Long C Craftsman Ratchets - Survey help needed:

So I picked up another Long C Craftsman Ratchet in 1/2 drive today.

I noticed it had "Pat Pend." on it, and decided to check the rest of them I have, which is (now) two Craftsman in 1/2, one "None Better" (New Britain, These are all New Britain made), and two 3/8 Craftsman.

All three 1/2's say "Pat. Pending"

Both 3/8 Say nothing about any Pat.

So I looked on AA to see what they might have and you know what? They are in the same boat. (only they have the ratchets in broached open head, and male drive fixed)

So here is the challenge for GJ members with Either Circle H or BE Long C ratchets (Edit: Or any similar New Britain), what Pat. markings does your ratchets have? AA was unable to ID a Patent; Can GJ do better?

Link to the articles in AA:

https://home.comcast.net/~alloy-artifacts/craftsman-be-hcircle-p2.html

https://home.comcast.net/~alloy-artifacts/craftsman-be-hcircle.html

https://home.comcast.net/~alloy-artifacts/newbritain-nonebetter.html

For those seeing this thread for the first time, there is a second survey being led buy Lugz, for date codes: See Post 30: https://www.garagejournal.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6911503&postcount=30

Lugz Survey:

Do you have a New Britain made ratchet, reversible or non-reversible, in any drive size, in any branding - New Britain, NONE BETTER, Husky, Long C Craftsman BE or (H) - with a forged-in date code?

Only one of my 1/2 drives say pat pending and none of my 3/8 do.
I've never seen one marked with the actual pat # (2,206,943).

I wish I could help you out I have two 1/2 drive ratchets but not the craftsman long c, instead ones marked from the NB company. Pictures to follow:

Well Gany, you had the patent and AA said they didn't know of one..

Publication number US2206943 A
Publication type Grant
Publication date 9 Jul 1940
Filing date 4 Dec 1937
Priority date 4 Dec 1937
Inventors Costello William F
Original Assignee New Britain Machine Co.

http://www.google.ca/patents/US2206943


So certainly none of these are pre 1937. but I'm sure New Britain was making tools for Craftsman as early as 1931. Maybe not these ratchets though. Hmm I wonder if they applied, then later reapplied? Not sure failed/rejected application records are around...

woody 73 said:

I wish I could help you out I have two 1/2 drive ratchets but not the craftsman long c, instead ones marked from the NB company. Pictures to follow:

Click to expand...

NB is fine also, thanks! I edited the OP to clarify... My bad!

I have a bunch and will try and remember to look tomorrow after the flea.

Edit, here's one

Outlawmws said:

..So certainly none of these are pre 1937. but I'm sure New Britain was making tools for Craftsman as early as 1931. Maybe not these ratchets though. Hmm I wonder if the applied, then later reapplied? Not sure failed/rejected application records are around...

Click to expand...

Yup, who knows, there could be one for the through plug version too.

ganymede said:

Yup, who knows, there could be one for the through plug version too.

Click to expand...

Funny you should ask that just yesterday twertsy was showing a picture of his vintage craftsman ratchet and asking for manufacturing information.

woody 73 said:

Funny you should ask that just yesterday twertsy was showing a picture of his vintage craftsman ratchet and asking for manufacturing information.

Click to expand...

Ive got one too but mine is a be code.

I could not find any patent info on any of mine. Sorry!

I found a Craftsman Circle-H plug ratchet at the flea market today. I didn't find anything on AA about them?

my 1/4" drive "circle H" has no patent number on it.

none of mine has any either

Outlawmws said:

AA was unable to ID a Patent... AA said they didn't know of one...

Click to expand...

Outlaw,
Since it's a New Britain patent, AA lists the patent number in their table of patents (Table 1) on the first page of the New Britain section, and they discuss the patent and the "PAT PEND" marking in the various ratchets shown in that same section.

From AA:
"The patent pending notice refers to patent #2,206,943, filed by W.F. Costello in 1937 and issued in 1940. Although it's likely that examples of this ratchet (and related models) were made after the patent was issued, no tools have been found with the patent number marked."

Having said that, there is a puzzling issue with dating these ratchets relevant to the patent, the PAT PEND marking, and the notable design changes to the ratchet. It's actually one of the more vexing issues faced by WWII GMTK collectors who want to put a New Britain-made 1/2-inch drive set in their kit.

