Vise Info Thread

[Fierljeppen]

Fierljeppen: it will be a very sad day in the vise collector's world if you ever discontinue with this hobby! Your contributions are legendary and irreplaceable!!

I think that the collecting of vises and other smaller items [smaller than cars, trucks and boats] is driven by available space and that most very collectible vises or smaller items rarely need a mortgage to purchase, and can be stored in most folk's homes.. one doesn't need thousands of square feet of storage like for cars and trucks..
And while a rather extensive collection of vises may add up to many, many thousands of dollars, they are reletively indestructible.. so having expensive insurance covering damage due to fire or flood is rarely needed.. Unlike antique cars. where even the least valuable of my teen's, twenties or thirties cars if lost due to fire, the loss would far exceed my entire collection of over 200 vises..
And of course I do carry insurance on my shop, contents, and each individual antique car.. The $$#$%^%!! insurance on my cars costs more per month than my mortgage and property taxes.
Yeah, I do realize that I could reduce that insurance expense, either by going partially or totally uninsured, or to greatly reduce the number of cars in my collection.. BUT which ones to sell? For me it's like which son or daughter to sell?

So I think you are right: the vise collecting world will continue, at least for a decade or two. Until the newer generations who don't know how to use a hammer or screwdriver [much less a vise! ] become the prominent collector population.. And I'll be pushing up daisies by then..

PierceA.

If I didn't say it clearly enough: Fierljeppen: THANK YOU for your contributions to this group of vise collectors !!

I certainly do NOT mean to minimalize the contributions from so many other knowledgable and helpful members, certainly not to minimize the time and efforts of KMS, without whom the vise database would be seriously lacking in content.

I know that if I attempt to list all of the major contributors, I will forget dozens of very helpful people.
So you guys know who you are!! And my heartfelt thanks go out to you too !!
PierceA.

Thank you for your kind words, although you may be overstating things a bit.

Collecting vintage American Vises and everything that goes along with it, will probably be my main hobby until the day I die. I really can't explain my passion for vises, but it's real and I like it!

I collect a lot more vise periodicals, both original and digital, than I do vises. In fact, I'm trying to downsize my vise collection as we speak. It's not going well, but it's still a goal.

I'm really pleased to see how well the vise market is performing these days. The rare vises are finally getting the respect they so deserve, while the vise catalog relevance continues to climb, with no end in sight.

Vise puzzles and seeing interesting vises is what I enjoy the most at GJ, but answering vise questions with historical content is satisfying as well. It's very important to me that we have credible vise data for all of the vise collectors that are interested.

A special thanks to KMScott! He is doing such a great job hosting the "Vise Info Thread" and managing the "Vise Spreadsheet". His efforts with all of the individual contributions of the "vise community" really make the GarageJournal a vise collectors paradise.

Vise on!

 

[KMScott]

Thanks guys for all you have said. I enjoy keeping the spreadsheet updated. Be patient since my internet is down (island life) and should be back next week I hope. I will get caught up when it does.

 

[PierceA]

Kevin, what are your thoughts on the 6" Parker? Just an accidental odd-ball? It's a beast of a vise. Only a fraction smaller than my Yost 107. When I can clear some floor space and the weather warms up, I may get the forklift busy and put the 6" Parker, the Yost 107, and my Parker 978 side by side, just for a visual comparison. It may be interesting.

PierceA.

 

[Fierljeppen]

I haven't contributed much to this vise info thread lately. So I thought I'd post these images and ask for some help trying to figure out what this Parker might be.


Sorry for the clutter, but I think you can see the very large 6" jawed Parker fixed base vise clamped in a small-looking Athol 615, on a wonderful iron vise stand.


It is clearly a Parker, and a 6" or larger one that [usually] has a two-screw collar. And the handle friction tensioning screw in the meatball. The jaws measure 6".


As you can see, this big Parker has NO name, model number, patent info or other on it's sides


The only name is on the collar. The only number I found was on the underside of the swivel jaw round 'peg' that fits into the top of the static jaw. That very faint number is '275'. I've looked up 275, and that isn't this vise.. But it is logical that the same swivel jaw casting could and would be used on a Parker 375.
I thought that it might be a 375, but that doesn't match either, because of the jaw width.

If the jaws were 6-1/2"wide, then I'd call it a Parker 375. I have looked carefully, and I do not think the jaws were narrowed by 1/2", this is a well used vise, but I see no indications of any grinding on the ends of the jaws or jaw towers. And when I got it, there were no indications that this vise had ever had any cosmetic or functional 'cleanup' work done on it. only some grease on the slide and mainscrew.

