Enco 'Dual tool" Plomb hammer wrench

Ole Slewfoot · Aug 3, 2016

Anyone know when Enco made hammers like this?
I haven't been able to find any reference to even a similar head....

It's nice for nudging thing things though.

Rileysan · Aug 3, 2016

Great looking home made hammer. If I were to guess, I'd say the Plomb DBE was broken and repurposed. I love the creativity of people!

Brian

Rileysan · Aug 3, 2016

Do you have pictures from where the wrench meets the hammer? The shape of the handle opening might give a clue about the era it is from.

Brian

WhoWhatNow · Aug 3, 2016

Not sure if that is factory or shop made but I would guess it is for a Bridgeport style milling machine. The 7/8 wrench to loosen the the drawbar and the mallet to knock the tooling free.

rlitman · Aug 3, 2016

WhoWhatNow said:
...The 7/8 wrench to loosen the the drawbar and the mallet to knock the tooling free.

It says 3/4 right on it.

ssdave · Aug 3, 2016

Looking at that, I think someone took a cadmium plated WF wrench, cut it off, polished it, chromed it and then pressed the Enco hammer head onto it.

I don't think it was originally constructed that way.

I'd bet that hammer head was from the 1990's or newer.

Private Lugnutz · Aug 3, 2016

Slew,

VERY intriguing.

I'd be interested in knowing how the rubber mallet head is attached, and if it looks like the opening and sleeve were designed to fit the flattened oval shape of the shank or whether it just form-fitted itself. Hard to tell from the photos.

Some thinking-out-loud, far from conclusive comments...

- With the 12-point box end on one end of the shank and a non-marring mallet head on the other, it gives an interesting implication to the "DUAL TOOL" branding on the mallet head. If this was a homemade tool and that rubber ENCO mallet head was originally found and taken off of its own mallet handle, what is the dual use of the original mallet? There's nothing extraordinary about a mallet with the same material (rubber) on both faces. Rubber mallets have many uses (anything that needs striking without marring), not two uses, right?

- Wartime Plomb WF tools - those made for the USAAF under contracts let at Wright Field, the HQ for the USAAF - were not chrome-plated. Plomb continued making a limited number of tools in the immediate post-war period, marked "WF", for unknown customers, and even some Proto tools have been found with a "WF" marking, all modeled on or even made with the same dies as the wartime "WF" tools, and some of these were chrome-plated. I would date the production of the shank, at the very least, to that same period - late 1940's or early 1950's.

- There is a precedence for Plomb modifying its tools for special clients during that same period. Ratchets with cranks, for example. And also a precedence for them not being overly concerned with re-using old dies regardless of the original meaning of the marking (i.e., WF-83 being the model number for a long DBE wrench, 15* angle head pattern, with 3/4 x 7/8 12-point openings, made explicitly under contract to the USAAF during WWII).

Having said all that, it is clearly more of a reach than homemade. And I am not disgareeing with Rileysan or ssdave. ssadave's note about someone having an old WF chrome plated is something I would never think to do, but also makes sense.

Ole Slewfoot · Aug 3, 2016

Ill get the camera out in a little bit.
the wrench/hammer union is very OEM looking.
My thought is the hammer part is not from the 90's, or I'd have been able to find something at least similar on the internet.
There are quite a few shop made tools with the hammer on one face and the socket on the other face, but this configurations seems rare.

Maybe I can get TSA to xray it for me? I'd really like to know how the wrench ends in there. Anyone have a WF-83 to measure overall length?

I could see someone getting a pallet of surplus wrenches and throwing them at the hammer caster.

ttpete · Aug 3, 2016

WhoWhatNow said:
Not sure if that is factory or shop made but I would guess it is for a Bridgeport style milling machine. The 7/8 wrench to loosen the the drawbar and the mallet to knock the tooling free.

There are other size drawbars on different make machines. That's 3/4" but it could also be used on a 19 mm hex. I agree with you for everything but a Bridgeport. It appears it was made that way, possibly by Enco using Plomb wrenches they may have had in stock. Enco sold a lot of Taiwan/China made machines.

ssdave · Aug 3, 2016

Enco was in business starting in the 40's. That surprised me, I thought they were 1970's. I can see them buying war surplus tools and making that hammer. Strange, but possible.

Ole Slewfoot · Aug 3, 2016

The wrench part hasn't seen (or been used as) a hard face hammer

or war grade abusive wrenching

this side has dimples

which are not evident here

.

Private Lugnutz · Aug 3, 2016

That sleeve looks to me as if it was designed to fit that shank. That is too perfect to be coincidental, and the rubber has not been deformed to make it fit. That, along with the "DUAL TOOL" branding, still has me inclined toward special purpose, limited run, OEM-made tool, by Enco, under license or some other kind of agreement from Plomb for the box end wrench.

