Plomb tool picture thread - show your stuff!

[d42jeep]

It’s news to me about the handles being a different color between Plomb and Proto. I always assumed that although the name changed the handles remained the same.
-Don

 

[Capt. Spaulding]

Picked this stuff up over the weekend.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Smokeshow69]

Here is a picture of plvmb, proto and p&c octagonal hammer handles... the proto on the far left is lighter than the proto hammer the second one in from the left. The plvmb, which is the second from the right is the darkest while the p&c is blue... all plvmb empire hammers had octagonal handles and the plvmb one where the darkest . The plvmb hammer has almost no paint on it so I had to turn it on it’s side in order to be able to see it




Sent from my iPhone using The Garage Journal mobile app

 

[Smokeshow69]

Picked this stuff up over the weekend.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I see your socket you are talking about with the weird words... it means British standard which I believe is whitworth sizing ? It will work for guys with British bikes/ motorcycles but not so much on standard American sizes or metric


Sent from my iPhone using The Garage Journal mobile app

 

[d42jeep]

Here is a picture of plvmb, proto and p&c octagonal hammer handles... the proto on the far left is lighter than the proto hammer the second one in from the left. The plvmb, which is the second from the right is the darkest while the p&c is blue... all plvmb empire hammers had octagonal handles and the plvmb one where the darkest . The plvmb hammer has almost no paint on it so I had to turn it on it’s side in order to be able to see it




Sent from my iPhone using The Garage Journal mobile app

Thanks for the pictures. Very informative. Although I have several old Proto hammers of various descriptions I really haven’t seen many original handle Plomb. My WW2 sets call for ball pein hammers which obviously rules out Plomb, since they had agreed not to make any with their name on them.
-Don

 

[Smokeshow69]

Thanks for the pictures. Very informative. Although I have several old Proto hammers of various descriptions I really haven’t seen many original handle Plomb. My WW2 sets call for ball pein hammers which obviously rules out Plomb, since they had agreed not to make any with their name on them.

-Don

Thank you sir! However plvmb made ball pein hammers under the paschall name so you can have an era correct plvmb empire hammer ! I do not have any of those but have a few friends that do


Sent from my iPhone using The Garage Journal mobile app

 

[Capt. Spaulding]

I see your socket you are talking about with the weird words... it means British standard which I believe is whitworth sizing ? It will work for guys with British bikes/ motorcycles but not so much on standard American sizes or metric


Sent from my iPhone using The Garage Journal mobile app

Ah ok. Thanks for the info!

 

[bmwrd0]

Whitworth isn't quite the same as BS (British Standard), that dimension came out, I think, during WWII as the Brits were trying to save steel, not unlike US dimensional lumber. You will see some marked with both Whitworth and BS dimensions and they are about 1/8 difference. So, 1/4 BS-5/16 Whitworth marked on the same socket.

Edit; 1/16th difference. Not my fault, it was 5:30 am when I wrote this.

 

[d42jeep]

Here is a short 3/8” drive speeder I recently found on eBay. It must have been originally purchased as open stock because I can’t find any set that it came with.
-Don

 

[Smokeshow69]

Whitworth isn't quite the same as BS (British Standard), that dimension came out, I think, during WWII as the Brits were trying to save steel, not unlike US dimensional lumber. You will see some marked with both Whitworth and BS dimensions and they are about 1/8 difference. So, 1/4 BS-5/16 Whitworth marked on the same socket.

Good info! I was hoping you would chime in as this is more your area of expertise!


Sent from my iPhone using The Garage Journal mobile app

 

[Private Lugnutz]

FWIW, here is a photo of the only Proto hammer I've ever found. In addition to the octagonal shape and green paint dip tells, it had "PROTO" embossed into the wood. I've always thought it was fairly early 50's because the head had an old school "00000" marking for 4 ounces.

