Pliers; How Many Is Too Many?
- Thread starter MisterEd
- Start date
Well, YOU reposted the pic - something I’m not savvy enough to do!
RTM, you had that Bethlehem Spark Plug Co socket that had the stamp that looked like one thing one way and another turned 90°?
I struggled with a Craftsman mfr stamp on a locking pliers that looked like an Indestro forge mark. And some Snap-on date codes.
I just think the lesson is, stamped numerals don’t always look like what they are.
RTM, you had that Bethlehem Spark Plug Co socket that had the stamp that looked like one thing one way and another turned 90°?
I struggled with a Craftsman mfr stamp on a locking pliers that looked like an Indestro forge mark. And some Snap-on date codes.
I just think the lesson is, stamped numerals don’t always look like what they are.
RTM
Well-known member
Going down a different rabbit hole, because searching for “super grip tool co” Iowa
in google books only got a couple of hits in the 40s, and lesser phrases as well. On the main web, most were the listings LesserSon was mentioning.
I started searching google patents, oldest first, for
Iowa pliers
After wading thru 40+ pages of undated foreign patents, I finally found some in 1876, page 54 finally hits 1899. And page 55 starts with 1900. Needless to say, nothing that look like the pliers in question, or even like pliers (gotta love OCR).
Not that this is a definitive NO, but not even a nibble to keep me fishing.
RTM
Well-known member
Dang, I had forgotten about that one. 1 3/8 on its side.
Last edited:
I haven’t proved the connection, but this Gilbey M Clifton is in the right generation for a 1933 patent and buried in the right state.
EDIT - 18mi/20min drive between Perry IA and Ogden IA. So, yeah, I think this is probably the same Gilbey.
As a US infantry private dying on 5Nov1943, there may yet be some researchable leads. I can’t see what type of plaque is hiding in the headstone’s shadow. Would have been just 17 at the end of WWI…early 40s in WWII. I wonder what his service dates were. Then there is his widow.
https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/103532543
EDIT - 18mi/20min drive between Perry IA and Ogden IA. So, yeah, I think this is probably the same Gilbey.
As a US infantry private dying on 5Nov1943, there may yet be some researchable leads. I can’t see what type of plaque is hiding in the headstone’s shadow. Would have been just 17 at the end of WWI…early 40s in WWII. I wonder what his service dates were. Then there is his widow.
https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/103532543
Last edited:
RTM
Well-known member
I can’t imagine there were too many “Gilbey Clifton”s running around, google didn’t find any yet. The only “Gilbey M Clifton” seems to be highly involved in a patent for a pliers, so far.
Nice work
Private Lugnutz
Well-known member
Yes. It's only the apparent PAT. date marking that's amiss. It's not the first time we've seen a marking that seems awry. As I said in my first reply, usually a trademark date, a foreign patent, a mistake (one digit), or the marking is illegible or misread. This one is very off.
No. Have you seen my slip-joint collection? I just provided a link if you missed it or you need to refresh your impression of my slip-joint collecting habits. Scroll down from there for a few more that are brand-specific, too. Most of my slip-joints are prewar, some postwar.
When I pick up or turn over a pair of slip-joints at a flea market I'm generally looking for any unique brands I don't have, or brands I already have in different lengths. If I happen to run into wartime 6" and 8" slip-joints, I have a tendency to bring them home, of course - except for CEE TEE CO (which I personally validated as an option, in a book, for the entire jeep community), simply because I have so many already, more than I need or would ever be able to pass on to another collector, but I am not only looking for pliers with wartime markings. (The correct jeep issue Utica slip-joints are so rare, I've never found a pair in the wild!)
I don't like to nationalize or transpose my collecting experience on others, but in this case, I am prepared to test it. I would bet that in general an overwhelming majority of all slip-joints seen in the wild are branded or marked with a logo of some kind rather than not, and I think the psychological effect in play here is the opposite - of exaggerating the third-party unbranded production. Again, I see plenty of them. Especially Vlchek. And with respect to Vlchek, I see more unbranded than branded. But there are a lot of Crescent, Klein, JP Danielson, Utica, PEXTO, etc etc etc slip-joints out there and I rarely if ever have seen unbranded versions of those OEMs.
