Vintage Tool Brand Survey

[Bolster]

Ran this Vintage Tool Brand Survey years ago when it got 86 responses. Reported it somewhere in an old thread. Just recently reactivated my Survey Monkey account, and decided to open the poll again. Get some fresh data.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/98GWM5D

This survey was originally intended to gauge popularity of various vintage tool brands, but in the last survey several people wanted to add modern and euro brands, so a second question has been added to accommodate them.

(Sorry Harfers--nobody asked to add Harbor Freight brands, so it's not a choice. )

 

[kc-steve]

Thanks Bolster. I would have liked to have seen the results though. Any chance of that happening?

Steve

 

[Lump]

Bolster,
I love the idea of the survey. But it is always impossible for a survey to accurately break down the little nuances of various people. For example, I buy quite a lot of old USA-made or Euro wrenches, as you may have noticed. But it's very rare for me to pay as much as $5 each. Normally I will make a bundle of tools, and ask for a package price. It is rare that I pay more than $3, unless it is modern Snap On in near-new condition, or Plomb Pebble in really great shape. Moreover, wrench size makes a huge difference. I imagine EVERYONE on GJ would buy a 1" or 23mm Snap On wrench for $10. But what about an older ignition wrench? (I realize that you identified size as being medium in your survey terms/conditions.) Finally, there is the factor of age and style of the wrench. My experience has been that DOE wrenches are often in less demand than combos. And old black-painted heavy-steel wrenches of older brands (like Bonney, Billings, Herbrand, etc), will normally bring a lot less than a snazzier nickel or chrome-plated wrench from the 60's or newer.

Yet I love the idea of your survey, and cannot wait to see results. And I am not smart enough to make a better alternative survey anyway. I just found myself feeling indecisive while trying to answer some of your survey Q's.

 

[kc-steve]

Yeah, I had the same thoughts as Lump when I checked the boxes. I really had to think in terms of "is it possible" rather than whether I "actually would." Personally, most of the "vintage" stuff I buy is at estate sales, garage sales, and auctions. And often the commercial resellers don't have a clue as to what they have, or what they might be worth.

But then again, THEIR job is to liquidate FAST.

Steve

 

[Kirbot]

For example, I buy quite a lot of old USA-made or Euro wrenches, as you may have noticed. But it's very rare for me to pay as much as $5 each.

Same here.
I didn't take the survey because I never pay $5 for a single wrench, except probably for a Snap-on or other truck brand.

 

[treasureseeker]

If the wrench wasn't to complete a set I would not pay Five dollars for a medium size one unless it was something rare.

 

[Bolster]

Hi guys, let me **** some questions here.

Thanks Bolster. I would have liked to have seen the results though. Any chance of that happening?

Yes, somewhere in the archives are the results of the last survey. Sorry I'm too lazy to search...but maybe you can find them? I'll post up the recent results after a couple weeks go by.

Bolster,
I love the idea of the survey. But it is always impossible for a survey to accurately break down the little nuances of various people....

Sure, but that's not the point of the survey. What I'm trying to do is get a ranking of desirability, that's all. Not trying to come up with point estimates of worth.

Although you make a good point that it would have been better to specify a "combo wrench," that would have easily gotten rid of some variability.

Could you make a better survey? Heck yeah! But you'd have to find someone who has more free time and/or cared more about the results than I do.

Same here.
I didn't take the survey because I never pay $5 for a single wrench, except probably for a Snap-on or other truck brand.

Well see, that's just fine! So mark the Snap-on. When you don't define certain variables that would impact the results (such as individual differences in spending, or what condition it's in, or what exact size it is, etc) you are basically controlling for those variables by utilizing randomness. Yes it introduces error into the denominator, but we're not doing predictive statistics here, just a ranking, so a small error term is not the goal. And if someone wants to criticize by saying the ranking may not be statistically significant, I say, fine! Being confident at p<.05 that one raking is significantly higher than another is not my concern here.

Chill, my friends! Do not be concerned with the methodology for this very casual survey.

