Billmont #500 mechanics kit

[four.cycle]

(* first time I've seen this thread, which is the one linked to in the "sticky". apologies for any duplications here. *)

Billmont / Guthard

 

[four.cycle]

Billmont / Guthard

 

[four.cycle]

Billmont / Guthard

 

[Oldtuleguy]

Here's an old bilmont set. Thought it was cool how the sockets are stored in the handle.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Thought it was cool how the sockets are stored in the handle.

Very cool. Around the tommy bar used for turning the handle, which basically has a universal joint inside that elbow. I see you have some decal left on the lid. That's neat. My box (see page 1) has some paperwork inside, but nothing left on the lid. These were their No. 1 set.

 

[Oldtuleguy]

Yup was surprised to see a bit of decal on there!

 

[Private Lugnutz]

It was inspirational for me, because it reminded me it was supposed to have one. I am going to re-create one. Even though the whole decal is not there, there's enough there to see the branding, style and color scheme, which they used in other marketing. See post #16 and #17 on page 1.

 

[Patrick Eubanks]

Here is my Billmont set as it currently stands. Getting the box back presentable has been a chore. I’m still missing some pieces but I’m on the hunt daily

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Looks terrific, Patrick. And the "signage" is a great idea.

 

[Patrick Eubanks]

Looks terrific, Patrick. And the "signage" is a great idea.

Thanks a lot for your help.

 

[bmwrd0]

This came home with me yesterday:

It seems to be beyond complete, as there are over 40 sockets, much more than the 100 or 500 sets contain, not to mention what is inside the handle. Obviously the box is homemade, and while I would love to find an original box I am not sure which one I should be looking for.

 

[Old Radar]

I found this at an Estate Sale today. From looking at posted literature, I'm guessing it is a No. 300 set--which they apparently sold without any drive tools--to which a No. 2 Junior Wrench was added to give the set some utility.
The unbranded chromed 1/2" hex head was included in the sale and I thought it was just tossed in there, but now believe it and the cross bar go together to form a sliding T--which means the Junior's original cross bar is MIA. Those of you with a Junior, could confirm this by checking if your cross bars have a center detent, a ball catch at one end and a pinched stop at the other. My luck finding original cross bars runs somewhere between pitiful and nonexistent...

The box has been repaired several times and in its current state is screaming for a thorough reconstruction, including fabricating a replacement for the missing left side wall. No trace remains of any label.
That being said, I'm extremely happy that all 24 sockets are accounted for and the fact that two or three are cracked, bothers me not at all.

I'd be interested to know from other owners, if any of your sockets lack a size stamp. Stamps are missing on five of mine--5/8, 19/32, 9/16, 1/2, & 7/16.
Also, if anyone has an extra Master Wrench they would consider trading/selling, let me know!

 

[Old Radar]

Happy Thanksgiving to all the GJ members. I thought I would post this update before diving into meal prep for this afternoon's feast.

As noted above, the box needed restoration from previous slap-dash repairs over the years.
I removed the carpet tacks and thin brads that were all that was holding the box together, used double ought steel wool to rub everything down and planed down the long break in the lid that had been glued a sixteenth above the plane of the box and a sixteenth left of center. I had to glue multiple cracks and splits from nails and decades of rough handling.
I fabricated a new left side for the bottom half from of a piece of cherry that my neighbor had.
To age the raw wood, we soaked a bit of steel wool in vinegar and another bit in ammonia and experimented with each and some coffee grounds until we came up with a stain that was acceptably close.
Finally, I decided to apply a coat of BLO everywhere except to the slab that holds the sockets. I didn't want to obscure the printed socket sizes. Unfortunately, I touched the slab with BLO covered fingers and decided I had to do that, too. As feared, the century old dry wood soaked up the BLO like a sponge, darkening it to a point where the sizes lost some readability.



Interestingly, the backs of the small hinges are marked with Stanley's Sweetheart logo. This adds weight to the dating of the box between 1920-22.


Finally, the box is missing its two hook latches. I thought it would be an easy procurement from HD, Loews or Hobby Lobby. Three strikes. I'm going to have to order online.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

This came home with me yesterday:

I found this at an Estate Sale today.

