Vintage Tool Brand Assessments

[Private Lugnutz]

Getting right to the point, in the past few weeks here on GJ I have seen Bonney called "decent", Blackhawk given a “4” on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 was the best and 5 the worst, and Blackhawk and Bonney both relegated like a pair of winless English football teams to "second tier” behind Premier League brands such as Snap-On, Plomb, and Williams.

And these assessments were from collectors whose opinions I greatly respect!

The fact is that neither Bonney or Blackhawk took a back seat to any other Mfgrs - including Snap-On, Plomb, and Williams, during WWII, and that was smack dab in the middle of a heyday for US tool manufacturing.

As an unabashed fan of both Bonney and Blackhawk, I can be accused of bias in defending them.

Fortunately, I have some honest broker backup.

I’m not trying to dissuade anyone from their opinions, but in the following posts I will provide some data points for further consideration. You can make of them what you will. This is for discussion. This is NOT to start another ad hominem ad nauseum brand battle of the likes that we see on the modern tools board (HF vs Snap-On, etc)

 

[Private Lugnutz]

SPEC SOURCES

If you see me refer to the US Army Ordnance Dept often in my postings here, it’s because they were responsible for all tracked and wheeled vehicle maintenance during WWII, from mid 1942 to the end of the war, after the Quartermaster Corps was relieved of this duty. Needless to say, that was a large fleet of vehicles to keep running, a rough environment for maintaining and repairing them, and, as you can imagine, the tools were important. And they bought a lot of tools.

They catalogued their entire inventory in a series of documents known as the Ordnance Supply Catalog, published in 1943, and again in 1945, with discrete Standard Nomenclature Lists (SNLs) by functional category. Here are the covers, for reference, of the 1945 SNL J-2 and J-4.

These catalogs include most of the major automotive tools, listed in table format, by Federal Stock Number, Ordnance Dept specification, and description. When the Ordnance Dept did not have its own specification or a federal specification for a certain tool, they cited an industry model number as a specification instead.

These Mfgr’s specifications can be read, therefore, as an expression of quality, and high credibility, at the very least, and perhaps even superiority - in the sense that the US Army Ordnance Dept is selecting only one Mfgr, out of a large pool of Mfgrs, as best representative of a certain tool.

Here is scan from the engineers wrenches section of the J-2 as an example of the format:

Note that all of the wrenches in this scan have an Ordnance Dept number (“TKKxxxx”) as the specification, except for the wrench with Federal Stock Number 41-W-1065-60, which has a Williams model number (“WMS-39A”) as a specification.

Needless to say, I found this spec column very interesting, enough to prompt me to go through the catalogs line by line, tabulating statistics on this column. The results were very interesting.

Here is a list of the Top 8 Mfgrs followed by the number of times they are cited as a specification source for a tool entry (in parentheses). Note: I am not counting specialty makers like Disston or GTD, for example, who were used almost innumerably but exclusively for files/saws and tap and die pieces, respectively.

Williams (55)
Bonney (48, with 5 of those entries being for 15-, 16-, 20-, 23- and 30-pc wrench and socket sets)
Snap-On (48)
Herbrand (32)
Plomb (26)
Duro-Chrome (13)
Blackhawk (7, with 1 of those entries being a 100-pc wrench and socket set)
New Britain (5)

An impressive grouping, from the significant perspective of a huge tool customer and user.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Statistics like those spec column totals are good, but they can also be deceiving.

Here is a chart I developed to summarize over 160 pages of spec citations, not by volume, but by type. It gives not only a sense of what kinds of tools were being used as specification models from which Mfgrs, but the diversity (or not).

As you can see, some Mfgrs were considered models in a few areas, and some were considered models in several areas.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

MAJOR TOOL-SETS

As I alluded to in the Top 8 list above, the US Army Ordnance Dept entrusted a few major tool-sets to Bonney and Blackhawk that deserve a deeper dive to appreciate the magnitude of their choice.

One of the most important tool-sets in the Ordnance Dept fleet during the war was the 150-piece Master Mechanics Kit. The MMK was carried by an Emergency Repair Truck. This was a Dodge WC-41 1/2 ton 4 x 4 truck with a bed and side compartments that was assigned to 2nd Echelon (i.e., the front). The truck followed units around just behind the fight, fixing vehicles as necessary. The MMK in this vital truck – 1/4-, 3/8-, and 1/2-inch drive sockets and handles, DOE wrenches, and DBE wrenches – was not a Snap-On, Plomb, or Williams kit.

The MMK was supplied by Bonney.

