Plomb tool picture thread - show your stuff!

[thehorse13]

I was able to purchase a lot of Plomb wrenches recently off of the FB group for $40. I really only needed 3 for my Post-War Veteran Set, those being the 3021 DOE, the 1125 DBE, but the best being a MINT 1212 pebble combo. A little paint, but it will come off easy. I've been looking for the 1212 pebble for a while, and have missed the only 2 to come up this year. Neither were mint like this one though.

I sympathize with your search pain and suffering. The only thing harder to find than the 1212 was this little fella right here, the 1210.

 

[nailheadmatt]

 

[nailheadmatt]

 

[nailheadmatt]

 

[Oldtuleguy]

Looks good!

 

[Smokeshow69]

Looks amazing Matt!

 

[Shelbylex]

Looks amazing, Nailheadmatt! Great job!

Please post the picture of the top!

... Now you will have to start filling it with period correct tools! Post the updates!!!

 

[nailheadmatt]

Won't let me post pics from my phone. Have to be on my laptop

 

[3baygarage]

Very nice.

A little 1/4” socket set that was purchased off Ebay. No beauty queen, but it was priced fair. Only gave it an initial wipe down when it arrived.

I think it’s from 1938 based on the 8 stamped in the drive tools. I like the little 4748 ratchet, and the large style Plomb logo on the sockets.

 

[Smokeshow69]

Won't let me post pics from my phone. Have to be on my laptop

Sometimes I have trouble posting pics as well. I post the words and then go back and edit the post and add the pictures. That seems to work for me?

 

[Oldtuleguy]

Something is off. The pics are automatically supposed to resize, but sometimes I have to do it myself.

 

[d42jeep]

Very nice.

A little 1/4” socket set that was purchased off Ebay. No beauty queen, but it was priced fair. Only gave it an initial wipe down when it arrived.

I think it’s from 1938 based on the 8 stamped in the drive tools. I like the little 4748 ratchet, and the large style Plomb logo on the sockets.

That is a cool early set. It may be the last year that 12 point sockets were included in the 1/4” drive sets.
-Don

 

[nailheadmatt]

Something is off. The pics are automatically supposed to resize, but sometimes I have to do it myself.

Yeah everytime I try to load a pic from my phone on this forum it gives me an "oops something is wrong" message. Doesn't matter if I use the "attach file" button or the image icon in the upper window. Does the same thing from my phone but I have no problem when I'm on my laptop which I keep at work

 

[3baygarage]

That is a cool early set. It may be the last year that 12 point sockets were included in the 1/4” drive sets.
-Don

Thanks for the photo. Looks like it might be the 4700A socket set. I‘ll have to add a spinner! Interesting how the ratchet wasn’t included unless requested. Can see the large logo nicely in that additional socket drawing too.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Yeah everytime I try to load a pic from my phone on this forum it gives me an "oops something is wrong" message. Doesn't matter if I use the "attach file" button or the image icon in the upper window. Does the same thing from my phone but I have no problem when I'm on my laptop which I keep at work

I've been getting the same msg even from my laptop at times. Lately more often than not. When I reduce the size of the image to something like 900 x 600, it always goes right through immediately. Every time. It could be a coincidence, but I'd be curious what happens if you try reducing the size.

 

[mritchie77]

Can anyone explain to me why some 1/2" deep USA period sockets have a cross-bar hole while others do not? I've got a 5343, 5344, 5345, and a 5348 here yet the larger 5348 doesn't have a crossbar hole whereas the smaller sizes (minus the 5343) do.

Also, am I correct in these being "Pebble" era sockets? If not, what would the Pebble era deep sockets look like? I haven't been able to find a clear answer when it comes to the deep sockets.

 

[d42jeep]

It’s difficult to speak in absolutes when it comes to “Pebble Era” since some of the earlier Pebble tools were brought out during WW2 when the metal (chrome) restrictions were still in place. In terms of the sockets, I go by wartime finish or Chrome finish. If the 1/2” deep socket is Chrome plated and not marked with prewar date codes, I consider it to be postwar which would be made at the same time as most pebble tools, particularly those that are Chrome plated. The presence of crossbar holes is a little more of a mystery. It could be as simple as being produced at different locations since Plomb had so many manufacturing facilities. Crossbars were gradually phased out by most manufacturers as time went on after the war.
-Don
I believe that these are all postwar sockets.

