Show us your bench vice(s)

[dannysheff]

For any interest.
List of Patent and Registered Design numbers I have found so far.
Any additions welcome please. There are a number for Parkinson yet to be added.

Patent RD No	Manufacturer	Date	Notes
Pat GB196858	C & J Hampton Record	03.05.1923	Improvements in or relating to vices Size 00 - 8, 32-36 with "Unbreakable nut"
RD 666598	C & J Hampton Record		Size 00 - 8, 32-36 with "Unbreakable nut"
Pat GB310723	C & J Hampton Record	02.05.1929	Improvements in or relating to vices (74 and 75 auto vices)
Pat GB858489	C & J Hampton Record	11.01.1961	Improvements in or relating to bench vices (Leader series in steel)
Pat GB704042	C & J Hampton Record	17.02.1954	Improvements in or relating to bench vices (Swivel base design)
Pat GB679982	C & J Hampton Record	24.09.1952	Improvements in or relating to bench vices
Pat GB462834	C & J Hampton Record	17.03.1937	Improvements relating to vices Ideal 186 & Ideal 99. Half back turn to quick release
Pat GB115931	Fortis	30.05.1918	Improvements in Vices. Method to connect jaws to vice.
RD 689821	Parkinson		Handy Vice
Pat GB190625134	Steel Nut & Hampton Woden	22.08.1907	Improvements in Vices
Pat GB462834	Steel Nut & Hampton Woden	17.03.1917	Improvements relating to Vices
Pat GB697238	Steel Nut & Hampton Woden	16.09.1953	Improvements in quick release Vices
Pat GB800885	Steel Nut & Hampton Woden	03.09.1958	Improvements in or relating to Vices

A side note concerning Fortis.
I have read a few opinions over time about either Fortis basically just making vice for Alfred Herbert (because the AH Ajax vice was identical in most respects to the Fortis) - OR even AH making the vice under AJAX and then making a version for Fortis to sell. And, both companies were from Coventry.
My thoughts.
1. Fortis were in the Buck and Hickman catalogues for years. B&H were competitors to Alfred Herbert.
2. Fortis was an independent company established in 1900. Directors were not connected to AH.
3. Fortis took out their own Patent for mounting jaws in vice (as above). Patents protect manufacturers.
4. There are so many different Fortis designs and mods and changes, (yet Ajax remained the same one design) that Fortis must have been the manufacturer - playing with designs - not AH.

Hence I believe Fortis was a separate company to AH. Also evidenced by their establishment, ownership and also one director Hubert Martin being the inventor of the above Patent.

Fortis is an enigma at the moment as data is so short on them. We can see so many examples of their designs, some terrific in my opinion, yet very little about them. Not even a Fortis catalogue can I find.

If anyone sees one - SHOUT!

Fantastic - you have plenty to keep you going here - I also have some RD and patent nos for some of the more outlying UK vices - I'll save these for later.

And there are some v similar vices just marked 'Coventry' - neither Fortis nor Ajax. (I don't have one, but may have saved an image somewhere).

Re Reg Des nos, the national archive should give details, but I've never had the energy to go that deep, however to give year info, I found a collector's list on www.925-1000.com (go to 'registry') quite useful, -- RD nos back to no 0001 in 1884 - not details, but year.

 

[SteveB58]

PS. Just found a Patent by F Parramore (PARAMO).. very interesting.... clip-on soft jaws for vice.... One to add to my excel list..

View attachment 367056

Amazed that this qualified for a patient, to all intents and purposes it's a vice clamp which I'm sure most of us would have made from aluminium or brass sheet, for work I din't want to mark I'd glue leather to the outer faces. The ones we made would enclose the jaw rather that slide on as illustrated. Or have I missed something?

 

[StevieO]

Amazed that this qualified for a patient, to all intents and purposes it's a vice clamp which I'm sure most of us would have made from aluminium or brass sheet, for work I din't want to mark I'd glue leather to the outer faces. The ones we made would enclose the jaw rather that slide on as illustrated. Or have I missed something?

Think you got it spot in there. Sometimes patents are all about prestige rather than protection of design. To contest copiers of a patent is extremely expensive (even in those days). Sometimes there are so many copiers it’s economic suicide.
As my old boss used to tell me- patents are only worth anything in court!

 

[StevieO]

Fantastic - you have plenty to keep you going here - I also have some RD and patent nos for some of the more outlying UK vices - I'll save these for later.

And there are some v similar vices just marked 'Coventry' - neither Fortis nor Ajax. (I don't have one, but may have saved an image somewhere).

Re Reg Des nos, the national archive should give details, but I've never had the energy to go that deep, however to give year info, I found a collector's list on www.925-1000.com (go to 'registry') quite useful, -- RD nos back to no 0001 in 1884 - not details, but year.

