Search results

Your commitment to accuracy is much appreciated, @four.cycle. Ebay sellers and others are one of the biggest reasons I rely so heavily on the OEM catalogs. I’m sure you have too - I’ve even seen many wholesale hardware catalogs that advertise a specific model, style, or size of vise that, per...

@four.cycle I think I found the source of the confusion - it looks like the September 1910 publication of The American Blacksmith was incorrect. Hard not to go wrong when the source documents appear to be the issue! The attached 1910-05-31 article from The Evening Republican of Meadville, PA...

Some neat history on the Barrett Machine Tool Company from a 1912 publication: Historical and Industrial Review of Meadville, PA

It looks like at one time, the history for the Meadville Vise Company on Vintage Machinery included a 1910 reference to Yost having bought the company, but it looks like that reference was later corrected and updated to the Williamson Vise Co. Could this be the confusion...

Unfortunately the video that I attempted to post didn’t go through (I forgot that GJ doesn’t allow videos). I’ve attached a couple pictures that should give a better idea. Essentially, there’s an interior hub that allows the nut itself to swivel. Whether from a newspaper reference somewhere or...

Mechanically speaking, one of the neatest vises I’ve ever personally owned. This is a 4 ⅛” jaw, 58 ½ lb. № 30 Barrett “Adjustable Jaw Machinists’ Vise”. What’s amazing about this vise is that unlike any other adjustable vise you’ve ever seen, the dynamic jaw swivels…NOT the static jaw (unlike...

Your work looks immaculate

These are a couple vises I was thrilled to receive recently: Prentiss № 31 (Nickel-Plated): 1 ¾” jaws, 1 ½ lbs Prentiss № 32 (Pin-Striped): 2” jaws, 3 ½ lbs The № 31 came from a friend of mine who is a watchmaker-in-training. The № 32 came directly from the jeweler’s bench to which it was...

You’re in Ohio? I have a couple friends you should talk to who could help get you a swivel jaw vise, basically any brand you’d like

I only know of a couple, but thankfully they do exist

I had no idea this was a patent. So cool! Thank you for sharing

Despite the angry, corrupt, and cowardly voices that tell us otherwise, we’re blessed beyond words to be Americans. The freedoms that we enjoy were (and are) fought for and borne on the backs of men, women, family members, and friends. Many came home, but many also paid the ultimate price. As...

I’m never above being corrected! Good eye on the lack of pipe jaw slots. I hadn’t noticed that. @twagler could you post some more pictures of the vise? (EDIT: Perfect timing - thanks for the picture above!)

Me personally, I’d think factory. If a user really cared, I think they wouldn’t have missed the “S”.

That’s really cool. I’ve never seen (or maybe just never noticed) that on any Reed before

It certainly could be. Plenty of Prentiss’s other vises made similar design transitions over the years without looking back. Makes me wonder why this design wouldn’t have panned out. Unfortunately the friend I received it from found it at a swap meet in Texas, so I’ll likely not be able to...

Wow that’s for all that digging! You always come up with great catalog pictures. No “B” and no three-foot stationaries…all round bases. Realistically, I can’t imagine that my 3-foot vise is a one-off. It wouldn’t make sense that Prentiss would have an entirely new pattern made just for one vise

Needing the group’s help! Can anyone show me either an advertisement of this vise (Prentiss № B161 1/2) OR another survivor like it? This 3” vise is one in Prentiss’ line of “Shepard” vises. These were introduced by Prentiss in 1895 and were discontinued by 1936. By no later than 1929, Prentiss...

Excited to share THREE new catalogs and a price list. My favorite is the 1901 Massey catalog - the first known example, to the best of my knowledge. The others are later Columbian Hardware Co catalogs/price list. All can be found here on Internet Archive: https://archive.org/details/@micah_darwin

Thank you both for correcting me…I obviously didn’t look close enough