Ole Slewfoot · Aug 3, 2016

The polishing and chrome make it unlikely to have been done by Plomb at least during the war I think, unless maybe there was an environment that really justified it.

After VJ day, I could see there being a boxcar full of wrenches out back.

Private Lugnutz · Aug 4, 2016

Agreed, as I said upthread. But Enco had to have some kind of agreement with Plomb/Proto if they made these for sale, which the DUAL TOOL branding suggests. Even if they were just re-using a truckload of old WF-83 stock. I'm no industrial rights and trademark expert, but I think they'd run into a legal bind making, branding, and selling a tool with the v Plomb v logo on it without some kind of agreement. If that's the case, though, and these were made in quantity, why have we never seen one before? That's puzzling.

twertsy · Aug 4, 2016

Private Lugnutz said:
Agreed, as I said upthread. But Enco had to have some kind of agreement with Plomb/Proto if they made these for sale, which the DUAL TOOL branding suggests. Even if they were just re-using a truckload of old WF-83 stock. I'm no industrial rights and trademark expert, but I think they'd run into a legal bind making, branding, and selling a tool with the v Plomb v logo on it without some kind of agreement. If that's the case, though, and these were made in quantity, why have we never seen one before? That's puzzling.

Remember that "Plomb" was never trademarked, nor the accompanying arrow symbols. Anyone could have used it.

Rileysan · Aug 4, 2016

twertsy said:
Remember that "Plomb" was never trademarked, nor the accompanying arrow symbols. Anyone could have used it.

This doesn't make sense.

Plomb failed to trademark their name early on and, according to AA, was sued by Plumb to prevent that from happening (the dispute going back to 1926).

If a legal precedent was set, how would anyone else be able to sell tools under the name "Plomb"?

How's this for a theory:

Let's say the tool was legitimately made in an ENCO factory. What's to prevent an employee from taking a wrench from their own collection and placing it in the mold in place of a normal hammer handle? The shape of the wrench is similar to that of the flat hammer handles that are still used today.

My biggest argument against this being a commercially (or privately) sold tool is the chrome plating on the wrench - it's simply too dangerous for normal use. I can't imagine any tool company selling a striking tool with chrome plating as the liability is too great.

Brian

He/she would have to had

gungatim · Aug 4, 2016

time for a "show off your home made hammer wrench" thread... : )

that is interesting looking, as worn as the head is, it's hard to believe the wrench part looks almost unused...

wonder if it was a fiberglass handle the same shape, that broke and someone stuffed in a wrench just for fun. if it was customized for a specific need/job, I would expect the wrench to show a lot more wear.

Private Lugnutz · Aug 4, 2016

Interesting angle, Todd. I'm not sure that would've mattered in a legal dispute (first use and use rights), but, okay, if that's the case, then by the same token that Plumb went after Plomb, they could've gone after Enco for the same reason. Also, if it was that open, why didn't see more of that? It still seems like a no-no to use it without some kind of complicity agreement to me. But that is an interesting explanation. Definitely an intriguing case Ole Slewfoot has presented.

twertsy · Aug 4, 2016

Private Lugnutz said:
Interesting angle, Todd. I'm not sure that would've mattered in a legal dispute (first use and use rights), but, okay, if that's the case, then by the same token that Plumb went after Plomb, they could've gone after Enco for the same reason. Also, if it was that open, why didn't see more of that? It still seems like a no-no to use it without some kind of complicity agreement to me. But that is an interesting explanation. Definitely an intriguing case Ole Slewfoot has presented.

I should reword that last part: "anyone could have TECHNICALLY used it"

Private Lugnutz · Aug 4, 2016

Rileysan and gungatim,
You guys have good points, and I can go with the 'the old handle just happens to be the exact shape of a WF-83 DBE shank' theory if there was something on the other end of the original handle. Like a vintage tire and rim tool (spoon on one end, socket on the other) or an old connecting rod tool, etc. Otherwise, the DUAL TOOL branding doesn't make sense to me. Do you have exsmples? That's not a challenge. I really don't have any knowledge of a tool in this era with a mallet on one end and something else on the other.

APEowner · Aug 4, 2016

That sure seems to be a drawbar tool to me. Both my Bridgeport and my Hartford brand Taiwan knock off have a 3/4" hex on the drawbar.

It looks homemade to me. Well done but homemade. I think it's the difference in the condition of the wrench as compared to the head as well as the part of the rubber right at the junction. The difference in the condition of the two parts makes me think that they haven't spent their whole lives together and the rubber at the joint appears (at least in a photo viewed on my monitor) as if it was cut rather than molded.

Rileysan · Aug 4, 2016

Private Lugnutz said:
Otherwise, the DUAL TOOL branding doesn't make sense to me. Do you have exsmples?