Warning: I will elaborate.

Most WWII collectors agree that the ratchet shown in this July 1944 manual figure...



... is either a New Britain NS40, None Better S40, Husky H4725 or Craftsman Circle-H or BE. (As has been noted many times, they were all made by New Britain.)

Note that the ratchet shown in the figure, though, is the model with a short direction shift lever and three bands of knurling around the handle. As shown in this AA image:



The earlier model has a longer shift lever and the entire handle is knurled, as shown in several photos posted by contributors above. For continuity of thought, and so you don't have to scroll up, here are some photos of my "early" New Britain NS40 ratchets with a PAT PEND marking...





...my "early" Craftsman Circle-H ratchet with a PAT PEND marking...



...and an "early" NONE BETTER S-40 ratchet with a PAT PEND marking...



The critical point here is that nobody seems to know when New Britain made the design change, exactly, and nobody knows how to date the ratchets with the "PAT PEND" markings except to assume that they were made prior to July 1940 when the patent was granted.

But that's not fool-proof, obviously.

The fact that the figure in an Army manual dated July 1944 shows a New Britain made ratchet with the "later" design (again, short lever, three bands of knurling) makes the "later" design most desirable to WWII collectors. It had to be made at least prior to July 1944 and is therefore bonafide wartime. The "early" ratchet, on the other hand, has that pre-1940 stigma. But collectors tend to overlook the fact that the only known examples of the "later" design ratchet - to include the example on AA - also have the PAT PEND mark. (Woody has an example of the "later" design, posted above, and his, too, has the PAT PEND mark.)

So the critical question for the community is whether anyone has ever seen a New Britain made NS-40 (or S-40, H4725, Crafty Circle-H or BE) ratchet with a patent number - as you have posed and as others have wondered, or, without a PAT PEND notice!

The central question is why do all the known examples of both designs bear the PAT PEND mark?

I have some theories:

One is that New Britain changed to the "later" design after they applied for the patent (in 1937) but before the patent was granted (in July 1940). In other words, they were making the "early" style with the long shift lever and all-knurled handle in the 1930's, applied for a patent in 1937, and in the time it took for the USPO to grant the patent in mid 1940, they had already made some modifications to the design, and, had already started producing that model. In this case, the ratchets AA refers to as a "later" design (short lever, three bands of knurling), bearing the PAT PEND marking, were also made before the patent was granted in 1940.

But that doesn't explain why nobody has apparently ever seen a "later" ratchet without the PAT PEND mark.

One explanation is that the PAT PEND marking on the "later" design refers to a different patent, a second patent, to cover the new design, but there is no record of such a patent as far as I know.

The only other possible explanation is that New Britain was making the "later" design before 1940, before the patent was granted, with the PAT PEND marking, and continued making them even after the patent was granted, because they just didn't bother to re-tool their line (make another die or press with the patent number or at least absent the PAT PEND marking).

Outlawmws I apologize for my ignorance, but I don't seem to grasp what your objective is.

Are you looking for the base patent no. for the 3 variants of the BE & Circle H 3/8" ratchet that was offered in the Sears Catalog from 1939-1948? Or are you asking if any of the smaller sizes other than 1/2" have the Pat. Pend. branding on them?

Thanks!

My original intent was to find the actual Patent No. for the ratchets (Mission accomplished), and to figure out if the 3/8 ever referred to any patent , since my 1/2 drives had Pat Pend, and the 3/8 did not... Other's have gotten interested in when what versions were made, and that seems to have resurrected this thread.

It's all good.

I didn't even notice it was an older thread, Outlaw.

But, it's all better than good, indeed. It gave me the motivation to bug an old friend and catalog collector, again, who shared a scan of the 1/2-drive tools page from the October 1940 New Britain catalog with me. It shows an excellent labeled cutaway figure of the NS40, which clearly has the shorter shift lever and the three bands of knurling on the handle, and the advertising copy proudly proclaims that the design is patented. So the "later" style was clearly being made at least as early as October 1940. The possibility exists that they were being produced well before 1940, as well, as I postulated above. This doesn't explain why none have been found with a patent number or at least without the PAT PEND mark on the head. But it does clear up how early they were introduced.

I've asked him if I can post the page here.

