Eugene Cornwell

[Private Lugnutz]

Ye Olde Honey Hole!

 

[3baygarage]

Yes, nice haul. Lots of goodies. I’m curious about the Manzel of course. I have a couple of the ratchet, but only one size handle for each. I’ve seen the ratchet and handles as a set before but finding them is “Wooh, good luck.“. Congrats on that find. It sounds like you have the set now.

 

[Ricky Joe]

Manzel made Ford tools, hedging in on K R Wilson territory. I’d say that brake spoon is for 1950s Fords.

That is a great haul. Some of the items are very good to have and hard to find. I see several that I can use today (working on a 1938 Chevrolet Master Deluxe Sport Coupe with rumble seat).

 

[MR.X]

Ye Olde Honey Hole!

Chit! I realized I left half a dozen good tools I got at the same $1.00 sale out of that group pic. Here’s one.

 

[MisterEd]

Have found few Cornwell tools, but like the ones we have.
End Wrench, EW14, 7/16 x 1/2

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Found this "CORNWELL" feeler gauge at the flea yesterday. It's for Fords. The same house close-out lot had a Blue-Point version, same exact blades, much nicer, older, more ornate markings, posted here.

 

[Garage.Girl]

A fun selection of early CORNWELL tappet wrenches (USS,SAE,and one OP?)

 

[Private Lugnutz]

OP?

For "Opening." That's the only one that follows the modern and current convention of displaying the size of the actual milled opening.

 

[Garage.Girl]

For "Opening." That's the only one that follows the modern and current convention of displaying the size of the actual milled opening.

Hahaha as usual super helpful (and you got me lookin deeper into sizes before we standardized) it just seemed too easy so I jumped past the idea, now to find an excuse to use em XD

 

[d42jeep]

I found a few Cornwell items today at an estate sale. The Cornwell ratchets are favorites of mine and I don’t leave them behind whenever I see them. I also found a couple of combo wrenches in a sleeve but I don’t know if the sleeve is original.
I cleaned and added the new ratchet to my others. The little 3/8” drive is my favorite shorty ratchet.

 

[Oldtuleguy]

Some ignition wrenches

 

[MR.X]

Picked this stuff up about 15 miles from Dearborn in one direction or Willow Run in the other yesterday....Think it's WW2 Air Corps stuff that was liberated from one of the Ford Aircraft plants.

 

[Oldtuleguy]

Someone cut up these cornwell combos, now they are short flare nut wrenches. Some numbers stamped on them, also USAC.

 

[MR.X]

Someone cut up these cornwell combos, now they are short flare nut wrenches. Some numbers stamped on them, also USAC.

Looks like Air Corps and Henry Ford Trade School.

 

[MR.X]

Someone cut up these cornwell combos, now they are short flare nut wrenches. Some numbers stamped on them, also USAC.

Cornwell extensions converted to Ford L wrenches.

 

[LNKMK8]

I came across these early Cornwell Extensions at a sale last week. They pre-date the "E-**" numbering convention, so they should be pre 1935? They are marked as follow"

3/8" Drive 6" length = "23 Cornwell 6"
3/8" Drive 12" Length = "33 Cornwell 8"
1/2" Drive 4" Length = "42 Cornwell 4"
1/2" Drive 10" Length = "2 Cornwell 8"

The numbers do not always align to their length. A bit of a mystery to me and my limited research/knowledge.

 

[Oldtuleguy]

Threw my custom made short wrenches in old cornwell drawer

 

[MR.X]

Here's some cool old Cornwell stuff. BTW, I'd be interested to know if anyone other than me has found the generally accepted Cornwell letter/ year code to be problematic. Not interested in ragging on the AA site in general just comparing red flags.

 

[Oldtuleguy]

I have not really looked into it. Did you find some discrepancies?

 

[MR.X]

I have not really looked into it. Did you find some discrepancies?

3/8" drive sockets with B date codes (before they were introduced). same thing with 12 point 5/8" drive sockets. I don't think the "A" code breakers in my picture were being offered in 1927 . I understand the S.A.E.? U.S.S. sizing convention 1927 changeover theory but the Cornwell Catalogs still use the old S.A.E sizes til 32 so I'm not sure it's a lock that "B" codes with "across flats" sizes started in 1927 and in that case would throw the whole timeline off. I also understand that the original theory has to take the letter system from 27 up to 1935ish? when they started with model #'s but I think you could do the same thing by changing the start year for letters and then not limiting yourself to a straight 1 letter= 1 year restriction. I don't know,..... just throwing chit at the wall.
Just thought of another example ...I have a 3/4" drive 'F' code which would supposedly be 1932 but at least by the catalogs they weren't offering 3/4" drive yet.
I'm not really a Cornwell guy, so thought maybe someone had already looked into this with more patience and attention to detail than I can muster....

