WWII British socket set?

[burnin53]

This set showed up from England from an Ebay seller today.
It hasn't been used much,if at all.
The sockets are still in cosmolene and paper.
I thought the ratchet looked Snap-on to me,but I don't really think so now that it's here.
The sockets look very Plomb-like to me.
Everything looks to be cad-plated,and I'm leaning towards WWII era.
The seller is into aircraft surplus,but this was the only tools that were for sale.

These are the photos from the Ebay ad.
I can take some pictures tomorrow and post when i have more time.
Hope someone here has an idea on the maker and application.

 

[Farmer J.]

Nice set, i've not seen one of those before. Ratchet looks like Snap On to me as well, and it looks like it's all 5/32" drive.
Now we need the people with knowledge of the military part numbers to wade in, this could be interesting.
It does look to be in startlingly good condition though, so there is the possibility it's been nicely restored and re finished and the wooden tray made by a collector.

 

[3baygarage]

Very cool rare find. Someone posted that same or similarly strange set before. It was a big mystery.

The ratchet looks Snap-On, but from here the lever and and drive square just seem odd. The square looks too squared at the edges, no chamfer, maybe it's just me. Are screws just loose?

Please do post some more details of the ratchet and the sockets if you feel like opening them. I don't see why it couldn't be a mix of SO and Plomb during the war, a set with a special purpose.

Was it a Euro seller?

 

[3baygarage]

See posts 1147 - 1169 of The Ratchet Collection Thread.
https://www.garagejournal.com/forum/threads/the-ratchet-collection-thread.343867/post-7632685

Starts with post 1114 by member Odinru. Set found in Ukraine he mentioned in a post.
https://www.garagejournal.com/forum/threads/the-ratchet-collection-thread.343867/post-7623799

 

[Dave455]

I can’t help with the maker(s). I’m with you that the ratchet looks Snap On, but isn’t quite. It would be good to see more of the sockets.

I can possibly help with the application. I believe that to be a “lend lease” set.

When the first lend lease vehicles arrived in the U.K, the tools to service them, or even assemble them, were not available, the U.S. using different sizes to the U.K. This was soon rectified, and the appropriate tools were subsequently supplied.

I have some lend lease tools that were acquired by my Grandfather for servicing the lend lease trucks of the period. The bottom row of sockets in this picture are all lend lease SAE sizes. All Williams. Very nice.


However, someone came up with the (very sensible) idea that the tools should be supplied with the vehicles in question. If a vehicle was crated, the tools to assemble it were include in the crate. If the vehicle was shipped intact, the tools to service it were on the vehicle.

This is what I believe your set to be. It’s a coincidence that you should mention aircraft surplus, because I think it’s most likely your set was supplied with an aircraft. I have seen a similar set before, and that was it’s origin. It had a similar wooden tray, so I think that’s original, but I don’t recall the part numbers.

The reason that many sets survived intact was that they were removed from the aircraft for weight saving, but most of the aircraft mechanics already had SAE tools by then, so kept the new ones in new condition. That’s another reason I lean to your set having aircraft origins.

The set need not have British involvement. Lend lease vehicles were supplied to other countries (Soviet Union) and similar vehicles and tools were even supplied to Germany after the war under the Marshall plan.

It’s entirely typical of the U.K. for a set of tools, or numerous other parts, to lurk in the back of a hangar unused for 80 years though! Seen it many times. Could still find you examples now.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

Someone posted that same or similarly strange set before. It was a big mystery.

I remember that set and discussion! Ukrainian guy. Ostensibly came from the USSR and was ostensibly associated with Bell (Allison V-1710) P-39 Airacobra maintenance kit, or so said the original seller, anyway. Weird sets of numbers stamped on them (and not the same as the numbers on this holder...).

@burnin53 if you are willing to carefully and temporarily move just enough of the cosmo in just the right places on one or maybe two sockets, it would be interesting to see if the numbers are the same.

 

[snapmom]

snap on selector switches are different than this one. also the boxes from the war were all grey. this could be snap on, but it has red flags.

 

[3baygarage]

snap on selector switches are different than this one. also the boxes from the war were all grey. this could be snap on, but it has red flags.

So strange, like a copy of the Ferret. But what was the reason?

Another question, Sae or metric? Whitworth?

 

[Private Lugnutz]

snap on selector switches are different than this one.

As noted with the last similar/same set. See 3bays links and some links in those discussions back to Snappy thread, too. Special order maybe? Or inexact copy.

also the boxes from the war were all grey.

I don't think anyone was proposing the whole set, with case, came from Snap-on. The type of box, never mind the finish, and the wood insert probably eliminates that to begin with, no? I don't remember if we discussed that last time. That's what was so mysteriously intriguing about the first one. The sockets in that set do not resemble wartime Snappy. It looks to me like it was assembled from various sources by a third party. IF it's Lend-Lease - which was administered by the Treasury Dept, believe it or not, in close cooperation with the then OEM (later War Production Board), maybe here in the US. By whom though? There was some interaction between the Treasury Dept and the Army (US Air Corps, QMC, etc) on Lend Lease, but not too sophisticated. QMC was issuing BOMs for jeeps and toolkits, for example, that Willys was filling. It might could've been assembled by an agency on the receiving end, in the USSR.

 

[burnin53]

I finally got around to checking this set over again.
And it keeps getting odder the more I look.
The sockets are actually metric.
And the part no. doesn't seem to reflect the size.
They are chrome,too,instead of the cad plating the ratchet has.