Actually, the earliest version has a long direction lever, and a Frankenstein style button through the handle. Look under New Britain ratchets on my site, I have some. The patent drawing clearly shows the Franky button shifter.

Sent from my SM-P905V using Tapatalk

- October 1940 Catalog

Lugnutz, on your Quest:

During the War, the ONLY thing that mattered was functionality. no one would waste the manpower, or the materials, for new tooling that wasn't NEEDED... even after the war ended, it took several years to get back to a "peacetime" footing for a variety of reasons.

you had to re-tool for new products, for some companies back to what they originally made (Singer was making guns more than sewing machines) the economy went from red hot wartime, to mediocre, to waiting for the released solders to get back to work and back to spending $$, (remember everyone had sat through the great depression...)

Looking at the Craftsman catalogs for instance, it was 1948 before Sears proudly claimed "First time in 5 years, a Complete line of Craftsman Tools")

Same thing for Williams "Tools of Industry," Outlaw, in 1947. But some mfgrs actually innovated during the war. Snap-On, who introduced a whole new size of socket wrenches and fittings (1/4"), published a few catalogs, as did a few others. Plomb and a few others changed their broaching techniques. I could go on. But, in general, I agree, and we see that played out in many tools of that era. Hence my theory on why New Britain might just leave the PAT PEND marking.

I'm not saying innovations weren't made; they were, and in a huge way that paved the way to where we are today. IMO the only undertaking that had more impact on the current technology we have today was the space race, and that was launched on the back of the innovations made during the war.


I'm just saying no one was going to spend resources just to add a patent date to a tool; They had the patent, they were protected. Every material imaginable was rationed, and aimed at the war effort, and yes, many resources were spent on improving tooling, and on other technology, not for retail sales, but for improving the war effort.

As impactful as the space race was technologically, even that pales in significance in effort expended and how much of the US population was engaged, directly and indirectly to wining that war. But people forget, and its not even a dim memory for most of the population of the world. Certainly I have no direct memories of it, I'm just a student of history, and WWII was my first historical fascination.

Outlaw and Lugnutz -
some interesting points raised in the last few posts. I was looking at the first page of a 1948 Indestro catalog today and read language that relates to what you're discussing above regarding post-war manufacturing. I'll see if I can get a shot of it posted.
BK

Again, agreed, Outlaw, in general, with the notion that it was a crucial juncture for industrial evolution, especially with respect to tools, as well as with the notion that it was an era characterized by conservatism, especially of certain resources, and precious metals in particular - which forced industry and academia to invent the "New Emergency" triple alloy compositions that still dominate the tool industry today, making it possible for wrenches and other tools to be sleeker yet stonger than their primitive predecessors. My fascination, study, and deep research of WWII tool manufacturing continues to this day.

But please recognize the facts are that patents and other markings were certainly added, removed, and changed on the production lines of many tool Mfgrs during the war, directly affecting the tooling dies and presses.

The idea that New Britain would not have dropped the PAT PEND mark because no Mfgr changed any machinery except for purely functional reasons is simply not true. Herbrand went through at least three forgings of their S-10 ratchet, adding an AISI number (1340, for carbon-manganese), then removing the VAN-CHROME branding, just to name one example close to the subject at hand. There are numerous examples of stylistic production variations in DOEs, DBEs, and other wrenches, usually involving forged or puch pressed markings.

Again, I was the one who first suggested the explanation that they left the PAT PEND mark intentionally, despite the patent having been granted, for efficiency reasons, but it is only a theory, not the only theory (I provided a few others above), and certainly not an industry wide characteristic.

EDIT: I'm thrilled to have established a NLT date for the later model, and again - thanks for the prompt, but on the PAT PEND marking question, more research is needed.

Thanks Outlawmws!

I have two patents for the 1/2" New Britain derivatives. Does anyone have the 3rd for the one Private Lugnutz shows in the ad?

Does anyone have the patent for the 3/8" variants of the same era?

Based on my research there are 3 variants of the 3/8":
- Reversible Square Drive
- Reversible Female
- Non-Reversible Female





I'd be curious to see any patents for these 3/8" if anyone has them.

Dr. Doom said:

Thanks Outlawmws!

I have two patents for the 1/2" New Britain derivatives. Does anyone have the 3rd for the one Private Lugnutz shows in the ad?

