Pliers; How Many Is Too Many?

[four.cycle]

Not a clue.
Rather odd that a magazine blurb would tout the name but not mention the maker.

 

[Mintgrun]

"... readily sharpened or renickled."

Paging @Eric Brown !

 

[four.cycle]

^ really.

 

[LesserSon]

The pliers I did buy included Kilborn & Bishop slipjoints, S&H dikes (I suspect a PO attempted to sharpen one side with 180° from correct technique), JPD-mfd 6” slipjoints with no mfr stamp, Snap-on (code not visable) and M Klein & Sons (8-3-1938) needlenose.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

still wonder: who was “D&H,”

I don't know, but I suspect it's a relatively minor and more obscure mfgr with whom we just don't have the same level of familiarity as others that we can readily identify by initials, such as K&B, S&H, B&C, and P&C, or even other forms, without the ampersand, such as SK, KD, B-M, G-P, or NB, or even OTC, BHM, MTF, and, closer to the topic, PS&W.

I did look through a bunch of PS&W/PEXTO catalogs and did not find those pliers.

 

[RTM]

still wonder: who was “D&H

My Google book searches have yielded nothing, including your Lugz’s article, which surprised me, so.... (oops, miscredited)

I've started a Google AI search, and ran out of time this morning. Pointed it to your magazine article, told it to only use pre-1950 sources. It pointed out features I did not see in the pix, and said AA had an article on a niche maker. Did not give me sources on the iPad. Will poke more later this weekend, see if there is any truth.

In the BS category. It tried to tell me D&H stood for Diehard, so I eliminated anything post 1950, and that BS went away. More later. In the questionable answers, telling me it stood for Durable & Hardened, by a known maker. More later when I can verify more.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

My Google book searches have yielded nothing,including your article, which surprised me,

You said this in reply to LS's original quote, but I'm assuming you're referring to me and the 1915 The Advanced Age piece I posted. You probably didn't use the same exact syntax as me. My query was "D.&H. Hand-Forged Pliers" with no spaces between any of the characters in the term "D.&H."

the questionable answers, telling me it stood for Durable & Hardened, by a known maker.

My first thought was actually something like that, due to the improbability of two brands ("D. & H." and PEXTO) on the same pliers, but I am convinced the initials are the trade name of the manufacturer. That magazine consistently takes the same approach in all the pieces, including the one right next to it o the same page, and we all know that mfgr.

 

[d42jeep]

Has it been determined who made these pliers? I probably have too many by now.
-Don

 

[RTM]

You said this in reply to LS's original quote, but I'm assuming you're referring to me and the 1915 The Advanced Age piece I posted. You probably didn't use the same exact syntax as me. My query was "D.&H. Hand-Forged Pliers" with no spaces between any of the characters in the term "D.&H."

Oops, fixed the first part.

Google searches aren’t supposed to care about punctuation, even inside a quote. This search gave me the same search as without the punctuation.



In theory, this should have given your article too, which confuses me. If I got tons of results, I’d try to thin down by being more specific


But yours didn’t “work”either, it had to take the quotes away for me to get a result. The weirdness of google results. ETA: did you add the quotes for my benefit? My search should have still find it, but ignore the part about not working. Brain not at full speed today.

 

[paslemeilleur]

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Google searches aren’t supposed to care about punctuation,

I won't comment on Google, because I don't use it, but syntax - including spaces, absolutely matters to the Google Books search engine and always has.

 

[3baygarage]

Die & hammer? Edit: hand forged

 

[LesserSon]

Once upon a time, putting quotes around a phrase forced search results into prioritizing hits that included the entire phrase verbatim, versus hits that merely included individual words from the phrase. However, the commercial rewards of promoting sites with less relevant hits has undermined that function. Clearing cookies, browser history, location data may open up different results.
There seems to be a difference between the specific body of data that Lugz is searching (Google Books) and the Internet at large. In a sense, a general search is a search through other people’s previous results (popularity), which is smaller than everything that is actually on the Internet. You can miss things by casting too wide a net, as well as too narrow.
As a demonstration, try a general Internet search for something you know is in ITCL, then more specifically, archive.org, then ITCL, or even within a specific pdf. Try it with and without clearing your history. Try it with and without quotes around it. Try it with different search engines. (I, also, do not use Google for most of my searching.) You will get different results.

 

[Outlawmws]

Duck Duck Go is supposed to give much more useful results than the current Google or other AI infected browsers. More like the Google of yore...

 

[Private Lugnutz]

There seems to be a difference between the specific body of data that Lugz is searching (Google Books) and the Internet at large.