So: My best guess is either an unknown retailer wanted a 6" swivel jaw vise so a 375 was cast without lettering or numbers on the vise.
Or maybe it was a bad day at the foundry and someone cast the vise without adding the numbers and letters.. But why the narrower jaws?

It isn't a true 'no-name' since it has 'Parker' on the collar.

Of course, an original no-name collar might have broken and a named collar was the replacement.
I have inspected very closely with a bright light and a magnifying glass at the sides of the static and dynamic, and it never had numbers or letters that were ground off.. There are distinct casting lines and marks that extend through the flat areas that would have had to be ground smooth. Even using various methods to imitate cast-metal surfaces, the casting lines or flaws would not continue through the areas.
So: I'm looking for suggestions of it's possible origin? or maybe it's just an 'oops' at the foundry and it became an odd-ball 6" Parker..

Kevin: the protruding slide measures 9-3/4", jaws 6" wide. and it's weight I will have to get for you. Even when separated, the static and dynamic's weights exceed my electronic scale's capacity, I'll have to take a bathroom scale out to the shop..

I have a lot more recent acquistions, I hope to add to this thread soon..

PierceA.

PierceA...I'd bet my neighbors farm that your vise is a Parker Victor swivel jaw model no. 375, like you suspected. The earliest ad I found for the Victor no. 375 is 1894 and the latest ad is 1926. I found specs for both 6" and 6-1/4" jaws, as seen in the catalog scans below. The 6" jaw listing is from the mid 1920's, which may help you date the vise.



Very nice pickup!

 

[PierceA]

Thanks Fierljeppen. I did not look through Parker brochures, I looked in the vise database. In the database the 375 is shown to have 6-1/2" jaws.. With this info from the Brochure you posted, I can see that it is undoubtably a Parker 375 that came out of the foundry naked without any names or model numbers with the exception of the Parker on the collar.
I guess I should have poured over the brochures, I just didn't think of it..

Thanks again,
PierceA

 

[MattGavriloff]

Damn, usually I'm the one that's quick on the draw with a tiny Parker catalog discrepancy! And I know I've poured over both of those before, but it never dawned on me upon seeing PierceA's vise.

A beastly thing it is too!!

And nice I.D. Fier! Gotta keep my wits sharp to be quicker than the masters!

 

[Dave600]

PierceA - the 375 model has been 6-1/4 inch jaw width up to 1918. In 1919 and beyond it was changed to 6 inch jaw width. I have catalog pages in 1895 showing the 370-375 swivel jaw fixed base vises (6-1/4 jaw width on the 375).

Dave

 

[ejot]

I think this may be an Israeli manufacturer or importer/exporter. Couldn't find much info. Appears to be a decent quality English-style vice with optional swivel base. Two different vises shown.

Hakhoret - 4" jaws - possibly model "109"? (first pic)

 

[CRSINMICH]

ejot: That's one for the vise spreadsheet.

 

[PierceA]

I wonder if Kevin wants to update the jaw width for the Parker 375 in the spreadsheet/database. It should be from what you guys have pointed out be either 6-1/4" or 6" even.
Mine is 6" even.
Now, to get it apart and on a scale. LOL.

PierceA

 

[KMScott]

what does the writing on the nose say
my has the same construction, same jaw plates, anvil, dovetail nose and tommy bar

Ranger, like you I can't read it either. Not my vise and can't remember where I found the pic's.

 

[Dave600]

I wonder if Kevin wants to update the jaw width for the Parker 375 in the spreadsheet/database. It should be from what you guys have pointed out be either 6-1/4" or 6" even.
Mine is 6" even.
Now, to get it apart and on a scale. LOL.

PierceA

So from 1895 to 1918 the Parker Victor 375 was fixed base with swivel rear jaw and 6-1/4 wide jaws (23 yrs). In 1919 catalog jaw width was reduced to 6 inches. I am still looking but in the late 1930s or early 1940s the models 370-375 appear to be eliminated (approx 20yrs). The swivel base Victor vise models 270 - 275 were switched to models 383.5 - 386 with the last number being jaw width at that time.
Dave

 

[KMScott]

I updated the 375 Parker to 6” jaw width. Might be enough room to have 6 and 6-1/4”. I’ll check tonight.

 

[Dave600]

I updated the 375 Parker to 6” jaw width. Might be enough room to have 6 and 6-1/4”. I’ll check tonight.

Here is the older version (yr 1897) of the 370-375 with the 6-1/4 inch wide jaw for the Parker 375. Not sure how the other models in this group changed in 1919, but now you have both versions. Dave.

 

[CRSINMICH]

STEPHENS' Patent Vise​

In addition to adding to information about a specific vise, this serves as an example of how difficult it can be to find out who actually manufactured a particular vise.