Nice finds, guys! (And sorry for the late replies. Somehow I missed or never got Alerts for this thread being updated.)

The unbranded chromed 1/2" hex head was included in the sale and I thought it was just tossed in there, but now believe it and the cross bar go together to form a sliding T--which means the Junior's original cross bar is MIA. Those of you with a Junior, could confirm this by checking if your cross bars have a center detent, a ball catch at one end and a pinched stop at the other.

Pinch stop, no groove. I don't see any Billmont literature showing a sliding T, just the short and long T's.

As noted above, the box needed restoration

And it turned out gorgeously!

I'm guessing it is a No. 300 set...

What are the dimensions of the box?

I see that various catalog images show the No. 300 set with a compartment, which is strange, since it came with no handles, but it has the same number (24) and assortment (17 hex; 7 square) of sockets as the No. 100 set, which includes the Master Wrench (MW). I'm postulating that the box for the No. 300 may have been the same exact box for the No. 100 set, just came with no MW, and maybe a different decal under the lid. Which makes sense for them to do. In which case, you wouldn't know if what you have there was originally a No. 100 (and the MW is missing) or a No. 300 (and it didn't come with an MW).

I guess the Billmont merchandising scheme was for a customer who already had a No. 0 (MW only, no sockets) or No. 1 (MW and five (5) sockets), but wanted more sockets, could purchase the No. 300 for the full complement of twenty-four (24).

Individual handles were for sale, and the No. 200 set was all the handles, but only handles, and no sockets, which may be how your incomplete No. 100 or complete No. 300 ended up with a No. 2 Junior Wrench (JW). They did not offer any set with full socketry and the No. 2.

Doing some quick math, a person could acquire all the socketry and all the handles by buying a No. 0, a No. 200, and a No. 300 for less than the $44 smackers the No. 500 set would set them back. But barely (~$5 differential) and no box to put everything in.

The No. 100 box measures 16-1/2" x 6" x 2".

Also, if anyone has an extra Master Wrench they would consider trading/selling, let me know!

I have one, but it's inside this incomplete (missing six (6) hex sox) and trashy No. 100 set box.



At least I think it's a No. 100. It came with the No. 0 MW, which had no sockets inside, but using the same logic as above, that may have been purchased separately by a PO. It had the correct wooden socket tray originally, with all the size markings, but I cannibalized that and a few of the sockets to help complete the No. 500 set.

I also have a spare No. 6 Rim Brace.



I'd probably be willing to let the whole shebang go for a decently agreeable value, but I am loathe to remove just the No. 0 MW, which would neuter the set, and I realize that's probably not desirable on your end, because you don't need the box, and it doesn't even have the hooks if you wanted to cannibalize them!



On top of that, the No. 6 Rim Brace does not fit. Speaking of fit, I'm not sure you can get a No. 0 MW and a No. 2 JW inside the compartment in that box. So you'd have a complete No. 100 set, and an extra No. 2 and No. 6 handles toward a larger set, that you'd have to store on top.

Interestingly, the backs of the small hinges are marked with Stanley's Sweetheart logo. This adds weight to the dating of the box between 1920-22.

That is interesting. My No. 100 box has different hinges. Or same hinges, perhaps, but no SSH logo.

 

[Mintgrun]

no SSH logo

I noticed that the logo was on the back side of the hinge; so, maybe yours have hearts too. Are you curious enough to undo the screws?

 

[Private Lugnutz]

I noticed that the logo was on the back side of the hinge;

Doh! (That must be some kind of reverse logic marketing philosophy at work there. )

...maybe yours have hearts too. Are you curious enough to undo the screws?

Of course. Heck, they're already loose!

I wish had read your post in the morning though. I just got into my jammies, stoked the fire, and was waiting for dear daughter to come downstairs to start a movie.

Me: "I'll be right back."
Wife: "Where are you going?"
Me: "I have to check the back of some hinges for a Stanley Sweetheart logo or it will be bothering me all night."
Wife's face:

 

[Old Radar]

And it turned out gorgeously!

Thanks! I know you're not one to normally use such a heavy hand, but this one was literally in pieces--with one piece missing. My only regret is how much the BLO darkened the wood.

What are the dimensions of the box?