Doesn't make sense to me, either - which is why this is a mystery.

I have been banging my head on the keyboard trying to find other examples of ENCO rubber or dean blow hammers on the internet but to no avail. Surely someone has another ENCO hammer out there!

Brian

Ole Slewfoot · Aug 5, 2016

APEowner said:
The difference in the condition of the two parts makes me think that they haven't spent their whole lives together and the rubber at the joint appears (at least in a photo viewed on my monitor) as if it was cut rather than molded.

The parting line from the mold is intact and undisturbed, and I can't make out any cutter marks in person.
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b126/SVOlvo/Mobile Uploads/20160803_163745_zpsz1wkqncd.jpg

There is a WF-83 listed on ebay as being 11 1/2" OAL
The Dual Tool is maybe a hair over that, and a magnet will sick to the head where the end of the ring would be.

Private Lugnutz · Aug 5, 2016

Rileysan said:
Surely someone has another ENCO hammer out there!

Enco makes and sells a drawbar tool today. It looks like a deadblow hammer with a flat copper striking surface on one face and a socket broached into the other face. Fiberglass handle with nothin on the other end.

What continues to stump me is the branding. That required some OEM work. A design (i.e., marketing dept, engineering dept, drafting drafting) and the making of a die or mold for the caster. It made it to at least a prototype stage at some point. Even if it didn't have this Plomb WF-83 shank on it. Whether the DUAL TOOL was a drawbar tool made by Enco with Plomb WF-83 shanks, or this was a homemade tool and the Enco DUAL TOOL refers to some other function that was on the other end of the original handle, it is very weird that there is not one reference anywhere else.

The closest thing I have found to this Enco/Plomb "DUAL TOOL" is a tool that a guy is calling a "Bridgeport Wrammer" in sales ads on eBay and various machinists' forums. It appears to be a long 15* angle pattern (no offsets) DBE wrench with 3/4 x 7/8 12-point openings. It has a brass deadblow hammer head attached to the shank closer to the small box end so that the shank of the DBE can be used as a handle. In this case, both box ends and the hammer can be used. The ads show the Wrammer with a vintage Bridgeport milling machine, but I am assuming this thing is homemade.An illegible brand marking can be seen on the hammer head. A barely legible model number (C xxxx) and size marking can be seen on the shank of the DBE.

EDIT: Search on "Bridgeport Wrammer" to find ads and see pics.

3baygarage · Aug 5, 2016

This is an interesting case for sure. Particularly because of the name on the hammer head. I can't find anything on the hammer itself and I'm sure everybody else has looked.

For someone to say hmmm, this old Plomb wrench sort of fits this here hammer head, and then go to the trouble of chroming a wrench that was probably cad. plated is beyond me. Looks darn good though.

Time will tell if someone turns up another Enco.

Ole Slewfoot · Aug 5, 2016

Sent an email to the older tools parts department.

Edit;

And got a reply that Enco used to make their own tools, but I'm on my own.

APEowner · Aug 5, 2016

3baygarage said:
This is an interesting case for sure. Particularly because of the name on the hammer head. I can't find anything on the hammer itself and I'm sure everybody else has looked.

For someone to say hmmm, this old Plomb wrench sort of fits this here hammer head, and then go to the trouble of chroming a wrench that was probably cad. plated is beyond me. Looks darn good though.

Time will tell if someone turns up another Enco.

Machinists are a special sort of folk and I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to find that one made that up.

gorilla · Aug 6, 2016

My guess is that Enco bought some wrenches then had the rubber mallet end molded on one end of the wrench. More than likely made a small prototype run to see how well they sold and maybe discontinued due to low sales.

Rileysan · Aug 7, 2016

Private Lugnutz said:
What continues to stump me is the branding. That required some OEM work. A design (i.e., marketing dept, engineering dept, drafting drafting) and the making of a die or mold for the caster. It made it to at least a prototype stage at some point. Even if it didn't have this Plomb WF-83 shank on it. Whether the DUAL TOOL was a drawbar tool made by Enco with Plomb WF-83 shanks, or this was a homemade tool and the Enco DUAL TOOL refers to some other function that was on the other end of the original handle, it is very weird that there is not one reference anywhere else.

I was thinking about the "Dual" tool design and the idea behind it is much more common than I was originally thinking. I was limiting the context to the wrench being the second tool because of the OP's picture. But vintage dual purpose hammers are actually quite common and most often have a nail puller and/or pry bar on the handle.

Nothing about a chromed Plomb wrench for a handle makes any sense. The simplest conclusion is most often the correct conclusion. I believe now, more than before, this is a tool made either by an ENCO employee or by someone in their home shop.

APEowner said it best - "Machinists are a special sort of folk ..."