 

[MR.X]

Thank you sir! However plvmb made ball pein hammers under the paschall name so you can have an era correct plvmb empire hammer ! I do not have any of those but have a few friends that do


Sent from my iPhone using The Garage Journal mobile app

WW2 era Plomb ball pein

 

[Smokeshow69]

WW2 era Plomb ball pein

Oh man! A contract labeled pre- lawsuit hammer... only way that could get better was if that was also dual marked ! Nice example


Sent from my iPhone using The Garage Journal mobile app

 

[d42jeep]

That is a very cool hammer. Here is a picture of some Plomb wrenches that would be correct for a wartime GMTK, sent to me by a colleague in the U.K. A couple of these won’t be found in any catalog, sort of like that hammer.
-Don

 

[MR.X]

Hi, so I see the 27C and 28-S equivalents in your pic whereas Plomb didn't have those size pairings in their cats. Whenever I see those they seem to be in the UK. Any idea why that is? They also usually have a pretty rough finish ( like those Whitworth Plomb DOE's) and probably weren't the best ambassadors for Plomb quality.

 

[d42jeep]

These are the wrenches found in WW2 Motor Vehicle Mechanics Tool Sets (MVMTS) and General Mechanics Tool Sets (commonly referred to as GMTKs) throughout WW2.
41-W-991 DOE Wrench 3/8" x 7/16" - 723
41-W-1003 DOE Wrench 1/2" x 19/32" - 25
41-W-1005-5 DOE Wrench 9/16" x 11/16" - 27C
41-W-1008-10 DOE Wrench 5/8" x 25/32" - 28S
41-W-1012-5 DOE Wrench 3/4" x 7/8" - 731A
41-W-1021 DOE Wrench 15/16" x 1" - 1033C
If Plomb wanted to get in on being a supplier for those toolsets and others, they were going to have to come up with some 27C and 28S equivalents and it looks like they did. Most of these sets were shipped to the war in Europe and the Pacific and I’m sure appearance wasn’t high on their priority list, just like the WF tools.
-Don

 

[r_olson_06]

I’ve got an 1161 pebble in excellent condition.......

Are you willing to trade/sell it?


Sent from my XT1080 using The Garage Journal mobile app

 

[Provincial]

I picked up a few Plomb wrenches the other day. The 7/16" combo is dual-marked Plomb and Proto.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

I bought a few vintage catalogs and magazines at the flea market yesterday, including a February 1948 issue of Automotive Digest that included this full-page Plomb ad on page 3 (the inside cover was page 2). Yes, the wrenches are pebbled.

 

[Ratchet.]

Think I've posted some of this before, but got a bunch more Wright Field stuff recently, plus some P.W.A marked tools (Pratt and Whitney aircraft)

WF16, 17 and 19 3/8 drive extensions, still interests me the difference in length etc between WF series tools, presumably down to different factories or machines?


Two WF-20 breaker bars, again showing manufacturing differences in the length, a WF-22 t-bar and a PWA 1397 breaker/swivel bar


The PWA breaker bar is completely different to the WF-, shorter, thinner and doesn't have the square drive in the handle, the hole for the through t-bar is the same though (still not ever seen one of those.. were they even stamped with plomb?) i haven't got a non pebble 5265 to compare but i assume it is same as those?

Some 3/8 drive crows feet sockets, three 49 series, plus a PWA1950 1"1/16th.
And the first WF wrench ive found, a WF-79 3/8 and 5/16 double box end.

ignore the PWA1471 in the photo as its made by Bonney


Lastly some a WF-31 and some WF- UJ sockets, and a PWA1405 3/8 UJ (interestingly marked with the drive size?)

One of the UJ sockets is also unusual as has WF-74e, not seen one marked like this yet, anyone know what the e's significance is?


Also an observation, I'm yet to find any 1/2 drive WF series in the wild here, or much 1/2 drive plomb at all, other then a early 1/2 drive ratchet i got and one solitary pebble era socket, which seems odd as in general the UK seems to have preferred 1/2 and 1/4 drive tools up until relatively, though this could also be the reason not many are around as they got used/abused until they wore out over the years?

Also its not entirely related to this thread, but does anyone know of/have a link to a list of PWA marked tools?

 

[Capt. Spaulding]

Got these today. A few Plombs hiding in here. Plomb wrench at the bottom and a single socket.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RagTopTA]

Found a few Plombs today

Transition Tappet, Pebble DBE, and a Driver

 

[Ole Slewfoot]

Spotted this oddball WF 20 Was pressed for time, but might go back for it.