16-5/8 x 6-3/16 x 2 -- within manufacturing and measuring tolerances (in my book) to be the same box.

I went down the same logic path that you did about the 100/300 sets and decided to settle on the No. 300 with the addition of the No. 2 Junior thinking the original owner may not have needed the Master Wrench's capability to reach the Ford 4th connecting rod nut--so he saved $1.75, which, according to Steve's link on the previous page, is nearly $31 in today's coin.

and I realize that's probably not desirable on your end, because you don't need the box

Yes, you're right about that and, truth be told, I'm not really all that hot about the Master Wrench--at least as a part of this set--I'd rather have a #8 ratchet, which I think would fit better in the box. (There's currently a #8 on ebay but has a rivet and possibly the spring clip retention in the hex missing.) It's interesting that your box has the same crack all the way across the top that mine has. It doesn't look like yours has been repaired yet, but I think mine was given to the owner's nine year old son with instructions to "do his best". The repair from the top looked even worse.
As for the latch hooks, I'd like to find ones that are brass plated steel (like the hinges) but all I've seen on the web are shiny brass.

I hope movie night wasn't interrupted for too long--at least you were sharp/lucky enough to correctly unscrew the screws that revealed the logo without having to remove the entire hinge.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

It's interesting that your box has the same crack all the way across the top that mine has.

Telling. Something about the design. Is the crack just about aligned with where the socket insert/compartment ends/starts?

As for the latch hooks, I'd like to find ones that are brass plated steel (like the hinges) but all I've seen on the web are shiny brass.

Your best approach might be to look for empty old boxes. It's a very common latch. I probably have no less than ten 1920's era socket sets in wooden fingerjoint corner boxes with those exact latches. I also have some empty ones. I actually pulled those out, hoping to remove the latches and add them as tempting deal "sweeteners", but they are smaller boxes, for tap and die sets and micrometers, with smaller versions of the same latch.

 

[Old Radar]

Is the crack just about aligned with where the socket insert/compartment ends/starts?

Yes. It is in the center of the unsupported span between the front of the box and the first row of sockets.

Your best approach might be to look for empty old boxes

Agreed.

Another interesting/odd and possibly distantly related thing I noticed in my search on ebay for "Billmont" was a number of listings for "Etienne Collection Billmont straw bone handbag".
I was struck by the similarity between these bags and the carrying bag offered in the Billmont catalogs. A brief search for Etienne didn't bring anything to light, but due to the rarity of the term Billmont, I can't help wondering if there is some kind of distant connection.

 

[Old Radar]

...truth be told, I'm not really all that hot about the Master Wrench--at least as a part of this set--I'd rather have a #8 ratchet...

Despite my earlier assertion, a No. 1 Master Wrench came up on ebay earlier this month and after some negotiation, I purchased it. It arrived a couple of days ago in what was likely the box it has been stored in for the last several decades--which was probably just within the USPS acceptable limits for oil-infused, ratty shipping boxes. The tool itself was wrapped in several pieces of old sweatshirts, knotted and and securely held with electrical tape.


The tool was functional, but rotation was accompanied by the sound of grinding grit which could be seen through the access holes. Looking down the angled end, the universal ball was visibly caked with hardened grease and grit.
I spent the better part of yesterday dissolving the old gunk and cleaning it up. Despite its initial appearance, what I thought was rust, was mostly more dried grease. The nickel plating, while no longer shinny, is mostly intact except for a small place on either side (outside) of the angle where it appears to have been susceptible to contact during use.




The set is missing the 9/16 socket and none of the sockets are stamped with a size. I cross-checked the sockets in my 24-piece set and none of the sockets that would be included with the No. 1 Master Wrench set are size-stamped in the 100/300 set either--even though smaller and intermediate size sockets are. It would be interesting to know if that lack of sizing was consistent for those particular sockets--and why.

Another oddity is the 5/8 socket included with this set does not fit within the tube with the rest of the sockets. The socket's diameter is slightly too large. I tried inserting the 5/8 socket from my larger set and it does not fit inside either.

And finally, speaking of fitment,

I'm not sure you can get a No. 0 MW and a No. 2 JW inside the compartment in that box.