There's no "seems" about it. As the name implies, it only includes books and periodicals. A total of 45M+ volumes and growing!

I don't understand why everyone doing any research on any vintage or antique tool doesn't use it. When you go to the library, do you see new and used tools for sale stacked up everywhere you turn? You won't see them when you go to the largest digital library in the world (Google Books), either. You won't see countless references to secondary sources such as Worthpoint, AA, or GJ, either. Just original publications. And it's nearly timeless. So, not just like going to the library, but like going to the library in 1898 or 1924 or 1957.

With some exceptions. Publications still behind the copyright decay date who have not provided their publications to Google Books will be snippet only view. There are ways around that. Direct requests for more as an academic interest researcher, for one. Clever text searching to try to produce additional snippets before and after the original snippet, until you can piece a whole page together, and, quite possibly, several pages of snippets that you can pastiche together.

 

[LesserSon]

Mine that researchers’ paradise while it lasts.
After GB has walmarted volunteer and nonprofit repositories out of existance, isn’t the next predictable step to sell advertising space and stepped subscription fees?

 

[Private Lugnutz]

After GB has walmarted volunteer and nonprofit repositories out of existance, isn’t the next predictable step to sell advertising space and stepped subscription fees?

Not sure what prompts the analogy or the dire prediction, LS, but Google Books (and its antecedents, Google Print and Google Print Library Project) has been run like a separate entity from its oft-vilified parent business entity for 21 years, and in all that time it has shown no propensity for monetization, and has instead forged alliances with other non-profit efforts such as HathiTrust, Internet Archive, the Smithsonian, the New York Public Library, and many private and state university digital library programs, including the largest in the country (California), all of whom depend on it for large percentages of their volumes. These relationship and its well-established commitment to openness and the free democratization of knowledge has helped stave off several misguided and ill-fated lawsuits by various more parochial associations.

 

[LesserSon]

Coming from you, I respect the favorable and evidenced endorsement. As I have said elsewhere, I’m anticipating significantly more hours a day to indulge my curiosity, soon. I will definitely check my compatibility with Google Books.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

I must be a terrible salesman. (I've been using it, citing references from it, and recommending it for years.)

 

[RTM]

I must be a terrible salesman. (I've been using it, citing references from it, and recommending it for years.)

You and me both.

 

[Eric Brown]

Getting closer to answers about German pliers. After spending a few days trying different groupings I have settled on a mixed approach. In the pictures below are many of my German pliers, with a couple of related US ones. The first picture shows them laid out on my bench, separated into sections. Each section represents a different time period. The first section is only marked Fulton. The next section is marked Fulton with Germany. (Country of origin started in 1930 but some may have been marked earlier and ones not being exported did not require COO). Most the rest are not Fulton. There are ones marked Germany and D.R.G.M. putting these before the end of WWII. After WWII Germany was split into four zones: British, French, US and Russian. This would be the period between 1946 and 1949. In 1949 three of the zones were combined into West Germany (except the Russian zone). Then finally in 1990 Germany was fully reunited. So pliers simply marked Germany may have come before WWII or after the 1990 re-unification. Some of the pliers have been grouped according to handle patterns or other features. I have about 20 more German pliers coming to maybe help the research. It looks like Bruno Will made a lot of these pliers before WWII and his son, Harry Paul Will after WWII. The later tools made might simply be marked Will, HPW, or some of the other later names. Harry Will was also know as the "Plier King" and was a big importer to the US. Here is where I need to speculate: The Bruno Will pliers look very similar to the Utica model 5000 from the 1926 time period. The later Harry Will pliers have handle grips that look similar to the Utica model 550 and used on Oxwall? Possible that Harry Will copied them to be competitive with American makers? There are many similarities between Harry Will pliers and those of Oxwall. I have found no information as to Oxwall having manufactured their pliers and believe Harry Will provided them. Will post more information soon.

 

[Eric Brown]

Trying to figure out who made some Fulton Tool Company pliers. So far I have found nothing matching their shape. Alloy Artifacts was helpful, but I didn't find a match. One possibility are some planes I have that are marked with Fulton Tool Co and were made by Union Mfg. Co. but I haven't found where they made pliers. On AA: http://alloy-artifacts.org/hall-charles-e.html it's mention the Hall and then Barcalo companies. They made pliers but again none match the shape from what I've found so far. Anybody have suggestions?

 

[Mintgrun]

Possibly Vaughan & Bushnell?

The shape is similar to this old pair of Keen Kutter pliers I own, although the pivot pin is different and the tip of one of the handles flares out on these.