Here are some reference images:

A view of the truck with sideboxes opened showing the two main toolboxes:

The MMK figures from the manual:

View media item 74452
View media item 74453
View media item 74454
View media item 74455
Another big Ordnance Dept set – this one with 110 pieces – was this M25 wrecker set.

Who did the US Army turn to for this kit? Again, not Snap-On, Plomb, or Williams.

They turned to Blackhawk’s 100-pc Master Wrench Set.

View media item 75306
To be objective, I will add that in terms of volume, Snap-On, Plomb and Williams (along with other giants, such as Crescent and Stanley) all had much bigger contracts, producing a much larger quantity of tools, than Bonney and Blackhawk. But quantity is not always a measure of quality.

In my opinion, Bonney’s and Blackhawk’s selection for the repair truck and wrecker sets, respectively, over similar big master mechanics sets from Snap-On, Plomb, and Williams, and their reputations as “go to” sources for specifications in the mix with the likes of Williams, Snap-On, and Plomb, cements their reputation as Mfgrs of at least equal (and one could argue even higher) quality than Williams, Snap-On, and Plomb, at least in the 1940’s.

 

[Packard V8]

First, I agree, Bonney and Blackhawk were and are top quality tools. Back in the '70s, Bonney was my first choice for value-for-the-dollar. Even then, they weren't widely available.

These Mfgr’s specifications can be read, therefore, as an expression of quality, and high credibility, at the very least, and perhaps even superiority - in the sense that the US Army Ordnance Dept is selecting only one Mfgr, out of a large pool of Mfgrs, as best representative of a certain tool.

I completely disagree with the above. What the guvmint buys at any given time has less to do with quality and a lot to do with politics. However, in WWII, it had everything to do with who could deliver and whose machinery could be better utilized for producing other war materials. Does anyone really think a typewriter manufacturer or sewing machine manufacturer were the first choices for making guns? Not at all; they just had machine tools available when all the gun manufacturers were maxed out.

The first tool "set" I owned was a general mechanic's pent roof carry box liberated from the Ordinance Supply Depot in Germany in 1968. It was a random mix of mostly used and a few new tools representing literally every US tool manufacturer I'd ever heard of at the time and many I hadn't. All were very good quality. Based upon that and many other first hand experiences, the US military bought from every manufacturer at one time or another.

jack vines

 

[Farmer J.]

Wow, Lugz, you know a lot about this, and have the documents to back it up too! (this thread will be a good weekend read, thanks, and I love those tool set illustrations from the manual)
All I can add is that as all of those American tools are far more exciting than an English 2nd division football team...

 

[Rileysan]

I will qualify my remarks by stating I am simply playing devil's advocate and have not previously expressed an opinion on the quality of Blackhawk or Bonney tools.

As humans, we usually form opinions based our life experiences and family of origin. If dad or grandpa used or swore by Brand X (Blackhawk, et al), we would likely do the same. If you did not have a familial influence (like myself), and had to learn on your own, you relied on friends & neighbors or the salesman at the local hardware and auto parts stores.

Until three years ago, I had never heard of Bonney, let alone owned any Bonney tools, so could not form an opinion. Blackhawk, on the other hand was/is (seemingly) widely available everywhere. However, I can't think of a single retailer who sells Blackhawk and would be forced to look it up. And yet, I know people who owned Blackhawk tools growing up, and am sure Blackhawk could be commonly found at used tool stores and yard/garage sales.

So where do you turn to learn about Brand X tools?

I didn't have the benefit of the internet growing up and without a retailer nearby, seeking information about, or to warranty anything made by Brand X would be difficult, if not frustrating when compared to other brands which were carried by the retailers in my community. Experiences differ by region, of course.

Right or wrong, my life experiences formed the basis for my opinions on tool brands. The same has to be said for other members here.

It's easy to take for granted what we know now simply because very little information was available 20 years ago - and by that time, most people in my age group (45-55) had long since formed opinions on tool brands.

Even with the availability of the internet, don't take for granted the influence of one's life experiences. For those under the age of 30, Harbor Freight is the new normal. Craftsman, Husky, and Channellock wrench & socket sets have always been made in China and offer no benefit over their Pittsburgh counterparts. Blackhawk is still Brand X to the casual observer.

Thus the goal must be education. Posts like yours go a long way towards understanding what used to be.

Thank you for the history lesson. Keep it up!

Brian

 

[woody 73]

Good post well done.

There are a lot of things I don't understand about some of are GJ members, that confuse me. I don't know if they are seeing something that maybe I am missing or is something else at play?