Lugz is absolutely correct. One or the other, but not both.

 

[Old Radar]

The interesting thing is there’s been a number 8 ratchet on ebay with strictly rivets in the head, and looks like there isn’t a screw in the side of the head either. I wonder if it was an earlier model. Also has that forge mark.

This post from 3bay was from the summer of 2019.
In the interim, has anyone determined whether or not the riveted wrench lacking the side adjusting screw pre-dated the one held together with screws?
My ebay purchase this afternoon of a riveted version prompted my renewed interest in the question.
I'll post pics when it arrives in a week.

 

[Old Radar]

Here is the #8 ratchet. "Before" photos are from the ebay listing--I hate it when I jump right into cleaning before taking pictures... This wrench lacks the side adjusting screw and is fully riveted instead of having screws. Anyone have a guess about which version is older?


After degreasing and an overnight Evap-o-Rust bath:

Most of the nickel plating has worn away, but hey, it's over 100 years old...

Unfortunately, I didn't notice that the socket retaining clip was broken off before purchase.


Having never seen one first-hand, I'd really appreciate a close-up picture of an intact clip from a fellow owner to see if I can fabricate a repair.
If possible, I'd also like to hear from other Master Wrench owners if they have any trouble storing their 5/8" sockets in the tube. Neither of mine fit inside.

Finally, a family group shot. Both the #8 and #2 wrenches fit inside and the lid closes--although I'm still looking for hooks for the case.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Having never seen one first-hand, I'd really appreciate a close-up picture of an intact clip from a fellow owner to see if I can fabricate a repair.

Believe it or not, I have moved my entire Billmont #500 Mechanics Kit on to another owner, and in looking through my photo albums, I don't see any that zoomed in on it. I will contact the new owner.

If possible, I'd also like to hear from other Master Wrench owners if they have any trouble storing their 5/8" sockets in the tube. Neither of mine fit inside.

What do you mean by "fit inside"? The 5/8" socket will not slide all the way into the tube, even if there were no other sockets inside, if that's what you're asking. It has to be placed last in the string of sockets on the bar, and it sits right on the end, with just enough and only enough space for the threads on the cap and the threads on the inside of the tube to mesh. EDIT: Scratch all that, and proceed to the next post!

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Well, another believe it or not, this one just as shocking, but much more gratifying: having an Aha! moment, I have discovered that either not all MW's are alike or not all 5/8" sockets are alike!

As you know, I have two, a complete No. 1 MW set, in its original wooden box, with original paperwork in the bottom, and an orphan/solo MW that came only with a crossbar, no sockets. Either misplaced by a PO, or perhaps a No. 0 MW, which did not come with sockets, offered and sold on the assumption that a customer already had the sockets, from one of the many other sets they came with (namely, the No. 100, 200, 250, 300, and 310) that did not come with an MW.

The 5/8" socket from the complete kit-in-box No. 1 MW set will not fit in the tube of the orphan (potentially No. 0) MW!

I have not mic'ed either of them yet, internally or externally, but it's pretty obvious that the original MW from the No. 1 set is slightly larger inside. It looks like it has shallower threads, or better said, threads that are slightly more inset inside the tube. Technically, No. 0 MW's sold separately would, by rights, need no internal tube storage. The sockets were stored in one of the other cases. But the idea of a slightly alternate tooling and process on the line seems highly implausible to me. I am inclined to think this might be a massive case of poor QA/QC. Note that the caps are interchangeable, which is a little strange and may point to the interior diameter of the tube itself below that as the culprit, not the threads.

Pic 1 is the 5/8" socket inside its rightful MW. Pic 2 is the same 5/8" socket inside the orphan MW. Pic 3 and 4 are the MW's side by side, No. 1 on the left, and orphan on the right.