Here is the 16 next to a Plomb LA 5/8."
They are very similar but not the same.
The Mystery socket looks hot broached vs. the cold broaching of the Plomb.

I did compare it to a later hot-forged Plomb and it is not even close to looking the same.



The oddest thing to me,though,is the drive size.
When I bought it,I was sure it was 3/8 drive.
Then I tried to put a Plomb socket on the ratchet.
No dice.
The drive is a tick over 3/8!
You could use these sockets on a 3/8 ratchet,but they would be a sloppy fit.
Because the drive size is 10mm!


Here is the part no. on the 10mm drive ratchet.
Never thought I'd be able to say that.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

The drive is a tick over 3/8!

Exactly the same as the other set! Did you go into the links 3bay provided yet? You will be having deja vu all over again...

The attachment square size is 9,85 mm, so the ratchet takes on sockets from the set only.

Private Lugnutz, the set is in Ukraine geographically, in a posession of my friend, so some measurements results requested will come later.
As to the ratchet drive plug/drive stud size, it is indeed 9,85 mm. Modern 3/8" dr. sockets have square aperture of approximately 9,65 mm

 

[Private Lugnutz]

I'm back to thinking, as I was with the original set, that these are European "production", perhaps Russian, and the resemblance of the ratchet to a Snap-on is just a red herring that leads to fanciful tales of Airacobras and Lend-Lease, or perhaps those were indeed unmarked Snap-on F-70 ratchets, with modified drive plugs and switches.

Did you measure the 701417 "16" socket? Is it 16mm?

The idea that digits 6, 7, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19 refer to fasteners/nuts sizes in millimiters failed.

What two-digit number is marked on the 701414 socket? And what is the highest number in the set? 70142x? Would you transcribe all the red markings on the holder (obscured by wax paper) and all the markings on the sockets?

 

[Dave455]

When I saw a set previously, I wasn’t convinced that the box and tray had the same origins as the tools. I wondered if the tools were U.S. supplied, and the boxes / trays locally. They do have a central / eastern european look.

I’m coming round to the idea that these are European produced, perhaps a copy of wartime tools. The quality is a bit high for Russian stuff though. Certainly wartime. Again, something that made me think of aircraft tools?

Could they be U.S. produced for a Russian contract? The U.S. produced tools in BS sizes for British contracts, and could easily have produced metric.

 

[burnin53]

Ok,guys.
Here it is with the cosmo and wax paper gone.
It looks like everything really is cad plated.
And it's all metric. Went out to the garage and test fit them on metric bolts.

The 16 was unwrapped when the set arrived and it looked chrome to me,but maybe the previous owner buffed it or something.
Maybe the cad didn't adhere right.
I'm not sure.
Cad does get good and shiny with a light buff.

Here's a bunch of pictures.
I tried to show in the first four,which socket correlates with its numbered position in the box.

 

[burnin53]

More pictures.
I really like the sliding t-handle piece,but I don't know what they expected a guy to use for a handle.

 

[burnin53]

Some more pictures.
Any questions or need for more pics,letme know.

 

[burnin53]

Very cool rare find. Someone posted that same or similarly strange set before. It was a big mystery.

The ratchet looks Snap-On, but from here the lever and and drive square just seem odd. The square looks too squared at the edges, no chamfer, maybe it's just me. Are screws just loose?

Please do post some more details of the ratchet and the sockets if you feel like opening them. I don't see why it couldn't be a mix of SO and Plomb during the war, a set with a special purpose.

Was it a Euro seller?

The screws were loose and the heads were way to long. So much so that they hung out.
So I filed those down a bit.
And the square drive is quite blunt.
I dont think its a Snap-on,just a copy.

The set came to me from Great Britain.

 

[burnin53]

Here are the stampings on the tools, which do correlate with the stamping in the box:
701416 and 19
701414 and 18
701417 and 16
701413 and 15
701422 and 14
701415 and 13
701419 and 11
701420 and 9
701453 and 7
The above are all metric and 12- point.

There are two 4-point sockets:
701421 and 9
701418 and 7

701623 sliding-T adaptor

701437 u-joint

701452 ratchet.

 

[3baygarage]

Thanks for taking the detailed pics. I didn’t realize it was a 10mm ratchet. Very interesting. The t-bar head with no bar is a mystery in itself.

 

[Private Lugnutz]

The t-bar head with no bar is a mystery in itself.

Except that we've seen the same mystery before on the other set!!

What is part 107? It looks like the drive head from a sliding tee that is absent its bar. Is there a hole cross drilled in it? Hard to tell from the photo, but I think I see a glimpse of an opening. That's were the sliding tee bar would go.

As to the part №107, yes it's a drive head from a sliding tee that is absent. And yes, it has hole cross drilled in it.

Am I the only one comparing these sets? They're the same sets, guys! Different model numbers, but very much the same set. There is no way two sets in the same box with a wooden insert with 10mm drive tools and sockets and a sliding tee handle without its tommy bar is a coincidence!

Here are the model numbers of the first set. Ignore the prefixes. Look at the emboldened numbers.

85-7, 85-9, 84-11, 80-13, 87-14, 78-15, 82-16, 79-18, 81-19.

Here are the model numbers of the second set. Ignore the nomenclature numbers. Look at the emboldened numbers. They are the same numbers!

701416 and 19
701414 and 18
701417 and 16
701413 and 15
701422 and 14
701415 and 13
701419 and 11
701420 and 9
701453 and 7

We now have two examples of a very odd set. We are no closer to figuring it out, but it's not a one-off. And we know it had a "production" span that had two slightly different model numbering iterations, whether in time, or by two different agencies.