 

[nailheadmatt]

yeah

It’s difficult to speak in absolutes when it comes to “Pebble Era” since some of the earlier Pebble tools were brought out during WW2 when the metal (chrome) restrictions were still in place. In terms of the sockets, I go by wartime finish or Chrome finish. If the 1/2” deep socket is Chrome plated and not marked with prewar date codes, I consider it to be postwar which would be made at the same time as most pebble tools, particularly those that are Chrome plated. The presence of crossbar holes is a little more of a mystery. It could be as simple as being produced at different locations since Plomb had so many manufacturing facilities. Crossbars were gradually phased out by most manufacturers as time went on after the war.
-Don
I believe that these are all postwar sockets.

yeah those all look pebble. despite popular believe, plomb offered many tools in chrome, starting 43 when all the tools were drop forged. in 42, many were drop forged and many were still hand forged, depending on the factory. 42 is the earliest factory chromium wrench ive come across and it was also drop forged, not hand forged. all the hand forged stuff from 30s to early 40s was polished bare metal prior. once the ware hit, the chrome stuff wasnt that common but still available.. rest was bare metal. probably half the war era stuff was date coded. depended on the factory

 

[nailheadmatt]

theres many many variations of the same tool. even the same year, depending on the factory it was made in. they all made this stuff slightly different and often date coded stuff differently as well

Can anyone explain to me why some 1/2" deep USA period sockets have a cross-bar hole while others do not? I've got a 5343, 5344, 5345, and a 5348 here yet the larger 5348 doesn't have a crossbar hole whereas the smaller sizes (minus the 5343) do.

Also, am I correct in these being "Pebble" era sockets? If not, what would the Pebble era deep sockets look like? I haven't been able to find a clear answer when it comes to the deep sockets.

 

[d42jeep]

I would like to be shown a chrome plated tool definitively dated 1943. I’ve been collecting wartime tools for a while now. The link below might make for some interesting reading
-Don

Wartime Alloy Restrictions - G503 Military Vehicle Message Forums

 

[nailheadmatt]

I would like to be shown a chrome plated tool definitively dated 1943. I’ve been collecting wartime tools for a while now.
-Don

there you go. january 1943. "AC" B is 42. C 43. D is 44 (in regards to dual letter date codes.)

 

[RubiconJK]

Very nice.

A little 1/4” socket set that was purchased off Ebay. No beauty queen, but it was priced fair. Only gave it an initial wipe down when it arrived.

I think it’s from 1938 based on the 8 stamped in the drive tools. I like the little 4748 ratchet, and the large style Plomb logo on the sockets.

I've never seen an example of the 4748 ratchet in person. Sweet find!

 

[RubiconJK]

Who can tell me what these unnumbered Plumb items are applicable to?

Size is 1/2” DIA x 2” long

I cannot recall when and where I got these, the stains on them may be from being unrolled from rust preventative paper the military liked to use. TIA

No clue here either, but I could go along with Lugz' thought on these being some sort of drift punch.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

despite popular believe, plomb offered many tools in chrome, starting 43 when all the tools were drop forged....[ ]...all the hand forged stuff from 30s to early 40s was polished bare metal prior.

I'm not sure where you're deriving this from, Matt, or why you seem to be tying it to construction process, but Plomb was chrome-plating tools at least as early as 1939. It's mentioned in that catalog and trade mag ads, and plenty of examples demonstrate it. As for being "hand-forged," that's true, but that doesn't mean manually, despite the blacksmith imagery they were still so fond of advertising due to their legacy. They were using trip hammers. How the tools were finished (plated or not) is not dependent on whether they were made with trip hammers or drop hammers.

once the ware hit, the chrome stuff wasnt that common but still available.. rest was bare metal.

Plomb was generally subject to the same chromium restrictions as every other mfgr in America, beginning with it being allocated only to steel for military applications in mid to late 1941, well before the war started, and only getting much more restrictive (banishing all pre-war Chrome Alloy AISI recipes and all plating) from there, and that extended well beyond hand tools. Entire industries had to rethink their plating processes and compositions. (Since we're car guys, it's why so many wartime autos and, famously, Harley-Davidsons, have NO "brightwork" during that time.) As for alternatives, in addition to a natural steel finish, Plomb also used some kind of zinc phosphate and cadmium, which they were using as an economy measure (their "Industrial" line vs their chrome-plated "Pride" line) well before the war. Full admission, I am responsible for most of the War Production Board research at the end of Don's link, and I can bury this thread with documents confirming restrictions on chromium, including plating. It was a pervasive policy. No mfgr was chrome-plating any tools during WWII as a matter of routine production. For brevity sake, here's a pretty good summary...



On the other hand, as Don well knows - because he and I have already reached an amicable 'agree to disagree' on this, I was responsible for QC'ing the letter-letter date code system that you mentioned before Todd went final with it on the old Tool Archives site, and I am a proponent of it. So I agree with you on that. It is so perfectly logical and so well exemplified with wrenches that it would be unreasonable to deny it due merely to examples of some chrome-plated tools.