 

[Old Radar]

Believe it or not, I have moved my entire Billmont #500 Mechanics Kit on to another owner,

I have not mic'ed either of them yet, internally or externally

...so of course, I had to.
First thing I noted during a close visual inspection of the 5/8 socket was a slight flare of the round "head" just forward of the hex flats.
I mic'ed the edge of the head adjacent to the flats and adjacent to the reflex angle between the flats. I found that the diameter of the head adjacent to the angles was between 0.0070 and 0.0095 larger than at the flats.
This however, became moot when I noted that the diameter of the head was between 0.9357 and 0.9375 while the inside diameter of the threads is 0.9357.
I conclude that this particular 5/8" socket has never seen the inside of this particular Master Wrench, and also that you are on to something big when you say you are inclined to think this might be a massive case of poor QA/QC.
Whether this 5/8 socket is a replacement for one that was damaged or lost is unknowable, but it definitely did not start out as part of this No. 1--if in fact this wrench started out as a No. 1 and not a No. 0, which is also unknowable.
I do know that I agree with you that "the idea of a slightly alternate tooling and process on the line seems highly implausible" and that the only difference between a No. 1 and a No. 0 should be whether or not it was stuffed with sockets at the factory.
BTW, mine looks just like your picture #2 with the socket head catching on the first threads.

I just thought of another scenario that could pull all these issues together.
1. A new company quickly fields a novel tool and touts its virtues.
2. Orders flood the company and to keep pace, their QA/QC slides.
3. To recoup losses on rejected wrenches, company offers them for sale without sockets.
4. Two years later, company goes out of business...

 

[Private Lugnutz]

I had the same thoughts as I was stopped over the tools on my bench. That's the fun thing about vintage collectibles, and even moreso, the obscure vintage collectibles. The appeal often has nothing to do with quality.

 

[four.cycle]

1921 "Billmont" Edgar C. Guthard Co., 361 E. Ohio St., Chicago IL

 

[Oldtuleguy]

I have seen a number of these sets, but grabbed this one locally because of the label.

 

[Patrick Eubanks]

I have seen a number of these sets, but grabbed this one locally because of the label.

whew what a great looking box. I would have grabbed it too.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

I have seen a number of these sets, but grabbed this one locally because of the label.

Fantastic. It appears to be the same No. 100 set and box that @Old Radar and I have been talking about in great detail (contents, box dimensions, latches, Stanley Sweetheart logo hinges, etc) in posts #51 through #57 above. Can you confirm?

Also please provide a photo of the label that is all squared up to the lens so it can be reproduced.

 

[Oldtuleguy]

Here's a label pic

 

[Old Radar]

Great label!! I want one!
Let's see the rest of the box and, of course, the tools!

 

[Oldtuleguy]

Typical finger jointed box, hook hasps, hinges

 

[Oldtuleguy]

The sockets are stamped with the size, box marked as well.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

He didn't measure or check for the Stanley Sweetheart logos under the hinges ( ), but it sure looks like our No. 100 boxes, @Old Radar. It's interesting that the set number is not included anywhere on that label. It is almost certainly a No. 100 set.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Here's a label pic

Thanks.

 

[Old Radar]

He didn't measure or check for the Stanley Sweetheart logos under the hinges ( ), but it sure looks like our No. 100 boxes, @Old Radar. It's interesting that the set number is not included anywhere on that label. It is almost certainly a No. 100 set.

Completely agree on all points--especially that OTG needs to get with the program and check under a hinge for the Sweetheart logo!

 

[JeffreyG]

Another Billmont set. I’ve had this set for a bunch of years, put aside along with other antique tools that were interesting but not functional enough to mix in with my “active” toolboxes, so simply put aside to look at later.

I found the 1/2 inch square drive socket adapter interesting, as they probably saw that becoming a standard with other toolmakers. Remnants of a label inside the box, but enough to see it looks different than the label shown above, maybe a list of included parts? Also, ratchet labeled “Billmont Junior”, do they all say that, or could that be the name of the set?

 

[Patrick Eubanks]

Another Billmont set. I’ve had this set for a bunch of years, put aside along with other antique tools that were interesting but not functional enough to mix in with my “active” toolboxes, so simply put aside to look at later.

I found the 1/2 inch square drive socket adapter interesting, as they probably saw that becoming a standard with other toolmakers. Remnants of a label inside the box, but enough to see it looks different than the label shown above, maybe a list of included parts? Also, ratchet labeled “Billmont Junior”, do they all say that, or could that be the name of the set?

And finally, did anyone find a source for the hook latches that seem to always be missing?

Thats fantastic. One of my all time favorite sets