Does anyone have the patent for the 3/8" variants of the same era?

Based on my research there are 3 variants of the 3/8":
- Reversible Square Drive
- Reversible Female
- Non-Reversible Female

I'd be curious to see any patents for these 3/8" if anyone has them.

Click to expand...

It is the same patent as the 1/2" drive. The correct patents are associated with the examples on my site. Look under New Britain here: http://toolarchives.com/node/520

Dr. Doom said:

I have two patents for the 1/2" New Britain derivatives.

Click to expand...

Two? I am only aware of one: 2,206,943. Applied for Dec 1937, granted July 1940. Please share your information on a second patent relevant to New Britain's reversible ratchet design, Doc.

Dr. Doom said:

Does anyone have the 3rd for the one Private Lugnutz shows in the ad?

Click to expand...

This is precisely the crux of the issue, Doc. The ratchet design shown in that October 1940 ad is clearly not the same design as the design represented by the sole 2,206,943 patent. It uses the same 26-tooth gear and a tic-tock pawl, but the shape and design of the pawl, especially where it meets the teeth, is not the same as the patent, the directional shift lever is different and much shorter, and the "Frankenstein" plungers are gone. And ALL of those components are itemized in the patent. And yet the ratchet in the ad was clearly being advertised for production in October 1940, which is just three short months after the 2,206,943 patent (with the "Frankenstein" plungers, the longer shift lever, and the slightly different pawl) was granted. Hence my supposition that New Britain had already improved the design of the ratchet before the patent, with the older design, was granted.

It looks as if New Britain produced at least three major variants of this pear head ratchet, apparently all under the same patent, regardless of the design changes.

For brevity, in sequence:
- long lever with "Frankenstein" buttons and a fully knurled handle
- long lever without "Frankenstein" buttons and a fully knurled handle
- short thumb lever with three-banded knurled handle.

Note that the latest variant is also marked differently. The model number is higher on the face plate and there is an “ON” and an “OFF” marking near the switch instead.

The problem is that ALL the variants apparently bear the PAT PEND marking.

Complicating the issue ever further is the fact that some of the early examples have strange forged in marks and codes that look like date codes, but seem to be incongruent with the apparent production sequence. Here is an example (compliments of Silly's MB):




It doesn’t seem very likely they would’ve made this older design in 1943 when they were advertising the design with the short thumb lever as early as 1940 and that’s the kind shown in the Army manual.

I suppose it’s possible that they kept up an older line, with the older tooling, to meet production demands, but if that's the case, why add a forged in date code to the die but leave the PAT PEND on the stamper? So back to not likely.

twertsy said:

The correct patents are associated with the examples on my site. Look under New Britain here: http://toolarchives.com/node/520

Click to expand...

Going to check it out now, Twertsy. Thanks for link.

Twertsy,

Wow. Nicely organized.

The most interesting New Britain made ratchet in your collection is this one:


Frankly, I have ever seen one before.

If I'm not mistaken, it's the latest variant, but it does NOT have the PAT PEND mark.

What's interesting is, that it doesn't have the model number (NS-40), either.

Could be a no frills version that was made for the Army.

I am reviving this thread to conduct a survey. I am doing it here because it pertains to ratchets and because I don't want to take Outlaw's general 'Long C' thread on a tangent.

Background:

I've only seen three (3) examples of New Britain made ratchets with forged-in date codes. They are all 1/2-inch drive.

One, a "2-43", is on a reversible New Britain NS-40 with a long selector switch, owned by a WWII collector-friend in the UK. (See Thumbnail 1.)

The second, a "6-44", is on a reversible Craftsman BE with a long selector switch, owned by WWII collector and GJ member Tin Medic. (See Thumbnail 2.)

The third, a "11-45", is on a non-reversible Craftsman (H), which I just found. (See Thumbnail 3.)

In the collecting world, one of anything is an anomaly. Two is a curiosity. And three - especially when they span a few years - is enough to make one wonder if there aren't more out there and if we're not collectively missing an aspect of New Britain's production (nobody I know of in the collecting world thinks of New Britain tools as being date coded) that is not recorded anywhere.

Survey:

Do you have a New Britain made ratchet, reversible or non-reversible, in any drive size, in any branding - New Britain, NONE BETTER, Husky, Long C Craftsman BE or (H) - with a forged-in date code?

