they're not really predecessors or ancestors. Sears, Roebuck & Co only bought the name. They're just old tools with an acutely, potentially misleading name.Maybe I wouldn't use the word "novelty".or even trivia but that's a small point.
It might have to do with where the forge tooling went when Ford was done with it. A die sinker would find it easy to put the Craftsman logo into the dies.There were lots of people making aftermarket Model A tool kits, so I guess these wrenches would appeal to those people that collect Ford and early aftermarket tools for Ford's more then Craftsman tools collectors ?
Agreed. I'm actually struggling for the perfect word for them...
A die sinker would find it easy to put the Craftsman logo into the dies.
I wasn't really following your exchange with ttpete until now. I always thought RJ's wrenches in post #1 were Cushman. I could be wrong. I'm just saying that was always my assumption. Because I don't think the Marion-Craftsman Company or the Craftsman Tool Company made those, and they have the blocky logo that Cushman CRAFTSMAN tools have.You can see where I'm going with this.
I guess. Except that they're oddballs for them, too. Not marked Ford, not un-marked Ford but Ford supplier (e.g., MDF, McKaig-Hatch, etc), not major Ford knockoff (e.g., Mossberg), not even minor Ford knockoff, and on top of all that, even though it says 'CRAFTSMAN', it's not even that CRAFTSMAN, and yet they're not ersatz CRAFTSMAN either!I guess these wrenches would appeal to those people that collect Ford and early aftermarket tools for Ford's more then Craftsman tools collectors ?
And yet, all of that is exactly what makes them appealing. They're odd, potential conversation starters, stumpers, and smartass 'gotchas' all at the same time. All because - let's face it - of the Sears, Roebuck CRAFTSMAN.Nominal.I'd probably call them something like "unrelated Craftsman-named". Even using a concept like "adjacent" implies a connection too close.
www.bladeforums.com