"The patent is for a groove in the inside face of one half of the tool, and a ball stop on the inside face of the other half, positioned so that the stop aligns the wire cutter notches fully open and ready for use. The pliers jaws are incidental and not part of the patent claims. Vaughan & Bushnell added "Button's pattern pliers" to their product line starting in 1901."

(Taken from here https://www.datamp.org/patents/advance.php?pn=667411&id=15662&set=13 )

Apparently, it was William L. Peterson 's only patent, but Sanford S. Vaughan has thirteen to his name. Mostly hammer and axe related.

 

[Mintgrun]

Vaughan & Bushnell Double Duty Plier : Vaughan & Bushnell Manufacturing Co. : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

1 p., illus., 29.0 cm, trade catalog

archive.org

 

[Eric Brown]

Possibly Vaughan & Bushnell?

The shape is similar to this old pair of Keen Kutter pliers I own, although the pivot pin is different and the tip of one of the handles flares out on these.



"The patent is for a groove in the inside face of one half of the tool, and a ball stop on the inside face of the other half, positioned so that the stop aligns the wire cutter notches fully open and ready for use. The pliers jaws are incidental and not part of the patent claims. Vaughan & Bushnell added "Button's pattern pliers" to their product line starting in 1901."

(Taken from here https://www.datamp.org/patents/advance.php?pn=667411&id=15662&set=13 )

Apparently, it was William L. Peterson 's only patent, but Sanford S. Vaughan has thirteen to his name. Mostly hammer and axe related.

This is close and may be related. The outside of the jaws are shaped different and like you said, the pivot pin too. Found a V&B catalog 21 and at the bottom right they have one that looks closer to the Fulton Tool Co one called "Double Duty".

 

[Eric Brown]

Following up on Vaughn & Bushnell, I noticed the pliers in the middle (the button ones) had a "Stop feature". Patent 667411 (Feb. 5, 1901). Some of my Fulton pliers do have this feature. That makes my Fulton Tool Co pliers and these other two more likely to have been made by them.
Considering the stop feature, then the pivot, and the shape as tying the two sets together.

 

[Eric Brown]

Here is a group of Fulton pliers that all seem to have been made by J.P. Danielson based on the following: The top two pliers are marked with 312.1 which was a Sears supplier number for Danielson. The top pair also has cast into the handle side A20 which is a date code Danielson used. Second pair has no numbers on the handles but does have a grip pattern. The bottom three pairs simply have Fulton inside a rectangle but have the same grip pattern as the second and third pairs. Bottom two pairs also have date codes of N3 K7 and 10 A 3 on the handles.

 

[MisterEd]

Enderes No.23

 

[MisterEd]

Duro Chrome G 2110

 

[MisterEd]

Unbranded "Drop Forged West Germany" Long Nose Plier

 

[Eric Brown]

Trying to track down Fulton tool makers, I have two pliers marked "United Hardware & Tool, Fulton, Germany". Nice patterned grips. Unfortunately they match Kraeuter "Don't Slip" design patent D46682 (Nov. 24, 1914). Have found no evidence Kraeuter had a plant in Germany. Kraeuter did make tools for Sears, including pliers, and Sears sold Fulton tools around this time. So, did a German maker copy the Kraeuter patent for their handle design? Maybe. For now I will assume as much. Below are pictures of the pliers I have, plus a page out of the United Hardware & Tool catalog of 1925.

 

[d42jeep]

Here are two pairs of pliers found at an estate sale today.
Xcelite.
Xcelite handle pattern (Crescent)
Stanley Handyman.
Stanley Handyman handle pattern (Plombpire).
-Don

 

[four.cycle]

United / United Hardware & Tool Corp., 74 Reade St., New York, NY / "Fulton" / importers and distributors /

Jennings / C. E. Jennings, 71-73 Murray St. (79 Reade St.), New York, NY / "Arrow Head" screwdrivers, saws, chisels, edge tools, tool boxes / patent 278935 Jun 5 1883 George W. Griffin & 813152 Jan 20 1906 Archer B. Jennings / https://swingleydev.com/ot/get/198293/single/ /

Miller / Chas. E. Miller, 97-99-101-103 Reade St. & 121 Chambers St., New York, NY / manufacturers and importers of automotive parts, tools, and accessories /

all coincidence that all three operations were almost within spitting distance?

(there are a couple others in the list on Reade Street, but they looked to be more than two blocks away.)