 

[Kirbot]

Well see, that's just fine! So mark the Snap-on.

Lol, for some reason I didn't even notice Snap On the first time I looked at it.

I wen't back and chose it.

 

[trout]

I think a good way to phrase the question would have been: "If you see a wrench worth $5 from brand x, would you buy it for $5? Would you pay $10?"

 

[Bolster]

I think a good way to phrase the question would have been: "If you see a wrench worth $5 from brand x, would you buy it for $5? Would you pay $10?"

Ha ha! Funny. But, no. Not a good survey question; that's adding a confound. I want perceived worth to be free floating.

 

[Bolster]

So guess what the lowest ranked tool brand is? (You already know what the highest ranked brand is...)

Sadly, because of adding the new question, it's not as easy to compare suckage between new and old questions. But you can guess which brand ***** most for each question...

HINT: Least desirable and second least desirable brands are both high quality, respectable brands...I'd be proud to own either...they're just not popular...

...and no peeking from the previous survey results! Because suckage has not changed...

 

[kc-steve]

I wouldn't have a clue where to peek. I can't get past the "done!" page.

Steve

 

[Bolster]

By peeking, I meant the previous writeup on this forum, when I ran this survey last, wherever it is. Now that I've told you where it is, don't look at it! That would be cheating. Whatever you do, do NOT search under "vintage tool survey." That would be unethical.

EDIT: I just cheated and could not find the results. I know I wrote them up. So I'm stumpified. I don't know where they went to. Oh well, we'll have new results soon...and with more datapoints!

Already we're up to 115 responses...cool! :thumbup

So nobody wants to guess lowest ranked brand?

 

[Lump]

No harsh criticism here, Bolster. I'm grateful that you did it at all. I just wasn't comfortable that my answers were really accurate to what I would actually do at an auction or flea mkt, etc.

I would like to make a guess, but I confess that I cannot recall for certain exactly which brand choices were offered. Nevertheless, I can think of some brands that no one seems to be seeking on GJ, such as Buffalo-Barcalo, Walden-Worcester, Sparta, Bridgeport, Master Mechanic, P&C, Penens, Fairmount, Wards, Mustang, etc.

But that wasn't what you asked for, was it? You wanted a guess. So....I'll go WAY out on a limb, and guess Craftsman.

 

[Gregg33]

Craftsman?

 

[Bolster]

Lump, you got one of the bottom two, with current answers. Penens is second from the floor. Can you believe it? I can't. Perfectly respectable company with high quality tools.

Cman is about middle of the pack.

 

[trout]

Ha ha! Funny. But, no. Not a good survey question; that's adding a confound. I want perceived worth to be free floating.

I thought it was to gauge brand preference?
I didn't check ones that I thought were worth $5 but wouldn't buy them because it's not a brand I'm interested in.


I would guess it's either a brand that's not mentioned much, or one with low customer loyalty that is either not the company's flagship brand or does most of it's business making tools for other companies.

 

[kc-steve]

. . . Cman is about middle of the pack.

That doesn't surprise me really, being that "vintage" Craftsman is actually quite good quality, and the brand is the most recognizable household brand there is according to Wikipedia. I believe it any way.

Many "average joes" like myself aren't as familiar with some of the other brands. And I personally don't want to expand the number of brands I already have in my tool inventory. I like to keep it simple.

Steve

 

[Bolster]

I didn't check ones that I thought were worth $5 but wouldn't buy them because it's not a brand I'm interested in.

That's good...because I don't want to estimate hypothetical worth...I want to estimate what real people would actually pick up. When you get enough data you can start to aggregate and then sort. Ya done good Trout!

Ya, I was a little surprised to see Cman in the middle, but then remembered all the folks who like the vintage =v= marked items and it made sense. I think there are more Cman collectors out there than we'd guess...

I've owned some of the quality tools that show up at the bottom of the list. When I tried to sell them, I couldn't give them away. Also owned tools at the top of the list, and people would fight over 'em. So I have personal faith in the ranking, because I have experience that backs it up.