EDIT:
Maybe I have made an erroneous assumption about your post. I consider your collecting experience to be on par with mine in terms of source, frequency, duration and volume. Do you think you generally see more unbranded slip-joints than branded slip-joints? I will be shocked to hear a yes.
Curious to hear @d42jeep 's answer to the same question. What say you on this point, Don? You go to more estate sales and the like rather than fleas, so your wild is slightly different than my wild, and you're on the other side of the country, but your volume, frequency, and duration are probably close to mine.
Last edited:
Here is a different version with the city added, and the word TRUTH under the pivot
Aha! The TRUTH [Tools] comes out. I have a Truth Tools catalogue (#42, but no date) listing a Super Grip plier and saying it is "new patented".
However, the Truth Tool Co. is in Mankato, Minn., not Jefferson, Iowa, so if Truth Tools took over Super Grip and stamped the original old stock with TRUTH, then we'd have what we see.
re: Jefferson, Iowa.
Of interest only to me, probably. I see that **** Oatts is from there.
He is one of the kings of sax section lead for modern big bands. Thad Jones-Mel Lewis Orchestra / Vanguard Orchestra. Big discography.
The other, not great, pic of the genius pliers.
Of interest only to me, probably. I see that **** Oatts is from there.
He is one of the kings of sax section lead for modern big bands. Thad Jones-Mel Lewis Orchestra / Vanguard Orchestra. Big discography.
The other, not great, pic of the genius pliers.
Attachments
RTM
Well-known member
Cool, more names to track down.
four.cycle
Well-known member
Super Grip / Super Grip Tool Co., Jefferson, IA / patent 1915404 Jun 27 1933 Gilbey M. Clifton / pliers / * some examples stamped with patent date of 1-16-39 * /
Attachments
Private Lugnutz
Well-known member
Interesting. And good on you for making that connection. My first thought when I saw "TRUTH" was Pexto, which TM'ed a stylized version of that word, believe it or not. I would not have suspected the Mankato tool company.
The No. 42 catalog is almost assuredly from 1934. Unless they really messed with their own sequence. The No. 36 on IA/ITCL is dated 1928. The No. 39, No. 40, and No. 41 on IA/ITCL are dated 1931, 1932, and 1933, respectively.
That's a Monday.
Private Lugnutz
Well-known member
Are you sure about the date? What's the source, Newspapers.com?
The article states "...a newly patented plier" in the first paragraph. May 9, 1933 is a month and a half before the patent was granted (June 27, 1933). If the publication date is valid, the newspaper could have misinterpreted what the company reps told them, or the company reps could have misinterpreted what Mr. Clifton told them, or Mr. Clifton could've misinterpreted the correspondence from the USPTO on its status. This is pure speculation, but if they jumped the gun on that, they may have been just as likely to jump it on the marking, and perhaps January 16, 1933 ("1-16-1933") was some intermediate missive date. The die wasn't fixed, and with such a short run, maybe never fixed.
Note that Mr. Clifton is not mentioned in the article as being a part of the enterprise. His patent was not assigned to the Super Grip Tool Co., and he was not an assignor for the Super Grip Tool Co. That means he was either licensing the rights or they bought him out. Judging only by the article, I think the company was a head shed only. One of the principals was a lawyer from Jefferson, the other was from Perry, but not the patentee, and it indicates that TRUTH would be the manufacturer. We have seen this before. It's the 20th century industrial version of the "start-up." Party A invents something. Party B and C raise some capitol and endeavor to make a business out of the invention, buying out Party A and hiring Party D to make it.
Last edited:
@Private Lugnutz
First - sleep deprivation probably fueled an argumentative impulse that would have better been surpressed.