For example one member was crying in his beer about the demise of those plastic craftsman screwdrivers, which I find rather interesting because at best they were ok but not the greatest of screwdrivers. Today I was a garage sale and for $5.00 I picked up a vintage xcelite screwdriver set along with 4 older yellow handled proto screwdrivers, that I find are much better then the craftsman screwdrivers.

I do not think that GJ member would ever look at anything other then those craftsman screwdrivers, which I find rather sad

I guess maybe one less buyer of great old vintage tools and more for us to pick up at best.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

What the guvmint buys at any given time has less to do with quality and a lot to do with politics.

Most people tend to over-generalize this based on anecdotal experience and recent history. I have worked in or for the DoD for 33 years, and it is more often not the case even in contemporary acquisition. But, I wasn't talking about the government, in general. I was talking about one of the Technical Services, and one department in particular, which I studied extensively. I can assure you that the specifications and the process were rigorous. I wouldn't even try to assert there was no "politics" involved, which is just unrealistic, but I think the statistics and the charts speak for themselves. They certainly aren't random, and I don't think it can all be chalked up to politics that highly-reputable tool mfgrs got the bulk of the spec citations.

I also wasn't talking about all war materials, just tools. Many other manufacturing concerns were converted during the war out of necessity, and because they could be, for bulk production. As long as you bring up Singer, they were actually very well suited for their materiel, enhanced by Defense Plant Corporation assistance.

The first tool "set" I owned was a general mechanic's pent roof carry box liberated from the Ordinance Supply Depot in Germany in 1968. It was a random mix of mostly used and a few new tools representing literally every US tool manufacturer I'd ever heard of at the time and many I hadn't. All were very good quality.

I have a similar story from 1983, Jack. The first “GMTK” – a Motor Vehicle Mechanics Tool-Set (1938-1942), later (1943-1945) the General Mechanics Tool-Set – also had many suppliers. Wartime GMTK references --- (just look at all the various Mfgrs represented by the sockets in this figure!)

--- and these WPB Major War Supply Contracts records…

… show that.

Here is a link to a WWII GMTK I assembled with wartime vintage tools from verified US Army Ordnance Dept tool suppliers. This one has a heavy Snap-On orientation, but many other mfgrs are represented, and I have assembled others with other themes (Duro-Chrome, to name a heavy favorite), as have d42jeep and User name already in use. They can attest to the variety of verified suppliers for that set.

But I wasn’t talking about 1968, and I wasn’t talking about the GMTK, which is a separate tool-set. I was talking about 1942 to 1945 and the G-61 MMK and the M25 Wrecker Set. Those were without a shred of doubt supplied by Bonney and Blackhawk, respectively. Sole suppliers. I cite those because they are equivalent to Plomb's famous WF- series, for example. Yet relatively unknown in comparison.

the US military bought from every manufacturer at one time or another.

Certainly. And nothing I have presented even attempts to say anything different. On the contrary, just about every major US tool mfgr you can think of is included in the charts I have prepared to summarize the 1945 Ordnance Supply Catalog, and I can assure you that representation in the WPB Major War Supply Contracts records is similar. But sometimes it’s more informative to look at things with just a tad more detail than a sweeping generalization of time ("at one time or another") and agency ("the US military").

My focus above, again, is on the US Army Ordnance Dept and WWII, specifically, as a lens into what tools a large user and customer was buying for fleet maintenance. Seems like a perfect measuring stick to me.

The facts are that the Army and Navy did not buy from all US tool mfgrs in equivalent amounts (I have that list, too, and it would probably surprise many, too!), and the Ordnance Dept did not, as the data above shows, treat them all the same as far as tool specification sources go.

this thread will be a good weekend read, thanks, and I love those tool set illustrations from the manual)

Enjoy, Mate!

All I can add is that as all of those American tools are far more exciting than an English 2nd division football team...

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Totally agree, Rileysan. And I have my own biases as well. When I was growing up, Bonney and Mack truck (and Horlacher's Beer!) were right down the road. And honestly, we just took it all for granted. It's only by coincidence that my research for an adult hobby has revealed, from an objective historical perspective, how significant Bonney actually was. That they aren't as recognizable as others of their stature is just one of those fickle inexplicable things.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Good post well done.

Thanks, woody.

 

[Ole Slewfoot]

I think I see 4 brands of socket here.

