PLOMB Combination Wrench "4C"
- Thread starter corgibell
- Start date
DD T/A
Well-known member
i believe the current consensus is unknown for that part of the code.
Provincial
Well-known member
Speculation is that the letter indicates the month of manufacture, so the "4C" would mean the third month of 1934, or March.
r_olson_06
Well-known member
I don't think it has been fully understood. I don't think it is a date code as the letters range from A-E giving 5 examples. It possibly could be a plant location of manufacturing, production line number, or even a fordging die number.
Looking for the following Plomb Pebbles Wrench 3061
Private Lugnutz
Well-known member
As I have noted before, akin to the letters we sometimes see on some WF- series tools, in my opinion. More letters, because it was later production (i.e., more plants, lines, etc.) And, also as I have noted before, like those WF- letters, I don't think this code can be cracked empirically, through examples and inference. We're going to need documentation on this case.
r_olson_06
Well-known member
I agree. I know the WF swivels have all sorts of letters up to K is the highest I have seen. It would be good to do a research project on this hypothesis.
Looking for the following Plomb Pebbles Wrench 3061
As I have noted before, akin to the letters we sometimes see on some WF- series tools, in my opinion. More letters, because it was later production (i.e., more plants, lines, etc.) And, also as I have noted before, like those WF- letters, I don't think this code can be cracked empirically, through examples and inference. We're going to need documentation on this case.
Looking for the following Plomb Pebbles Wrench 3061
RubiconJK
Well-known member
As I have noted before, akin to the letters we sometimes see on some WF- series tools, in my opinion. More letters, because it was later production (i.e., more plants, lines, etc.) And, also as I have noted before, like those WF- letters, I don't think this code can be cracked empirically, through examples and inference. We're going to need documentation on this case.
I'm in. Lugz, when you say documentation, what are you looking for? I remember this coming up on the Plomb thread before, but will need to look back to see if we even went as far as documenting examples.
Private Lugnutz
Well-known member
It's definitely come up before and we used to have a fairly extensive write-up on the subject on TA 1.0. I am sure it will be revived on TA 2.0.
When I say documentation, I mean factory documentation, not something we can produce. I don't believe that any amount of examples and inference will be able to tell us what (or where) the "C" in "4C" is as opposed to the "K" in "WF-23 K". I could be wrong. But I am doubtful n this one, and you know I don't shy away from research projects.
When I say documentation, I mean factory documentation, not something we can produce. I don't believe that any amount of examples and inference will be able to tell us what (or where) the "C" in "4C" is as opposed to the "K" in "WF-23 K". I could be wrong. But I am doubtful n this one, and you know I don't shy away from research projects.
RubiconJK
Well-known member
Got it. Appreciate the work you and Todd are doing on TA 2.0.