For those who are reading who are not sure what we're talking about, here is a summary of the system..., and as you're looking at it, keep in mind that there are hundreds of examples with these letter-letter combinations, but not a single example of a Plomb tool with a letter-letter code in which the first letter is higher than "L" (12th in the alphabet) or a second letter higher than "E" (fifth in a series) has ever been found or seen...

LA: Dec 1941
AB - LB: Jan 1942 - Dec 1942
AC - LC: Jan 1943 - Dec 1943
AD - LD: Jan 1944 - Dec 1944
AE - ?E: Jan 1945 - ? 1945

So I'm in a weird position of agreeing and also disagreeing with both of you.

You might be asking yourself, How could both things be true?

Exceptions could be one answer. As I have pointed out prior. You had to have a Priority A-1-K order or higher to use steel with more than .6% chromium, for example. In 1943, the WPB approved a total of twenty such projects. It's possible similar exceptions existed for plating. Critical plating in fire extinguishers and engine valves were exceptions, for example. What those exceptions were for the Plomb wrenches we have seen that seem to defy the restrictions, I don't know.

As I have said before, the prospect of the letter-letter code combinations signifying something that just happens to need combinations of 12 and 5, other than 12 being the number of months in a year, and 5 being the number of years the war lasted, seems much harder to rationalize than Plomb having a customer with an A-1-K priority order allowing it to produce chrome-plated tools. On the other hand, though, it certainly wasn't a big, long, or persistent order. You said they were "not common" and I agree with that. They are absolutely dwarfed by wartime tools with a natural steel finish, in my experience. (The letter-letter codes are also dwarfed by wartime tools with no letter-letter codes, in my experience. In order to justify your 50% claim, or any exact ratio, we would have to know the superset - the number of tools they made during WWII, and we would have to have a way of comparing that superset to the number bearing a letter-letter code.) In summary, to consider chrome-plated wartime tools to be routine or as anything other than an exception to the chrome plating restrictions would be just as unreasonable to me as considering the entire letter-letter system to be dubious due to some chrome-plated examples. Which is why I think there's another answer.

 

[jabberwoki]

Ill throw this pic in here to research info

 

[Username already in use]

…but not a single example of a Plomb tool with a letter-letter code in which the first letter is higher than "L" (12th in the alphabet) or a second letter higher than "E" (fifth in a series) has ever been found or seen...

LA: Dec 1941
AB - LB: Jan 1942 - Dec 1942
AC - LC: Jan 1943 - Dec 1943
AD - LD: Jan 1944 - Dec 1944
AE - ?E: Jan 1945 - ? 1945

Hmmm, my 1/4” ratchet with the SC letter letter code doesn’t seem to jive with that supposition.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

mmm, my 1/4” ratchet with the SC letter letter code doesn’t seem to jive with that supposition

Nope. And Don also sent me photos of some ratchets he has with "UC", "RC", and "NC" codes. I told him we should probably revive/re-do the study - on a separate thread, not here, especially since we can't access it anymore now that Todd's TA site is kaput. All I can say is that Todd had asked for examples of any and all tools with letter-letter codes, and there weren't any outside the 12-5 parameters when he published that and asked me to look it over. If there had been, it would've been an instant red flag. As I said to Don, these tools cast way more serious doubt on the theory than tools with letter-letter codes within the 12-5 parameters that happen to have chrome-plating.

 

[Outlawmws]

Maybe those codes are for off brand/re-brand so as not to confuse them? or are these definitively branded Plvmb? (haven't been following closely)

 

[d42jeep]

They are all Plomb. I took a few more pictures today because I was curious.
-Don
All with the C code as the second letter.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

...now that Todd's TA site is kaput. All I can say is that Todd had asked for examples of any and all tools with letter-letter codes, and there weren't any outside the 12-5 parameters when he published that.

RTM, a Wayback Machine wizard, helpfully sent me a backdoor to TA, and I quickly located the old study under Timelines and Case Studies. Linked here, if anyone wants to see it for themselves. But it's basically a very short statement about the theory, and a list of examples, with photos, all of which fall within the 1942-1945 theory parameters. I remember studying dozens more examples for him (so many that I told him to stop emailing me!), but he must have sent me more than what he eventually posted on the site. Anyway, the first sentence of his write-up, in bold, states, "We have yet to find any examples disproving this theory."