Brian

Ole Slewfoot · Aug 7, 2016

well our thread here is the first 3 results if you google image search for 'Enco "dual tool"' or 'Plomb "dual tool"', so if someone comes up with another we may hear of it. Tried looking for proto dual tools, no dice.

Im still a little surprised the hammer head hasn't shown up.

2mJps · Aug 7, 2016

ttpete said:
There are other size drawbars on different make machines. That's 3/4" but it could also be used on a 19 mm hex. I agree with you for everything but a Bridgeport. It appears it was made that way, possibly by Enco using Plomb wrenches they may have had in stock. Enco sold a lot of Taiwan/China made machines.

My Bridgeport is 3/4.

Al Borland · Aug 7, 2016

Odd things I see bout this.
1. Hammer head shows significant use/wear. Wrench looks brand-new. No visible nicks or scratches.
2. That wrench would be an uncomfortable handle (narrow and flat) if you wanted to really use that hammer.
3. Chrome makes for a slippery handle. You want a good grip on something you're swinging.
Of course, the hammer head could be there TO hit, like a slug wrench...but again, not very efficient design.

davethorik · Aug 7, 2016

Al Borland said:
Odd things I see bout this.
1. Hammer head shows significant use/wear. Wrench looks brand-new. No visible nicks or scratches.
2. That wrench would be an uncomfortable handle (narrow and flat) if you wanted to really use that hammer.
3. Chrome makes for a slippery handle. You want a good grip on something you're swinging.
Of course, the hammer head could be there TO hit, like a slug wrench...but again, not very efficient design.

Have you ever used a milling machine? Drawbar specific tools usually stay on the machine and do not lead hard lives. Usually just a tap with a deadblow once the nut is loosened and the tooling falls out of the spindle.

Most machine shops have access to chrome plating facilities, the wrench portion could have very easily been included in a batch and then polished.

tym · Aug 7, 2016

Just stabbing in the dark here, but could this been some sort of small-batch promotional item?

Ole Slewfoot · Aug 8, 2016

Al Borland said:
Odd things I see bout this.
1. Hammer head shows significant use/wear. Wrench looks brand-new. No visible nicks or scratches.This is correct use of a hammer right? the handle transition part shows very little misstrike wear.
2. That wrench would be an uncomfortable handle (narrow and flat) if you wanted to really use that hammer. I'd put it at about 16 oz and 11.5" long, you aren't going to sein it that hard even if you want to.
3. Chrome makes for a slippery handle. You want a good grip on something you're swinging. The wrench end makes for a solid pommel, and the profile of the wrench handle lets you feel exactly which way its pointed, and the rubber end absorbs some shock.
Of course, the hammer head could be there TO hit, like a slug wrench...but again, not very efficient design.

I would not drive fenceposts into the ground with it, but it is easy to use and will deliver a solid blow.

Ole Slewfoot · Feb 28, 2018

2018 bump, it's still working.
Have yet to see another Enco hammer of any kind.

DadsTools · Feb 28, 2018

If you look closely in photo 5 at the shank, you can see that it is tapered shortly before entering into the head--you can see the distortion in the reflection off the chrome. If the head were molded around the wrench end, the rubber would naturally conform to the existing shank without having to grind the shank to fit. It also appears as if there are signs of corrosion pitting around the rims of the box end. I have an old ball peen with a fiberglass shank having a rectangular profile, so the original could have been similarly shaped. I agree with another post that the condition of the shank vs the head is too inconsistent.

This is a fantasy piece made by some unknown funny guy. He ground the shank to fit into the existing head hole and then had the wrench plated.

bluebolt · Feb 28, 2018

Hey Ole Slewfoot, can you measure the wrench end DadsTools is talking about and see if there is any taper or just the way the picture looks?

DadsTools · Feb 28, 2018

bluebolt said:
Hey Ole Slewfoot, can you measure the wrench end DadsTools is talking about and see if there is any taper or just the way the picture looks?

Even if you look at the edge of the wrench in photo 2, you can see the grinding striations under the chrome. I've never seen a Plomb wrench with such crude grinding marks, but only on the cheapest Chiwan ****.

Ole Slewfoot · Mar 1, 2018

Since the wartime powers that be forbade secondary grinding /polishing operations, the war tools are all pretty rough. Here with my factory WF-82's, it is by far the smoothest
This wrench was smoothed significantly prior to plating, or its plated really thick.

bluebolt said:
Hey Ole Slewfoot, can you measure the wrench end DadsTools is talking about and see if there is any taper or just the way the picture looks?

The beam is 0.003" thinner in the middle than the ends, and broadwise, tapers from 0.593" at the wrench end to 0.603" at the hammer end.

Strangely in the last two years I have not come across a normal WF-83 for comparison.

Enco 'Dual tool" Plomb hammer wrench

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Banned

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Banned

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Attachments