 

[MR.X]

In previous post I threw out some examples of Cornwell tools with date codes that seemed to not match up with the years those tools were actually available according to known catalogs. I hastily wrote the post assuming readers’ familiarity with the generally accepted AA date code. ( or if “ generally accepted” is too strong, then, at least used by default by ebayers and others with only a passing interest with the brand.) The site spells out its reasoning and goes on to theorize that the single letters after CORNWELL start in 1927 with “A”, “B”=1928, “C”=29, “D”=30 etc. I’m keeping my problematic example simple this time. Below are a speeder, 2 extensions,2 flex and 1 regular socket, all 3/8” drive and all “B” date codes.
3/8” drive tools are thought to have been introduced by Cornwell in 32 , possibly 31, either way, not even close to the “B” implied 1928. B simply can’t be 1928 if Cornwell 3/8” drive tools weren’t introduced til years later. Either I’m missing something here or it’s simply a case of AA not having enough examples on hand when originally hypothesizing the code.

 

[Oldtuleguy]

I started to investigate a bit but have not gotten through my examples yet. It would seem somethings off in the timeline.

 

[four.cycle]

simply a case of AA not having enough examples on hand when originally hypothesizing the code.

I don't know anything at all about Cornwell, MR.X.
What I do know is that the site administrator at AA has some rather unusual (and not, in my opinion, very reliable) methods in which he establishes "date ranges" on some items.
What is on his website is limited to what he has in his own collection, and his date findings are based on what he is able to find in printed material (usually catalogs), notwithstanding evidence to the contrary - empirical, anecdotal, or otherwise.

 

[MR.X]

I don't know anything at all about Cornwell, MR.X.
What I do know is that the site administrator at AA has some rather unusual (and not, in my opinion, very reliable) methods in which he establishes "date ranges" on some items.
What is on his website is limited to what he has in his own collection, and his date findings are based on what he is able to find in printed material (usually catalogs), notwithstanding evidence to the contrary - empirical, anecdotal, or otherwise.

Hi. Yeah, frankly, A lot of people like to simultaneously stand on Bill's shoulders and piss on him at the same time. As someone who has lived in the NW, SW, SE, NE and dead center Midwest I have somewhat of a better sample size / variety than the average Joe to observe just how much early to mid 20th Century mechanic tool knowledge improved after the establishment of that site. I do, however obviously see the issue with all the guys doing great research on this site, for example, attempting to come to reasonable consensus based on intelligence, initiative, and often times newly available info and then being frustrated at not having a site/ location to dump it all, with references, so that there's one place with all the updated information. I have neither the actual technical competency to run a site like that or am anywhere close to being wired for that kind of endeavor so.....anyway, I have no illusion that anything I do or "solve" here will have any permanence so I'm basically just....yeah,... I don't know what I'm doing.

 

[Oldtuleguy]

I'm just having fun collecting old tools

 

[four.cycle]

Hi. Yeah, frankly, A lot of people like to simultaneously stand on Bill's shoulders and piss on him at the same time.

I thought I had chosen my words very carefully there, and there's no intention to piss on anyone.
The site administrator at AA (I have no idea what his name is) and I have a somewhat mutually beneficial relationship, although there are points we do not agree on: date ranges being one of them.

 

[MR.X]

Fair enough. But what I said is true, even if inartfully( probably not a word) written.

 

[four.cycle]

how much early to mid 20th Century mechanic tool knowledge improved after the establishment of that site

^ No argument on that point, sir. What he has done has been a gift to the tool collecting community.
Unfortunately it's not always 100% accurate.
The "system" used here - kind of an ad hoc "peer review" system - seems to work quite well in sussing out the little nuances that exist (like the differing shapes of PLOMB 1/2" drive speeders) or looking to outside sources to ascertain correct dates on catalogs and patents.
It's not perfect, but it strives for absolute accuracy; gray areas are not filled with conjecture and speculation. You will not find "we believe" on GarageJournal.com. (Although you'll find a LOT of "I believe" in my own posts, because I have no difficulty admitting I don't know everything.

 

[MR.X]

^ No argument on that point, sir. What he has done has been a gift to the tool collecting community.
Unfortunately it's not always 100% accurate.
The "system" used here - kind of an ad hoc "peer review" system - seems to work quite well in sussing out the little nuances that exist (like the differing shapes of PLOMB 1/2" drive speeders) or looking to outside sources to ascertain correct dates on catalogs and patents.
It's not perfect, but it strives for absolute accuracy; gray areas are not filled with conjecture and speculation. You will not find "we believe" on GarageJournal.com. (Although you'll find a LOT of "I believe" in my own posts, because I have no difficulty admitting I don't know everything.