View media item 74452
B looks more like a late 30s Plomb product to me

I'd nominate Walden for biggest range. breaker bar hinges, speeders, etc often have fantastic movement and good ergonomics, but they must have sent the slow kids to work in the stamping department, and I have some off center broached sockets I'd just describe as POS.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

4 or 5 sounds about right, Slew. Somewhere there's a one-for-one mapping that was done, if you're really interested I could dig it out. I don't want to turn this into a GMTK thread, but there are 3 other figures with the rest of the set, and the diversity is even greater - for example, an OTC hinge handle, but a New Britain ratchet, etc.

There are a handful of anomalies in the Bonney MMK set. That's one of them. Did the people at the Raritan Arsenal Publications Dept not have a Bonney 1/4-inch ratchet on hand the day they were preparing that figure? Or did they really buy all those Bonney pieces, and one Plomb piece. (The ORD 5 catalog SNL specifies a Bonney, btw, and we tend to trust the SNL's more than RAPD figures.) The Ordnance Dept is known for driving us WWII collectors a little crazy with these little inconsistency zingers

 

[Ole Slewfoot]

I wonder if the kits themselves came just as inconsistent, Im sure the ones toward the front would have become increasingly more so.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Well, that's a whole 'nother subject, the difference between factory issue, and motor pool spares/replacements. But we're talking about something else in the inconsistencies between the SNL folks and the RAPD figure folks. The GMTK was intentionally filled with multiple suppliers, because of the numbers. Every mechanic assigned to 2nd echelon got his own GMTK. I can get you the exact figures later (a colleague in the UK has original logistics documents from the ETO), but the record is actually pretty good. Something like 80% of the GMTKs ordered in late 1942 were delivered to theater by mid 1944, and those were about 80% complete. It was the vehicle toolkits that got tossed, lost or pilfered. But the ORD's G-61 MMK and the M25 wrecker set were sole sourced, just like the Navy Aviation Supply Office sole sourced Snap-On for their master kit and the USAAF went with Plomb. They all had other suppliers for all kinds of tools, but those were sole sourced. EDIT: I'm sure they would've filled orders however they could if there was a lag in production. I'm just telling you what the book was.

 

[d42jeep]

Here is a picture from 11/42. The 1/4" sets on the top right are likely S-K and Duro D-I.
-Don

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Just to qualify, Don is referring to the MVMTS/GMTS (what we would call a GMTK in our day), not the MMK or wrecker set.

 

[d42jeep]

With some upper echelon tools peeking in on the left side. Lugz, I just noticed the new avatar. Very nice! Here is my homemade version of the image I posted above.
-Don

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Lugz, I just noticed the new avatar. Very nice!

Thanks! It's one of my favorite cartoons from the Care and Maintenance of Hand Tools TM. The small size doesn't do the detailed drawing of the big crazy pile of tools he's sitting on any justice, but I thought it was apt.

 

[Gmonkee]

Bonney was big and very capable before the war, they were OEM for many other small brands and car tool kit stuff.

They most certianly played a part in wartime production.

I have one Bonney wrench made for civvie use during the war in the collection. By far made in lesser numbers only after contracts were filled.

 

[Sam'sAutoParts]

I tend to agree with the fact that Bonney in their day were a top tier brand, even up to the end. I have to assume that anyone that thinks otherwise hasn't really used or owned any Bonney tools and is just making assumptions based on the fact that Bonney is no longer producing tools.

 

[twertsy]

In my experience, Bonney WAS top tier, until the '70's. Sadly, I have Bonney wrenches made in, well, sadly, not USA. By the 80's they were basically relegated to "value-line" tools, akin to kmart/walley-world and dare I say it, HF quality.

 

[d42jeep]

I bought a set of Bonney combos in the late 70s and they were the worst wrenches I've ever owned. I think the only wrench that didn't have a jaw break off was the 7/16". On the other hand, all of the early Bonney tools I've seen are of excellent quality.
-Don

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Bonney was big and very capable before the war, they were OEM for many other small brands and car tool kit stuff.

They most certianly played a part in wartime production.

They did a lot of contract forge work. As for their own production, in addition to the US Army's MMK set, and other tools and tool-sets sold directly to the US Army Ordnance Dept, they were WRIGHT Aeronautical's tool supplier during the war. But I'm curious about your reference to "car tool kit stuff." Do you know which cars?

In my experience, Bonney WAS top tier, until the '70's.

I bought a set of Bonney combos in the late 70s and they were the worst wrenches I've ever owned.

Conglomeration at its worst. Triangle took Bonney, Herbrand, and Utica down to Orangeburg, SC, away from where steel was in their blood, and they were never the same.