Yeah, that's copper coated, I couldnt really say about originality.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

That would be a good get if only for study. Nice Hinsdale rat above it.

 

[RagTopTA]

It that a Kop-R-Clad ??

 

[Private Lugnutz]

I could be wrong, but I believe the Kop-R-Klad line was limited to large DBE's and spud wrenches. In the ~1" opening and up range. I have not double-checked that, but that's my understanding.

 

[notlob]

As usual, Lugz is right. AFAIK, the catalog page below shows all the Kop-R-Klad tools that Plomb made. OTOH, it would not surprise me to find out that Plomb made small runs of certain other copper plated tools that weren't in their catalogs.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

OTOH, it would not surprise me to find out that Plomb made small runs of certain other copper plated tools that weren't in their catalogs.

Absolutely. And, given the fact that the hinge handle in question is a US Army Air Forces tool, especially in the context of working around aircraft and fuel. Although I will add that another alternative explanation could be patina. I have seen certain dark oxide finishes get coppery, or certain steel go coppery in the presence of certain fumes. I have a bunch of Williams DBEs in particular that have taken on a bronzey appearance with age. EDIT: But I have to admit that hinge handle sure does look intentionally plated. From afar, I would swear it's BeCu.

 

[ssdave]

Set aside for r_olson_06.....

 

[Ole Slewfoot]

The pro eye 1000 inspection left me 100% sure it is copper. wear and patina show its been that way quite awhile.

Odds of me finding the first factory copper WF tool any of us has ever heard of; probably not great.

Locally, we had a navy auxiliary air station (watsonville), and a navy airship base, but no AAF presence I'm aware of. Fort Ord nearby was focused on infantry. Of course a breaker bar can travel a long way in 80 years.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

You should go back and get it, Slew!

 

[Ole Slewfoot]

I need time to make a pile of other stuff with it to save money
The Hinsdale rat was an eye catcher, but the action felt like it probably would not recover.

 

[r_olson_06]

Set aside for r_olson_06.....

Thanks sent you a PM on it.

Sent from my XT1080 using The Garage Journal mobile app

 

[MR.X]

These are the wrenches found in WW2 Motor Vehicle Mechanics Tool Sets (MVMTS) and General Mechanics Tool Sets (commonly referred to as GMTKs) throughout WW2.
41-W-991 DOE Wrench 3/8" x 7/16" - 723
41-W-1003 DOE Wrench 1/2" x 19/32" - 25
41-W-1005-5 DOE Wrench 9/16" x 11/16" - 27C
41-W-1008-10 DOE Wrench 5/8" x 25/32" - 28S
41-W-1012-5 DOE Wrench 3/4" x 7/8" - 731A
41-W-1021 DOE Wrench 15/16" x 1" - 1033C
If Plomb wanted to get in on being a supplier for those toolsets and others, they were going to have to come up with some 27C and 28S equivalents and it looks like they did. Most of these sets were shipped to the war in Europe and the Pacific and I’m sure appearance wasn’t high on their priority list, just like the WF tools.
-Don

Those no tool number, NON Whitworth Plombs that pop up in the U.K include other non catalog size combinations that aren't standard Jeep or GMTK sizes either.
I'm going to avoid getting into a "correct" "not correct" g503 style never ending discussion but I will comment on that last bit. These are less finished than their WF tools. Barcalo, Fairmount, Vlchek, Duro Chrome, Bonney, etc. weren't sending over wrenches that rough from what I've seen. Maybe it was some kind of emergency fill or maybe just a money saving deal but I'll bet they had a little pros and cons debate about it at Plomb before they went ahead and did it.

 

[Bryan Burns]

I have this PLOMB LP2 L (Lead Picking Left) tool and want to verify it hasn't been modified but I can't find any images on line. Can anyone help?

 

[Smokeshow69]

I have this proto flying lady top chest #9997... any body know what years this was made by chance ? I have not done any research on it but want to say 50’s ? Edges are square not round like my pressteel top chests so I am not 100% sure if it was still made by them at this late in the game ? I would love to find the corresponding lower roller to make a full set!





