Well, craigslist has been kind of dry in my area but I want a decent vise. What about the Wilton 21500? I know it's imported, but it looks like it might be better than just a HF or HD special. What do you think?
With a tiny bit of patience, you should be able to find a clean '70's Wilton 350 or 400 bullet machinist vise for less than that price, or a completely restored one with extras for a bit more... *much nicer*.Wilton Mechanics' Vises - 21500 Sale Price:$191.29
I saw that one. Looks like it has a lot of potential, but I really want a 6" vise.http://atlanta.craigslist.org/nat/for/1970338995.html
My choice of the above. Snag that bad boy and clean it up properly.
ZRX is a CL master.
I don't mind old, but that thing is OOOOLD! Looks like they dredged that thing up from the titanic!This one has potential:
http://atlanta.craigslist.org/sat/for/1911356545.html
That's a nice vise for someone interested in something that is somewhat collectible and who's into vintage vises. I'm not interested in anything but a good, larger vise that I can moderately abuse and won't break on me though. That Prentiss is a bit small, does not swivel and doesn't have an anvil surface on the back.I'd love to have that Prentiss if I was closer. You should highly consider it unless it is cracked. It'd be a good vise.
That's a nice vise for someone interested in something that is somewhat collectible and who's into vintage vises. I'm not interested in anything but a good, larger vise that I can moderately abuse and won't break on me though. That Prentiss is a bit small, does not swivel and doesn't have an anvil surface on the back.
The Wilton 21500 that I linked to in the OP has all the features that I'm looking for, but I AM reluctant to pay $200 for a Chinese vise.
There was an older 5" CMan (I may consider going as small as 5") on CL a few weeks ago that I let slip away. Guess I'll just have to keep my eyes open.
Oh yeah, those are the real deal and are very nice. Only thing is, I'd want the 1765 (6-inch) model and that jumps the price up quite a bit.At this point a Wilton 1745 isn't going to cost THAT much more. And it will be way better.![]()
That's a nice vise for someone interested in something that is somewhat collectible and who's into vintage vises. I'm not interested in anything but a good, larger vise that I can moderately abuse and won't break on me though.
Oh yeah, those are the real deal and are very nice. Only thing is, I'd want the 1765 (6-inch) model and that jumps the price up quite a bit.

Wait.... The deals are out there! I got this for $68.00!!! Cleaned it up and it looks great. I don't think I'm gonna paint it. I'll just get pissed when I chip it. Wipe it down with some oil every once in a while.

I`m confused,you don`t want an old,strongly built vise,that will outlast you....because it is possibly collectible. But you are considering purchasing a new,cheaply made vise,that you are clearly worried about the quality of.
Who cares how old it is,or if it "might" be collectible to someone. I am sure it would want to be used for what it was made for,the old one`s aren`t still around because they broke easily.
Nothing against the old vises just because they're old. Sorry if I gave that impression. It's just that the examples given were either the wrong size or didn't have swivel capability or an anvil surface behind the fixed jaw.Steer clear of those ooooooold vises. New vises are are complicated, highly tuned, precision instruments of squeezing technology compared with those patented in 1912. SO much has changed in squeezing technology in the 100 years since that Prentiss was cast. The only thing it's good for is holding the door open and it may fail at that.
![]()
Nothing against the old vises just because they're old. Sorry if I gave that impression. It's just that the examples given were either the wrong size or didn't have swivel capability or an anvil surface behind the fixed jaw.
If an old 6 inch, swivel vise with an anvil shows up and is in decent shape, I'll consider it.
I'm not "into" old vises and I have no desire to refurbish one so I can stand around and polish on it. For those who like to do these things, that's fine. It's just not my cup of tea.
As for my original question about the Wilton 21500 vise, there have been many threads here on GJ on how Chinese quality of goods varies widely, depending on what specs an importer/retailer requires and is willing to pay for. I'm thinking that maybe, just maybe the 21XXX series from Wilton might fill a niche as a quality, durable, usable tool somewhere between the uber-expensive Tradesman series and the HF/Lowes/HD/Northern junk.
It very well may be a good vise. And in honesty I can't say with 100% authority it will be good or bad quality. The pattern remains though, that it is very easy to hide casting imperfections until it is too late. I have not seen very many Chinese made products that are good "because reputation depends on it".
I don't think anyone realized you needed a 6" vise with an anvil until later. That changes things. I'd still bite the bullet and buy a 1765 or wait for a fairly new one to pop up on eBay.
You are trying to get a good new vise at a good price, and it is hard to do. I got my 1780 for $200 in beautiful shape. I got a C2 for $120 bucks that had never been used, it just sat on a shelf. If you want those kinds of deals you will have to vigilant.
I saw that one. Looks like it has a lot of potential, but I really want a 6" vise.
The Wilton machinist vises have taller jaws, giving more clamping area than the mechanics series. Wider jaw openings as well. Overall, a heavier duty, higher quality vise.
I'd put a Wilton 4-1/2" 450S Machinist up against a Wilton 6" 756 Mechanics any day:
- 4-1/2" Wilton machinist 450S: 4.5"x1.25" jaws, (5.625 sq.inches of clamping area), 7.5" jaw opening, 4" inches of throat depth. 72 pounds.
- 6" Wilton mechanic's 756/21500AC: 6"x1" jaws (6 sq.inches of clamping area), with 5.75" opening, 4.125" inches throat depth. 64 pounds.
Bottom line?
I'd take a usede Wilton 4.5" Machinist over a new 6" Mechanics pretty much any day!
Well now I hadn't thought about that. Thanks for the info.