1864 Anson P. Stephens patented a distinctive style of vise. The patent information lists manufacturers as:
1) Stephens' Patent Vise Co. of NY, NY
2) Stephens & Co. NY, NY,
3) Tower & Lyon also of NY, NY.

1870 Stephens' Patent Vises are illustrated in a Stephens catalog

1881 An article in a trade journal indicates that Stephens' Patent Vises were manufactured by The Stephens' Patent Vise Co. of New York

1882 An ad for the ASA S. COOK Co. states that they manufactured Stephens' Patent Vises.

1884 An article in Building Age Magazine is titled "Stephen's patent toggle joint vises" indicates that they were manufactured by
Nathan Stephen, 41 Dey St. New York. The company name, Stephens, is spelled apostrophe S not S apostrophe because Nathan Stephen doesn't have the final S. More importantly, the vise is called 'toggle joint'. These differences were probably due to sloppy copy writing at the magazine but there were a lot of shenanigans in industry back then so it might be an attempt to get around patent laws.
Edit: After I wrote this I found a patent reference to Nathan Stephens.

Running into the name Nathan Stephen(s) is an example of another difficulty in identifying manufacturers. In addition to the original patent holder, Anson Stephens, there were also Benjamin Stephens, Chas Stephens, D.H. Stephens, Frank Stephens, L.C. Stephens, and Melvin Stephens, who all show up on patents around the same time. Benjamin seems to have been associated with Stephens' & Co. from the beginning, however D.H. and L.C. were both from Connecticut and their patents were not vise related but were manufactured by Stephens & Co. Chas Stephens was a witness on D.H. Stephens' patent application. In fact, many of the Stephens witnessed each others' applications. Quite a tangled web.

And finally, I think:

1908 An ad for yet another manufacturer of Stephens' Patent Automatic or Self-Closing Vises. You may already be familiar with G.M. Yost.
Look closely underneath the slide in the drawing. It says, "W. Bertram, NY." What's that about?

EDIT: See post #2461 for one more manufacturer - Colt's Armory.

 

[CRSINMICH]

ADDENDUM: The Chapin-Stephens Co. (1901-1929) was a merger of the H. Chapin's Co. ( 1897-1901) and the D.H. Stephens & Co. (1861-1901).
The Chapin firm was originally established by Hermon Chapin (1799-1866) at Pine Meadow, a district in the southern part of New Hartford,
with Daniel Copeland in 1826. In 1828 Hermon Chapin purchased Copeland's interest's and established the Union Factory there under his sole proprietorship, producing a complete line of wooden planes. In 1835 wooden rules were added and it is where Delos H. (D.H.) Stephens learned his trade.

 

[ranger08]

W. Bertram, NY, maybe the artist signature

 

[CRSINMICH]

ranger: I thought it might be the lithographer too. It just shows that following through with a possible lead can reveal new information. For instance, I just looked for information on Snediker Vises which were mentioned as being manufactured by Yost in the 1908 ad and I found this 1900 ad for Tower & Lyon who was the third company listed on the patent information as manufacturers of Stephens' Patent Vises. I also found this Tower & Lyon pipe vise. The more you look the more you find.

 

[bl00]

Here's some NOS star N vises that Harry Epstein is selling. Per the box they were made in Japan.

 

[CRSINMICH]

W. Bertram identified?​

W. Bertram's name appears in a number of early Stephens' Vise ads and illustrations like this 1870 Stephens catalog and an 1874 Photographic Times article. In an 1871 edition of Trow's New York Directory there are two W. Bertrams listed as engravers. Curiously, they are both on 3rd Avenue. I would feel more satisfaction at finding this but look closely at the Photographic Times ad. It says that Stephens Patent Vises were manufactured at "Colt's Armory". That makes one more manufacturer of Stephens Vise. I'll keep looking for others but it's becoming a marathon undertaking.

 

[CRSINMICH]

Another addendum: At the bottom of the 1874 Photographic Times ad it says Scoville Manufacturing Co. The Scovill Manufacturing company produced brass objects such as buttons, screws, and tools in Waterbury, Connecticut, from 1802 to 1956. Payroll records from 1862 to 1916 indicate that about half of the workers were women. Who knew?

 

[KMScott]

Emmert 24/25 Swivel Jaw. 4" jaws.

 

[KMScott]

Sawyer # 26. 6" jaws. No other spec"s.

 

[KMScott]

Emmert #49. 6-1/2" jaws that opens to 11" and weights 160lbs.

 

[CRSINMICH]

Kevin: That's some solid iron. I had an Emmert Tiger #46 once. I can't remember why I sold it. Probably had something to do with back problems.