My subjective impression is that I probably see at least two branded slipjoints for every unmarked slipjoints.
I stand by my suggestion that that impression is suspect for the reasons I gave. However, I think @username2 ’s opposing impression (that there are more unmarked slipjoints) is equally suspect. Once we have an impression like this, confirmation bias keeps reinforcing the impression. Who carries a clicker to do real statistical analysis of slipjoints?
I don’t much pursue slipjoints; I don’t really like them, so I tend to ignore them (which probably makes my impressions even less reliable). As users, I’d rather use a small Channelock for roundish/hexish things and linesmans for most everything else. As collectibles, if I have cash in pocket, I’ll buy just about any depressed-diamonds Utica or nested-diamonds Craftsman or FSP Vacuum-Grip or Winchester or Red Devil pliers I see, including slipjoints - but not because they’re slipjoints.
First - sleep deprivation probably fueled an argumentative impulse that would have better been surpressed.
My subjective impression is that I probably see at least two branded slipjoints for every unmarked slipjoints.
I stand by my suggestion that that impression is suspect for the reasons I gave. However, I think @username2 ’s opposing impression (that there are more unmarked slipjoints) is equally suspect. Once we have an impression like this, confirmation bias keeps reinforcing the impression. Who carries a clicker to do real statistical analysis of slipjoints?
I don’t much pursue slipjoints; I don’t really like them, so I tend to ignore them (which probably makes my impressions even less reliable). As users, I’d rather use a small Channelock for roundish/hexish things and linesmans for most everything else. As collectibles, if I have cash in pocket, I’ll buy just about any depressed-diamonds Utica or nested-diamonds Craftsman or FSP Vacuum-Grip or Winchester or Red Devil pliers I see, including slipjoints - but not because they’re slipjoints.
Private Lugnutz
Well-known member
Thanks. 2 to 1 is lower than my 9 to 1, and lower than I would expect, but it's not inverted, which would shock me. I didn't take it as argumentative, by the way, and my question was just a curiosity gut check. I know you and your collecting so it was a handy trustworthy way to expand the sample size of my experience.
Guessing that the local historical society (Greene County, Iowa) had newspapers, I looked around for a sec.
It takes a bit of searching.
Digital Archives of Greene County, Iowa
It's worth noting that the infamous Guy Richardson is an attorney, the county attorney in some newspapers. I doubt he was cooking up pliers secret sauce in a backroom somewhere. Wheels within wheels (or gears).
Attachments
Last edited:
We are all Bayesians in the final analysis.
Just for the sheer ******-mindedness of the thing, I was considering building a toolkit consisting only of unbranded old tools. I can make a sticker for the box that says 'Drop Forged'.
Private Lugnutz
Well-known member
Thanks for confirming. I used to have a Newsapapers.com account, but I let it lapse.
That article supports the idea that perhaps they made a mistake on the patent date.
WisJim
Well-known member
I have a pair of the Super Grip pliers, marked with the Jefferson Iowa and Truth stampings, and the patent date is clearly 1-16 and not so clear 33 or 66 or 88, but I guess we know it is 33.
Attachments
Private Lugnutz
Well-known member
Thanks for posting your example, Jim. After looking at many of them from afar (i.e., photos), I tend to agree. Some owners (and sellers and collectors and collecting sites etc) seem pretty sure of what they see, though, including RJ...
What's funny about that is that others are just as confident it's a 33 or an 89, etc.
I think the die, the stamping, and the stamper probably all contributed to the ambiguity.
What did they supposedly debunk? The marking (i.e., that it's not physically a "33")? Or the fact that 1-16-33 is also not a patent date (Tuesday). And do you have a link or reference? I'm curious to read their rationale.
Outlawmws
Well-known member
Maybe they were anticipating MLK day and shifted it out one day!
RTM
Well-known member
Just the wrong date, and the corrected one as well. Most other sites just published the incorrect date without comment.