But there are some righteously good brands at the bottom of the list that would be excellent bang-for-the-buck. The bottom-most brand is one I like, and would buy if I found it in good condition. Hardly ever see it though.

Just goes to show...people prefer the brands they see frequently. It's called the "mere exposure" effect. It's why advertising works.

Someone will likely be PO'd when I publish, because it will make competition for some favored brands more intense (when people see how popular they are, they'll pick them up whether they collect them or not), and it will reveal what a screaming deal some low-ranked brands are, possibly increasing competition for them too...

 

[kc-steve]

. . . Someone will likely be PO'd when I publish, because it will make competition for some favored brands more intense (when people see how popular they are, they'll pick them up whether they collect them or not), and it will reveal what a screaming deal some low-ranked brands are, possibly increasing competition for them too...

I hope that doesn't mean you won't publish the results. I'm looking forward to it because I think my choices fall in line with others here.

But an aside, the Garage Journal has a unique set of members that doesn't necessarily represent the overall population of tool owners. If it did, then I think the "vintage" Craftsman tool would be higher in your list. And yes I know this survey is not scientific.

Steve

 

[Lump]

I love this survey project. Can't wait to see the results. I do wish I could go back and look at the list of names again, just because I wonder about some of the brands that I have examples of at home right now. There are SO MANY older brands that were fairly high quality tools back in the day, but which I see no one interested in on GJ. IE: Wards, Powermaster, and Riverside (all Monty Ward brands), Thorsen, Wizard, Duro Chrome, Chrome X, etc. Yet I'm not sure all these brands were even on that list.

No matter. The results will be very interesting!

 

[rebelram]

Actually info about the brands towards the bottom of the list should let people know what they stand a better chance of getting a good deal on. I'm interested to see the results.

 

[kc-steve]

I love this survey project. Can't wait to see the results. I do wish I could go back and look at the list of names again, . . .There are SO MANY older brands that were fairly high quality tools back in the day, but which I see no one interested in on GJ. IE: Wards, Powermaster, and Riverside (all Monty Ward brands), Thorsen, Wizard, Duro Chrome, Chrome X, etc. Yet I'm not sure all these brands were even on that list.

No matter. The results will be very interesting!

I think I remember seeing Wards and Thorsen on the list. I had to think hard about selecting them. I could be wrong though.

Steve

 

[Lump]

Yeah, I know that SOME of the names I've been using in the thread were in the survey. Just can't remember which ones. No worries, I'm looking forward to this.

 

[Bolster]

And yes I know this survey is not scientific.

Ha, Steve! LOL. Yes it is, it's scientific. It's empirical. There's no agenda behind it. It's just bargain basement science, not expensive science with probability testing (which would not even make sense here...do we care if Mac is significantly less desirable than Snap-on?).

I'm a cheap scientist. I'll take partial data to no data any day of the week. That's the difference between a working guy like me and a no-dirt-under-the-fingernails egghead, who won't collect any data unless there's a million dollar grant behind it and it could be published in a top journal.

So let's be clear: I'm running a scientifically sound, cheap-*** survey. It's the Harbor Freight of surveys. It might get the job done, or it might fall on top of you. You answers your questions and you takes your chances.

It's a helluva lot more valid than the typical survey you see published in the media...I'm not biasing answers at all, I'm not trying to achieve a certain outcome, I'm not shading questions in a way that will support my agenda, like all the newspapers do, and like CNN does on a daily basis. I'll put my lack of bias up against Gallup or Pew or CNN any day.

Check your PM, good sir.

 

[Bolster]

Hot dam, we're up to 134 responses. This is good. Will yield nice stable dataset.

Oh, look at that. By mentioning Penens was second from last, I'm moving it up off the floor, it's moving up the ranks now. People are "countering" the information by voting it up.

That's why you can't tell people the results during testing...it biases the answers.

