Recent content by ImperfectSense

On full disassembly of my Columbian I found several new markings. Inside the static jaws it says it is a 604-2, and on the barrel that the main handle threads into it says "Columbian 40". Both also have repeats of that M on a shield design. Could the 40 be a year? Or does it signify...

A friend moving out made available a second big vise for my shop, this one a Columbian 604. I understand from the "double curved" Columbian name it's pre-WWII but can anyone get a closer approximation than that? The mark on the inside of the dynamic jaw is simply 604, others I've seen say...

I've got a nearly identical vise, but possibly earlier? Inside the dynamic jaw mine just says 604, instead of 604-3, but it has that same M in the shield, perhaps a foundry mark? Is there any new insight into possible dating of these?

Update: I had one of my trusted mechanic friends look at the vise today. He decided that even with a big press, he wouldn't want to risk trying to fix the bend. The bottom is perfectly straight, only the top is out of line, but the gap when the jaws are closed can be dealt with in other, less...

Ok, I've got a new horseshoe washer on the way. I'm also looking for a replacement swivel nut. I'd like an original one, even if it's pretty beat up. The outside hex is 7/8", carriage bolt is a 1/2" and the handle is only 3 1/2" long. Has anyone got one lying around?

Looks like they are 2 degrees off parallel vertically, 5/64" gap between the bottom edges of the jaws, and about the same difference in height of the bottom of the jaws. Next thing I'm going to do, once I finish fully cleaning the parts, is reassemble enough to test and measure the slide across...

Good call. Once everything was stripped and mostly clean, I conducted a test fit as you suggested and found that the jaws indeed do not meet. I suppose a shim behind the jaws could rectify the problem. Or making a custom set of jaws to fit. Hmmm.

Confirmed that the washer interior diameter posted by KMScott is correct for my C-1, but the washer thickness may be supposed to be 3/16. The depth of that ring in the spindle is at least 1/4" or larger all the way around.

There's not much rust on anything but it does show signs of having rusted in the past. The red paint was definitely new-ish, couldn't find any traces of original colors beneath. However, I think I found the reason for the washers behind the jaws. Looks like the screw has been welded back...

Is there a way to view what model each of those vises is? I'd be curious to see all of the different C-1s, how marked, what dates, etc.

Well, this thing has had a life. It's missing some parts and a few things a jury-rigged in interesting ways. Could someone with a C-1 do me a favor and check the screws used to hold the retaining ring in place? I think mine has had the holes bored out and tapped for larger bolts because at...

Will do! This was one of those opportunities that a rational person would realize is way beyond the realms of possibility or reason. But something about the airplane called to me, so I'm off on a great adventure! I have only two rules for the project. First, nothing I do will prevent a...

Confirmed! I just found the 1945 year stamped into the base! That's pretty awesome :D (and no, that's not a huge crack in it, just a dribble of black paint that gave me a heart attack!)

Oooooo, that is pretty, glad to hear it's holding up well, did you put any clearcoats on top? I probably won't be *too* rough on mine... it's going to help restore a 1941 de Havilland Tiger Moth, primarily a wood and fabric airplane but with some metal bits ;)

Thanks! Most of the ones I've seen from the 50s appear to have squared-off feet instead of rounded like this one. Rounded seemed to be common in the 40s and 60s? Any other clues I might look for to help date it?