The contributors do an excellent job on this site. There’s no actual point of official summary of course….or filing of said summary or consensus under an easy to navigate system. I can't even imagine what the mechanics of that would look like…. Or how not fun that would end up being.

 

[MR.X]

BTW, it’s almost, but I guess, not quite, interesting that there isn’t much of a following for vintage Cornwell. It’s not one of my areas of focus but you’d think…anyway, do any of the Ohio companies get much love?

 

[RTM]

, do any of the Ohio companies get much love?

Gerstner and Kennedy, from some.

Think there is an Ohio thread somewhere.

Tools of Ohio

As an ohioan the tools made in the state in which I live interest me. Rather than do a deep dive into the internet to find more ohio tool companies that I do not know of, I figured I could make a thread where people could post pictures and history of some Ohio tools. So post up your Ridgid...

www.garagejournal.com

 

[Oldtuleguy]

You can throw truth,otc and some others in that bunch. Most old defunct tool manufacturers get little love.

 

[MR.X]

Don’t suppose I need to add a bunch more “B” code tools that Cornwell probably wasn’t making in 1928 but…F it.

 

[Oldtuleguy]

Here's some a code stuff, looks to be in line with catalog

 

[Old Radar]

I found this Cornwell 1/4" open gear, female ratchet stamped "USA 16, BR 10" last week at an estate sale. It has a worn cadmium finish. I've searched GJ & the web unsuccessfully for info on it. Archive.org has been down the last couple of days so I can't check to see if it comes up in catalogs. If AA's dating theory bears any relation to the stamps--beyond USA appearing around 1935--it is beyond my capability to interpret.
Has anyone seen one like this? Can anyone decode the stamps?



Interestingly, I did find a 1/4" Snap-on R-7408 ratchet, that sold on ebay, that looks almost identical, barring the longer selector lever.

 

[Oldtuleguy]

With no letter code post 35? That style ratchet was sold by several companies, from late twenties on up.

 

[Old Radar]

^^^ If you're suggesting it was made sometime after '35, based on the lack of a letter behind "Cornwell", I cannot argue against that.

That would fit with Lugz's summary of the AA timeline quoted below. However, the AA timeline and therefore Lugz's summary seem, to me, to be heavily wrench-centric, whereas the stamps on my ratchet don't conform to any of the given conventions--

The Cornwell name, USA, unknown two-digit number, and possibly a functional phonetic prefix (e.g., AW for Angle Wrench, TW for Tappet Wrench, etc) followed by a number (e.g., 6, 12, etc)--BR 10. Bambino Ratchet 10??

Your assertion that several companies sold this style ratchet is validated by the presence of the Snap-on version, but is open to contradiction due to my inability to find further examples.

If true, do you know who the OEM was?

1919-1926
- The Cornwell name and hardware standard (U.S.S., S.A.E., etc) sizes, not milled opening sizes

1927-1932
- The Cornwell name with a letter (e.g., A through F) and hardware standard sizes

1933-1934
- Unknown one- or two-digit numbers (e.g., 17, 24, etc), the Cornwell name, one- or two-digit model numbers, NO letter, and the switch to milled opening sizes

1935->
- Unknown one- or two-digit numbers (e.g., 17, 24, etc), the Cornwell name, an alphanumeric model number with a functional phonetic prefix (e.g., AW for Angle Wrench, TW for Tappet Wrench, etc) followed by a number (e.g., 6, 12, etc) and NO "USA"

Later in the 30's through the 40's and into 50's
- Unknown one- or two-digit numbers (e.g., 17, 24, etc), the Cornwell name, the alphanumeric model number, and "USA"

Later still (and AA says 1954->)
- Unknown one- or two-digit numbers (e.g., 17, 24, etc), the Cornwell name, the alphanumeric model number with the prefix where the model number (e.g., 1814) now corresponds to milled opening size(s) in 32/nds, and "USA"

 

[Private Lugnutz]

I wouldn't do you fellers any good at this point on dating Cornwell or even re-looking the rationale. For one, because my handle on it quickly diminished when I traded my entire collection to @Username already in use to populate his sweet old Cornwell box. And, because I remember being less certain and downright confused at times by the alphanumeric soup. Believe it or not, I was a 49/64ths away from publishing an alternate theory I was excessively proud for having discovered, that correlated some of the numbers to sizes, and it really did work, on some sets, but had all kinds of holes in it, and did not scale across everything. It's a mess and seemingly unnecessarily complicated.

 

[Oldtuleguy]

Not sure if made by cornwell or not. Certainly looks like snapon and craftsman versions. Br maybe bantam ratchet? 16 maybe January 41? Mrx has raised some questions recently about our understanding of cornwell date codes. As lugz states it's a bit confusing.

 

[3baygarage]

A nice old Cornwell 3/8 drive breaker bar. I love the look of the old Cornwell drive tools.