From http://wrenchingnews.com/2020-york-auction/catalog.html
Choice Box 103: Lot of seven Plier Type Wrenches (1.) SUPER GRIP TOOL CO - IOWA - PAT 1-16-33--8 pliers with a geared cam mechanism. Patent was granted on June 27, 1933 (not Jan 16, 1933 as marked on the pliers) to Gilbey M. Clifton of Perry, Iowa. Excellent. (S245) *PAT*
Private Lugnutz
Well-known member
Thanks, RTM. Okay, so not providing any information that we have haven't collectively provided here. It's an interesting blurb, though, because in the process of pointing out that the date marked on their example of the tool is not in fact the correct patent date, they are indubitably reading the marking on their example as "1-16-33".
four.cycle
Well-known member
So... if I am understanding this conversation correctly, the incorrect patent date which is actually stamped on the pliers is being seen as 33, 39, and/or 89 ?
Private Lugnutz
Well-known member
And "99" (RJ, and others) and probably a few other numbers. If you page back most of the interpretations are covered by examples RTM and LS reported. It is not a crisp marking.
four.cycle
Well-known member
I'll make a revision of that note in my list.
There are all kinds of examples of wrong patent dates stamped on pieces, but the wrong patent date not being stamped clearly on this particular unit appears to have caused some confusion in more than one place.
this ought to cover it adequately, yes?
"* some units erroneously stamped with patent dates appearing to be 1-16-33, 1-16-39, 1-16-88, 1-16,89, 1-16-99, among others *"
* Included so that the patent date can be searched for within the list. *
now I need to go back into the list and edit all the other entries so they can be found simply searching "erroneously".
(photos: ebay)
edit 09/27/24 12:00 PDT you should be able to use the "search" function within the list - in notepad - to search patent numbers, dates, and (now) "erroneously". I'm sure I've missed one or two - one of my objectives is exploiting that "search" function so it can be used to find stuff with incomplete information. BK
updated list posted 09/27/24 12:04 PDT
Attachments
Last edited:
d42jeep
Well-known member
Pliers that live in the washroom. Too many? The bolt was backwards on the Cee Tee pliers so I turned it around.
Upper left pliers are unmarked. Good loaners!
-Don
Upper left pliers are unmarked. Good loaners!
-Don
Yay!!!
Please add 1-18-38, since it is an actual Tuesday.
Unmentioned so far is criticism of the font of the stamp, resembling Copperplate,
Americana,
or the diabolical font used for eye exams.
The type design lends itself to mistaken recognition of the numeral characters, made worse because only a few characters are present, so cannot be visually compared to those absent. The rounded nature, vertical symetry and near-closure of returns to the center means 3, 6, 8 & 9 bear enormous similarity, even when perfectly stamped. Imperfect stamping adds 0, 2 & 5 to the confusion. It is a “bad”choice among fonts for stamps intended to convey information like dates.
“Good” choices would include asymmetry, wide-open gaps; pronounced risers, descenders and generally more straight lines in non-corresponding locations. Like Goudy.
Attachments
Last edited:
four.cycle
Well-known member
done.
so we have at least six people who all came up with different dates on the same widget?
[Struggled to post some text with my last post.]
My Klein pliers by age groups.
First pic includes 1939-1947 with struck date codes and the “1857” graphic.
Second and third pic 1949-1968 with forged-in date codes.
Fourth pic is 1965-1970 with forged-in date codes. Last pic I don’t fully understand what appear to be date codes, but I think 1980s.
My Klein pliers by age groups.
First pic includes 1939-1947 with struck date codes and the “1857” graphic.
Second and third pic 1949-1968 with forged-in date codes.
Fourth pic is 1965-1970 with forged-in date codes. Last pic I don’t fully understand what appear to be date codes, but I think 1980s.
Last edited:
d42jeep
Well-known member
Nice group. I see some of the kind of odd Taiwanese clamp on Vise Grips. I found these recently. 
-Don
-Don