If there had been tools in the sample at the time of the original study like Don's and UNAIU's - with letter-letter stamps having a first letter (month) higher than "L" (December), I am sure it would've raised questions about the meaning of the first letter signifying a month, which would then also cast a lot of doubt on the meaning of the second letter being a year.

If there had been tools like Don's and UNIAU's presented to me at any time since the study, it also would've had the same impact on the conclusions we were drawing.

This is not the first time this subject has come up here on this thread.

Back in 2020, I re-explained the study and theory to DD T/A, here.

It came up again in 2021, when I found a Paschall hammer with an "EB" (May 1942) letter-letter stamp here, which prompted RagTopTA to posted his entire Paschall collection, here, most of which have letter-letter codes that fall within the WWII theory parameters, including Sep 1942 (IB), April 1943 (DC), and Sep 1943 (GC). His other hammer is a 1935 (5A). I even emphasized the significance of the exclusivity (only A-L) of the system in reply to some questioning from RJ and Jock here.

The only argument against the theory that I have ever been made aware of, from the initial study through all those incidents of it coming up again and being questioned, is the chrome-plating, as in this statement from Don last year.

Had there been no wartime metal restrictions, I would be more inclined to buy into the wartIme dating theory.

As I have said all along, and as I just posted again upthread, chrome-plating on a tool with a "DC" (April 193) or a "BD" (February 1944) etc etc stamping could be an exception. It is not enough to ruin the logic of the letter-letter theory system. What other reason for stamping them at all would need just 5 letters than 5 years of WWII? (When you ponder that, keep in mind that the letter-number system that preceded WWII ended in 1941. This A-E letter-letter "system" would follow that absence perfectly.) What other reason for stamping them at all would need just 12 letters than 12 months? Factory ID? They had 31 of them! Dies? They have never shown any propensity for doing that.

Higher first letters than "L" clearly challenge that logic!!!

But this is the first time I recall seeing them. Either Don and UNAIU acquired them recently, they had them all along but did not present them as evidence of theory-busting before, or they did and I missed it or muffed it. If that's the case, guys, I apologize. If not, it's important that we recognize that this is new information, and that they have not been willfully ignored.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

For the record, I am not ready to totally give up on the theory based solely on the higher than "L" tools just yet. Take RagTop's hammers, for example. His hammers are a very interesting sub-case study in the sense of them all being the same tool, and that tool being traceable to a single factory - the old Paschall plant, i.e., eliminating the possibility of the code being a factory ID. All the hammers are very similar if not identical in construction, style, and markings, except for the code, indicating very close production era. All the stamps are in the same place on the hammers, indicating consistency. And we know that the "5A" indicates 1935, establishing a precedence for date coding the hammers, and strongly implying with high probability that the other codes are also date codes. They were "IB", "DC", and "GC". They can't be older, because Plomb was using the number(year)-letter(unknown) codes then. That implies they are later. And within the theory, they would be Sep 1942 (IB), April 1943 (DC), and Sep 1943 (GC).

Hammers with higher than "L" first letter codes would bust that, obviously.

But is it possible that those letter-letter codes (and others, on wrenches for example) are indeed a wartime date coding system? And the higher than "L" first letter letter-letter codes (which are all "C", and if I'm not mistaken, all ratchets) mean something else?

That's why we may need to re-do the whole study. NOT HERE ON THIS THREAD. A separate thread. Just collect all the samples of any and all Plomb tools with letter-letter codes that we can and resist making any analysis until we have a lot more samples.

 

[d42jeep]

I think the IB is early 1941. They may have abandoned the old number letter date code system sometime in 1941.
-Don

 

[Private Lugnutz]

I think the IB is early 1941.

If there're no serifs it's going to be hard knowing if any of those are a letter "I" (in the letter-letter system) or a numeral "1" (in the older number-letter system). Only one of the reasons Arial is not a font that's conducive to anything technical. Heck, when writing numbers on paper, I still cross my zeroes and sevens and put a base and serif on my ones out of military habit, which has bit me in the **** with the post office a few times! Maybe we can explore that on the new survey thread I just started...

SURVEY: PLVMB tools with "Letter-Letter" code stamps (and ONLY those tools!)

Fellow and Sister GJ'ers, Several years ago @twertsy and some cohorts conducted a study of Plomb Tool Co tools with the letter-letter stamps and published their findings on the old Tool Archives site. It can be found, via Wayback Machine backdoor link, here. The theory, based on examples and...

www.garagejournal.com

They may have abandoned the old number letter date code system sometime in 1941.

Definitely. There are 1-letter codes. According to the old TA site, it was November, but I believe that was based on seeing an "LA" (not Los Angeles) code, theoretically signifying December 1941.