 

[LesserSon]

Here are two pairs of pliers found at an estate sale today.
Xcelite.
Xcelite handle pattern (Crescent)
Stanley Handyman.
Stanley Handyman handle pattern (Plombpire).
-Don

Those are two beautiful examples of contract production - nice chrome, too!
EDIT - Actually, Cooper (and now Apex) has owned both Xcelite and Crescent since 1973, and Stanley (/Black&Decker) has owned Proto since 1984… so maybe “inhouse crossbranding” is more accurate than “contract.”

 

[Eric Brown]

United / United Hardware & Tool Corp., 74 Reade St., New York, NY / "Fulton" / importers and distributors /

Jennings / C. E. Jennings, 71-73 Murray St. (79 Reade St.), New York, NY / "Arrow Head" screwdrivers, saws, chisels, edge tools, tool boxes / patent 278935 Jun 5 1883 George W. Griffin & 813152 Jan 20 1906 Archer B. Jennings / https://swingleydev.com/ot/get/198293/single/ /

Miller / Chas. E. Miller, 97-99-101-103 Reade St. & 121 Chambers St., New York, NY / manufacturers and importers of automotive parts, tools, and accessories /

all coincidence that all three operations were almost within spitting distance?

(there are a couple others in the list on Reade Street, but they looked to be more than two blocks away.)

I have a earlier C.E. Jennings catalog of March 1907 and it shows them at 21 Murry St. so apparently they moved between 1907 and 1914.
I did not see any pliers with most being wood working tools that they made in their own factories. I'm leaning toward coincidence.

 

[Eric Brown]

Just an update. Making progress on German and/or Fulton pliers. Have over a hundred and another twelve on the way. I have been sorting them, trying to put them into groups that make sense. Here are a few interesting things I have found. Most of the Fulton pliers without a country of origin were made in the USA. Fulton pliers made after about 1925 were usually made in Germany. All of the German pliers up to the start of WWII in 1939 had all information stamped. No numbers or words were cast into the handles. They say that imitation is a form of flattery, and there are a lot of times when American designs were used including the overall design and the handle grip patterns. These were done after the American patents expired. Speculating that an American company would tell a salesman they would be interested in similar looking tools at a lower price. Two German companies really stick out as having been in business both before and after WWII making pliers. These two also made pliers under different names. Perhaps another selling tool, put the customers name on it? Soon I will post breaking them into groups I hope make sense. Picture below is the group. The wood dividers separate into Fulton (no COO), Fulton Germany, then German up to WWII, German British and US zones, West Germany, and then Germany after WWII.

 

[RTM]

Here is a German catalog with a boatload of pliers shown. Even more than @Eric Brown has out on the table in the picture above.

Geharo Werkzeuge : Liste Nr. 16 : Gebrüder Hallenscheid : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

84 p., illus., 24.3 cm, trade catalog

archive.org

 

[Eric Brown]

Here is a German catalog with a boatload of pliers shown. Even more than @Eric Brown has out on the table in the picture above.

Geharo Werkzeuge : Liste Nr. 16 : Gebrüder Hallenscheid : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

84 p., illus., 24.3 cm, trade catalog

archive.org

Very nice catalog. Thanks for sharing.

 

[Eric Brown]

Just got another German plier but it's not for my Fulton study. It is marked with a 22 on the outside of one handle and Germany on the inside of the other. It is unusual because of the bullseye rings around the pivot on both sides. These rings appear to be stamped.
About 5 3/8" long. The jaws are very worn but they look smooth at the tips. One side wire cutter. Anybody have ideas as to maker? If I were to guess I would think late 1800's to early 1900's.

 

[Eric Brown]

Here is a group of Fulton pliers that all seem to have been made by J.P. Danielson based on the following: The top two pliers are marked with 312.1 which was a Sears supplier number for Danielson. The top pair also has cast into the handle side A20 which is a date code Danielson used. Second pair has no numbers on the handles but does have a grip pattern. The bottom three pairs simply have Fulton inside a rectangle but have the same grip pattern as the second and third pairs. Bottom two pairs also have date codes of N3 K7 and 10 A 3 on the handles.

To continue the above group, I have another Fulton plier that doesn't quite match up to the Danielson's. Where the handle goes from the grip to the lever has a different length. The grip has a different pattern and the measurement across the pivot area is different with the Danielson being smaller. Comparing to a Barcalo though it looks a lot closer to a match. Grip pattern is similar, but not an exact match. The length between the grip and the lever are the same and the pivot area with is also the same. In the pictures below I put some red lines showing the grip to lever angles and I measured the Danielson and then put it over the unknown Fulton so you can see the gap.

My inclination is to consider the unknown Fulton was made by Barcalo. Since the country of origin is not marked, there is still a possibility it was made in Germany.