 

[kc-steve]

When I said it isn't scientific, I meant that you are not pre-selecting individuals (survey participants) based upon their tool usage in order to get an accurate representation of the total population of tool owners. That would truly make it a "scientific" survey. It's not intended as a slam. I think there are many more professional tool users here than as a percent of the total population of tool owners. And I do agree with you on the Gallop, CNN, USAToday ****.

Checked PM and all I can say is "Wow!"

Let's all start clanging our tin cans against the bars and pounding our fists, chanting, "Bol-ster, Bol-ster, Bol-ster . . . " until he gives up the data.


Steve

 

[jim m]

As others have mentioned here I would find it hard to pay 5.00 for one wrench so I just marked the brands That I waych for





Jim

 

[Bolster]

When I said it isn't scientific, I meant that you are not pre-selecting individuals (survey participants) based upon their tool usage in order to get an accurate representation of the total population of tool owners. That would truly make it a "scientific" survey. It's not intended as a slam...

And I'm taking absolutely zero offense, I enjoy discussing this. I'm just having fun here.

I see what you're saying now; this is a self-select poll. I don't target a sample and then ride them until I get answers from all I've selected, thus insuring equivalent representation. So in that respect, agree, the poll isn't scientific due to lack of random selection. It's possible all the diesel mechanics refuse to answer the poll, thus biasing the results, etc. Or someone could answer the questionnaire from two different computers and get counted twice, etc. Or maybe people who answer polls are different than people who don't, and so on. Yeah, fixing that makes it expensive.

I like the chanting. One always does better research when one's name is being chanted!

As others have mentioned here I would find it hard to pay 5.00 for one wrench so I just marked the brands That I waych for Jim

Oh, come on Jim! That's so totally unscientific of you.

 

[kc-steve]

. . . I see what you're saying now; . . .

I'm sure glad YOU know what I said because I sure don't. I would hate to go back to my Econometrics textbook and try and find out.

Steve

 

[Gregg33]

Unless it was a Snap On, Gray, a NOS set or an extremely pristine antique wrench I don't know many people that would spend $5 on a "used" medium size wrench. To give you an example I got nearly 20 wrenches (mostly SO & Mossberg) and a whole lot of tools in which the wrenches made up only a 1/4 or 1/5 of the total haul for $45.

 

[Scout Driver]

Lump mentioned a lot of the brands that were not being actively sought after by GJ members.........

Looks like I fall into the minority. For those that are interested, I picked Buffalo-Barcalo, Thorsen, Lectroline etc. as my survey picks. Snap On and Proto USA made my list too. International was my "write-in" at the bottom.

My earliest memories of helping out in the farm shop take me back to using Thorsen tools. Helping my uncle, I'd get to use his Snap On tools. I even like the square-beam, not-very-pretty Buffalo Barcalo wrenches.

Anyhow....Thanks Bolster! I enjoyed taking part in your survey. I would also like to see survey results.

Scott

 

[Bolster]

Unless it was a Snap On, Gray, a NOS set or an extremely pristine antique wrench I don't know many people that would spend $5 on a "used" medium size wrench.

Well, Gregg, you must not know too many people. The survey now has 150 responses from people here at GJ, and virtually all of them are willing to spend $5 on their favorites. Again, the point is to see what are people's favorite brands.

The price was set somewhat high because if you set it somewhat low, you get ceiling effects and a worthless survey. When 100% or even 90% say "yes" then you're sunk. The $5 number is working out very well, giving a great spread of data from high to low. Even the $10 number is providing lots of good data.

Unless you have worked as a professional researcher (as I have), why don't you guys just relax on criticizing the methodology and let the experts do the work!

As soon as the data stops coming in at a rapid rate I'll publish the results, fear not.

 

[kc-steve]

Yup, I'm more than happy to back Bolster up on that after what I saw of the spread between the two prices. I don't think he could have picked better prices.

Bol-ster, Bol-ster, Bol-ster, . . . .

Steve

 

[dougal]

Bump

Is it time to ask, "And, the envelope please Bolster?"

 

[Bolster]

Envelope found at:

http://www.garagejournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=94295