 

[four.cycle]

photo taken for Private Lugnutz's other "figure this out" thread but I'm posting here as well.

I think that Don gave me a heads up on the ratchet, which I grabbed off ebay. The socket set was purchased separately.
Did Don send me the spinner?
Sockets run from 3/16" - 7/16" (6-points) and there's one 4710S 8-point. (I'm missing one, right?)
Sockets appear to have a cad or phosphate (?) finish. NOT sure if the ratchet is period-correct to the set or not.
CODE stamped on the ratchet ONLY. As near as I can make out with my big magnifying glass, it's VC

Plomb 1/4" drive SAE socket set w/ ratchet stamped VC

 

[d42jeep]

I think my 4 Oz. Paschall ball pein is from 1941 but I can’t make out the second letter.
Here is a 1/4” drive ratchet from 1941. Same problem with making out the second code letter

-Don

 

[d42jeep]

A couple more tools likely from 1941. The stamp on the flex handle could have been a little more legible.
-Don

 

[RTM]

Based on the Survey thread, I decided it was time to get the Plomb family together for a class portrait. This is all garage / estate / flea market finds over the last few years, nothing with any real provenance back into the family.

First off, the items I posted in the survey thread.
Top 5420 1/2" drive 5/8" Los Angeles, 6F stamp (oops, this doesn't belong in this group)
Middle 1218 9/16" combo wrench, Made in USA, LC stamp
Bottom 4749 1/4" ratchet made USA, NC stamp



Next up, the big pieces

Top to bottom

Box, unknown number, probably for 1/4" socket set , 6.5 x 2.75 x 1.25
Extension 5463, Made in USA
extension w hole 5461, Made in USA
Wrench Marked Proto 1222-L MFD.USA PLOMB TOOL CO 11/16" combination
Ratchet 5449 (pebble?) MADE IN U-S-A- (don't have a centered dot handy, so used a dash)
Wrench 1216 MADE IN U-S-A- 1/2" combination
Wrench 3031 MADE IN U-S-A- 5/8" 3/4" DOE



And finally, the sockets and tiny wrenches
Top L-R
1/2" drive 5434 1-1/16" MADE IN U-S-A-
1/2" drive 5425 25/32" MADE IN U-S-A-
3/8" Drive WF-77 C mark Swivel 11/16"
3/8" Drive WF-76 C mark Swivel 5/8"
3/8" Drive WF-33 3/4"
3/8" Drive WF-25 1/4"

Wrenches L - R
3216 Raised Letters 7/32" 1/4" Ignition fat beam U.S.A (angled sizes reversed from below)
3018 recessed panel (don't know the right name) 1/4" 5/16" Made in U.S.A
3216 Recessed letters 7/32" 1/4" Ignition skinny beam L.A. (angled sizes reversed from above)

Sockets again all 1/4" drive

4708-S 1/4" 8pt MADE IN U-S-A-
4709 9/32" 6pt MADE IN U-S-A-
4710-S 1/4" 8pt MADE IN U-S-A- K Mark
4712 3/8" 6pt MADE IN U-S-A-
4711 11/32" 6pt MADE IN U-S-A- War Finish CC Mark (vertical C over C) (oops missed this, will update Survey thread and pic)





Edit: And finally, some too big for the box the rest were queued up in, a 5469 Speed Hinge Handle, 1/2" drive. Break it over for leverage, then straighten it out and its a speeder.
WF-2K 3/8” speeder



And as noted above, I don't have any real attachment to these, so if a piece will help you complete a set, can be up for a swap.

 

[four.cycle]

commenting here so as to not clutter up the "survey" thread:

the number of letter-letter codes just seems to get bigger with each post.
I have to wonder if there's any possibility there might be more to the secret code than just date of manufacture?
didn't Plomb have multiple manufacturing facilities?

just stream of consciousness stuff - what if there were a different SET of codes for each plant? or is that just too far out there?

100% speculation and fantasy, of course.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

didn't Plomb have multiple manufacturing facilities?

They advertised 31 total, many probably just temporarily rented, as I just mentioned upthread here...

Factory ID? They had 31 of them!

I remain skeptical of the need for letter-letter codes to distinguish 31 factories (especially with the A through Q tiny single letter codes that are seen on some Wright Field tools), but the survey should help suss those and other theories out as well. The data doesn't lie!

commenting here so as to not clutter up the "survey" thread:

I don't think there's anything wrong with commenting on the letter-letter codes on the letter-letter code survey thread. That's the best place for it, in my opinion.

 

[four.cycle]

okay. ... like I said: 100% speculation on my part.. still need more pieces to the puzzle...