 

[PierceA]

It is interesting that the Emmert Tiger is so substantial.
I had an Emmert universal, and to be honest It really was not a very good vise. Very easily bent and broken.
The design had several weak spots and I've seen many broken and bent Emmert universal vises..
I have only looked at the smaller ones. The large size universal vises might be much better and stronger..

PierceA

 

[CRSINMICH]

Pierce: You did have the itty-bitty Universal. I think I showed you my 4a when you were here. There's nothing insubstantial about it. This one still has the brass shop tag on it but when I first found it in this alley it was all in rusted pieces inside a 5 gallon bucket. I didn't stick around long to see if all the parts were all there. By the way, Packards were made in those buildings many years ago. Maybe my vise helped.

 

[PierceA]

Hi CRS, yes I remember your Emmert. That is why I wrote the caveat in my post. Your Emmert does look sturdy. I'd like to look it over some day and see if the weak areas I found in my little version are of a similar design in the larger versions.

PierceA

 

[KMScott]

Charles Parker Coachmakers vise. Model 40-1/2. 4-1/2” jaws that opens to 9-1/2” and weights rules. Thanks fierljeppen for the spec:s.

 

[454ragtop]

^ Looks like it's about a foot and a half long.....

 

[ejot]

Anyone recognize either of these?

 

[Fierljeppen]

Charles Parker 40-1/2. No spec:s yet.

Charles Parker 40-1/2 Coach Makers vise.



catalog specs:
jaw width........4-1/2"
jaw opening...9-1/2"
weight.............57 lbs.

Advertised from at least (1902-1912).

 

[Fierljeppen]

Anyone recognize either of these?

I've seen the "Green" vise advertised in the 1990's as a woodworkers vise, I think.

The "Red" vise definitely looks similar to an unknown model no. Hollands Mfg. vise.

 

[CRSINMICH]

Fierljeppen and ejot: By and amazing coincidence, I just now ran across this picture of a Stewmac Guitar Repair vise. It's not an exact match but close enough to make you wonder. That led me to this Lee Valley Universal Vise. Bingo!

 

[Dlavallee22]

My first new vise of the year turns out to be a unicorn in my book. A new vise and manufacturer all together on this one. This vise is made by the Weedsport Drill Co of Weedsport, NY. It is a No. 3 with 4” jaws, 4” max opening, and weighs in at 22 lbs. It also has the Simpson Quick Action patent with a half nut and buttress threads. I absolutely love the design cast into the sides of this vise. The tail piece off the back seems to be a handle to help maneuver the dynamic slide to take it out without unscrewing and removing the half nut at the same time. Both that and the little piece that holds the main screw in place seem to be riveted in place through the top of the slide. Hopefully some of you can help shed some light on the history of this manufacturer or vise as I came up pretty empty!

 

[Fierljeppen]

My first new vise of the year turns out to be a unicorn in my book. A new vise and manufacturer all together on this one. This vise is made by the Weedsport Drill Co of Weedsport, NY. It is a No. 3 with 4” jaws, 4” max opening, and weighs in at 22 lbs. It also has the Simpson Quick Action patent with a half nut and buttress threads. I absolutely love the design cast into the sides of this vise. The tail piece off the back seems to be a handle to help maneuver the dynamic slide to take it out without unscrewing and removing the half nut at the same time. Both that and the little piece that holds the main screw in place seem to be riveted in place through the top of the slide. Hopefully some of you can help shed some light on the history of this manufacturer or vise as I came up pretty empty!

Diavallee22...That is an absolute "top shelf" vise and amazing addition to your collection. There must have been something special in the water of Weedsport, NY. for that small community to produce such exquisite vises from different companies.

There definitely seems to be a relationship between J. J. Cowell and O. W. Burritt, as they both had similiar patents for metal seaming machines made for tin roofs in the small town of Weedsport, NY.

I think it's safe to say that your "Weedsport Drill Co." vise and Joe Stripers "Lightning" vise could be cousins.



While the "Lightning" vise was heavily advertised, the only reference for a "Weedsport Drill Co." vise that I could find was in an 1897 directory, as seen below.



There's always more information out there than you may initially realize and I'm going to encourage you to keep searching for historical data that will enlighten you on your "unicorn" vise.

It really is something special and deserves an appreciative owner, like yourself.

Vise on!

 

[KMScott]

Hollands Keystone M Filers vise. 4" jaws that opens to 6" and weights 33lbs per catalog page showing Machinist model.

 

[KMScott]

Milwaukee V86/V87. 4" jaws that weights 45lbs.

 

[Outlawmws]

Wow, Much of a Wilton clone?

 

[KMScott]

Wow, Much of a Wilton clone?

Owner mentions that it was built in USA. I am thinking it might be made in Japan. I'll keep an eye out on a catalog page.