Sent from my iPhone using The Garage Journal mobile app

 

[d42jeep]

Those no tool number, NON Whitworth Plombs that pop up in the U.K include other non catalog size combinations that aren't standard Jeep or GMTK sizes either.
I'm going to avoid getting into a "correct" "not correct" g503 style never ending discussion but I will comment on that last bit. These are less finished than their WF tools. Barcalo, Fairmount, Vlchek, Duro Chrome, Bonney, etc. weren't sending over wrenches that rough from what I've seen. Maybe it was some kind of emergency fill or maybe just a money saving deal but I'll bet they had a little pros and cons debate about it at Plomb before they went ahead and did it.

Here is a snippet from the wartime limitation order that might explain the finish on wartime wrenches. For the full text you might want to check this link.
https://forums.g503.com/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=270564
Check out the finish on this wartime Barcalo 28S
-Don

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Those no tool number, NON Whitworth Plombs that pop up in the U.K include other non catalog size combinations that aren't standard Jeep or GMTK sizes either.

There's nothing unusual about that. Most of the major mfgrs, including those you cited later in your post, supplied DOE wrenches in a full range of sizes, satisfying the requirements of other tool-sets beyond the sizes specified by the US Ordnance Dept for on-board tool-sets. (Just as an aside FYI - while most famous as "Jeep wrenches", the sizes were actually specified for many vehicles - including many of the other trucks Ford made, all Chevys/GMCs, etc, except Dodge, which required some odd sizes. Same for GMTK at 2nd echelon, plus the 33C.) If you're arguing that you don't think the non-catalog Plomb wrenches were specifically made for on-board toolkits, I concur, and have written about this many times before. The US Ordnance Dept was Plomb's smallest customer, by far. And Plomb wrenches just don't show up in Ordnance Dept re-packs like other suppliers do. But once the wrenches were in US Ordnance Dept hands, there's no telling where they went to meet whatever need they had. So motorpool Jeep and GMTK kits with Plomb are possible. FWIW, I have some pretty rough wrenches in all sizes, on-board and other, from a variety of mfgrs. Bonney, Armstrong and Williams comes immediately to mind. I've never collected Plomb DOEs so I don't have any to compare in person. I agree that they appear to be even less-finished than WF counterparts. Whatever the contract, it clearly eschewed a hard buffing.

I have this PLOMB LP2 L (Lead Picking Left) tool and want to verify it hasn't been modified but I can't find any images on line. Can anyone help?

See Pic, excerpted from 1941. The 1939 catalog has the same image and list. Your markings (PLOMB LOS ANGELES) are clearly older than that, and you'll note that there is no LP2 L, but the 1920's and early 1930's catalogs that I have access to are strictly for the automobile and aviation industry, and they do not include the tools included in these later Plomb catalogs for the plumbing, oil, mining, RR, etc industries. Having said all that, it looks original and unmolested to me. Nice find!

 

[Bryan Burns]

See Pic, excerpted from 1941. The 1939 catalog has the same image and list. Your markings (PLOMB LOS ANGELES) are clearly older than that, and you'll note that there is no LP2 L, but the 1920's and early 1930's catalogs that I have access to are strictly for the automobile and aviation industry, and they do not include the tools included in these later Plomb catalogs for the plumbing, oil, mining, RR, etc industries. Having said all that, it looks original and unmolested to me. Nice find!

YOU DA MAN, thanks Lugnutz!

 

[MR.X]

There's nothing unusual about that. Most of the major mfgrs, including those you cited later in your post, supplied DOE wrenches in a full range of sizes, satisfying the requirements of other tool-sets beyond the sizes specified by the US Ordnance Dept for on-board tool-sets. ..... Armstrong and Williams comes immediately to mind. ...I've never collected Plomb DOEs so I don't have any to compare in person. I agree that they appear to be even less-finished than WF counterparts. Whatever the contract, it clearly eschewed a hard buffing. )

I agree, there's nothing unusual about that if that is what Plomb was doing. I was just giving Don info or evidence he may or may not have already for his theory. I'll dig around for some examples so I can add some pics.
Not knocking Armstrong in general but you reminded me of one of the worst contract offerings I remember seeing, which was their DOE contribution to the Merlin Packard kit.