If so, please full identify it by brand and model number, cite the entire marking (including any letters that may appear before or after the date) and the date exactly as it appears, including period marks or hyphens, etc, and post a photo.

THANKS

Here are 2, one reversible and one female DP. I'm also interested in knowing the origin of the pretzel mark on the 3/8 rats....I have some that have it and some dont, same exact style.

Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk

A None Better and 2 Husky....

Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk

I saw this thread and thought I would share my experience with the group. I have a new Britain NS40 that I tried out changing the control arm on my Mustang. It is very smooth and worked just as good as my SK and has almost no back drag. Judging from the wear, it has seen many years of use and still works as goon as new. Now that's quality!!

Twertsy: Thanks for checking your warehouse, but you **** at surveys. And I don't mean that in a good way!

No, seriously thanks, but what is the make on the first female ratchet? The one with the "J-S" mark and the "11-44" date code?

Already, with only eight (8) total samples, a potential pattern is emerging.

The reversible ratchets have a different format than non-reversible ratchets.

The reversible ratchets have some kind of round mark ("O") followed by a month and year followed by a number suffix. Such as "O 2-43-S". The mark is not brand specific, because one of those type markings is on a New Britain and the other is on a Craftsman (H). The prefix (if we can call it that) and the suffix may be forge codes. There is one outlier. A "O T 2 46". No hyphen, and no suffix.

The non-reversible ratchets have a letter code (which I am guessing is some kind of forge code), such as "J-S", and then the month hyphen year date code, such as "11-44". Also without regard to brand, with examples in NONE BETTER, Husky, and Craftsman (H).

The only "J-S" so far is 11-44.

The "T-S" (4 of them) run, so far, from 11-45 to 7-46.

EDIT: We'll have to see where it goes as more examples come in. If the numbers really climb, I'll start a spreadsheet database.

Private Lugnutz said:

Twertsy: Thanks for checking your warehouse, but you **** at surveys. And I don't mean that in a good way! [emoji38]

No, seriously thanks, but what is the make on the first female ratchet? The one with the "J-S" mark and the "11-44" date code?

Already, with only eight (8) total samples, a potential pattern is emerging.

The reversible ratchets have a different format than non-reversible ratchets.

The reversible ratchets have some kind of round mark ("O") followed by a month and year followed by a number suffix. Such as "O 2-43-S". The mark is not brand specific, because one of those type markings is on a New Britain and the other is on a Craftsman (H). The prefix (if we can call it that) and the suffix may be forge codes. There is one outlier. A "O T 2 46". No hyphen, and no suffix.

The non-reversible ratchets have a letter code (which I am guessing is some kind of forge code), such as "J-S", and then the month hyphen year date code, such as "11-44". Also without regard to brand, with examples in NONE BETTER, Husky, and Craftsman (H).

The only "J-S" so far is 11-44.

The "T-S" (4 of them) run, so far, from 11-45 to 7-46.

EDIT: We'll have to see where it goes as more examples come in. If the numbers really climb, I'll start a spreadsheet database.

Click to expand...

The first post were both Craftsman ratchets 2nd post two Huskies above none better below

Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk

Thanks.

Are you guys sure these are date codes? Anyway here's a long c, patent pending, h circle crafty. T 2 46 forged in.
View media item 78556View media item 78557

Thanks for your contribution, Ganymede.

No, we're not sure, in the sense of 100% definitiveness. Note, though, that they start in wartime - implying military contract production, and end shortly after the war leading into the KW conflict buildup. And note that we have not seen anything that breaks the date code logic (such as a "13", for example, which would defy a month code, or a wild second number, such as a "32" (before the Costello patent production started) or a "57" (after the Costello patent production ended) that would bust the year code logic. I am open and prepared for anything. Having said that, and with a healthy dose of caution, I think it would have to be one mighty strange coincidence if they're not.

I have a Husky H3183 unplated NR female marked J-S FORGED 11-44

Edit; Ill have to dig to confirm if it is an s or an 8. Done

Thanks, Slew. I'm betting that's a "J-S". Todd has the same ratchet with identical markings. And if I'm not mistaken, yours looks like it has a sheen of residue from the preservative we were discussing on the Long C thread.