Let me know any I can add Danny- thank you. Hope the list helps with identification for some. Still got to add the Parkinson yet! It’s hours of research!
I’ll look up the RD link later thanks mate!

 

[StevieO]

Ps Danny
Be interested to see any Coventry photos if you or anyone has any.
Cheers!

Enjoying a Tribute in the sun in our garden- maybe the last of the year….

Last chance in the garden - not the Tribute! LOL

 

[ranger08]

Fantastic - you have plenty to keep you going here - I also have some RD and patent nos for some of the more outlying UK vices - I'll save these for later.

And there are some v similar vices just marked 'Coventry' - neither Fortis nor Ajax. (I don't have one, but may have saved an image somewhere).

Re Reg Des nos, the national archive should give details, but I've never had the energy to go that deep, however to give year info, I found a collector's list on www.925-1000.com (go to 'registry') quite useful, -- RD nos back to no 0001 in 1884 - not details, but year.

link does not work for me

 

[ranger08]

A very early no 50 in amazing order, couldn’t find out what the registered design number refers to?
it appears in the 1935 catalogue, does anyone know of an earlier record catalogue
View attachment 366877

found a list of registered design numbers it shows the start number at the start of each year, so the above registered design number 741964 occurred in the year 1930

 

[dannysheff]

found a list of registered design numbers it shows the start number at the start of each year, so the above registered design number 741964 occurred in the year 1930
View attachment 367160

Sorry about the link - never seem to get that right, but what Ranger has here is just about the same list - so that's fine ---- thanks ranger.

 

[dannysheff]

So the Parkinsons early Handy type with a 2 casting static and a small anvil, reg des 94546 is 1888, which prob means the one without anvil or reg des started quite a bit before (before reg designs started? and prob some time before Parky's 'Perfect' QR patent of 1884). The later Parky Handy with 1 casting static, reg des 689821, is 1922.

Vonos of various types have reg des of 697761, which is 1924.

It may be possible that manufacture started before a design number was actually registered, but I'd guess not long before - (this is not quite like a patent).

 

[ranger08]

Introducing a unicorn, it’s an early rack system, that’s all I know as yet, except it was brought to nz in the gold rush somewhere between 1880 and 1900
the levers work and rack lifts and lowers as it should, will be fun one to pull apart and de rust

 

[dannysheff]

Introducing a unicorn, it’s an early rack system, that’s all I know as yet, except it was brought to nz in the gold rush somewhere between 1880 and 1900
the levers work and rack lifts and lowers as it should, will be fun one to pull apart and de rust
View attachment 367199
View attachment 367200

View attachment 367201

wow - yes, a unicorn. envious

wonder if it was from the 1870s 'vice invention hot-house of the Bradford area'? - seems closely related to the patents of Smith, Marks (J Syer vice) of 1877 and the Wilson, Riley (Entwistle and Kenyon vice) of a few weeks later, but different again (rack on top) - maybe a bunch of engineers working for various firms were having a drink together at a local pub and put the rack, cam and short-screw on the back of an envelope but finished up with three different practical applications of the device when they got into work the next day. Or maybe this was the first and the others were patent attempts to get around it. Or ---

 

[ranger08]

It’s a curious one, the short screw on the main shaft is balanced or circular if you like it’s not off set like an EK, the rack is forced down on the screw by the rear lever.
the rear lever is cast and is angled back, not sure if it’s bent or was designed that way?
i will de rust it, the rust pitting is rather bad
suggestions please on what to do, ie what level of clean up I should do or none at all

 

[StevieO]

It’s a curious one, the short screw on the main shaft is balanced or circular if you like it’s not off set like an EK, the rack is forced down on the screw by the rear lever.
the rear lever is cast and is angled back, not sure if it’s bent or was designed that way?
i will de rust it, the rust pitting is rather bad
suggestions please on what to do, ie what level of clean up I should do or none at all

Always personal choice, but personally I reckon a full de-rust, wire wheel, primer and top coats would make that look super!
Woof Woof Woof !

 

[StevieO]

So the Parkinsons early Handy type with a 2 casting static and a small anvil, reg des 94546 is 1888, which prob means the one without anvil or reg des started quite a bit before (before reg designs started? and prob some time before Parky's 'Perfect' QR patent of 1884). The later Parky Handy with 1 casting static, reg des 689821, is 1922.

Vonos of various types have reg des of 697761, which is 1924.

It may be possible that manufacture started before a design number was actually registered, but I'd guess not long before - (this is not quite like a patent).

Danny,
Thanks for the extra RD numbers etc and I've added to my excel.
Do you have the Parky's 'Perfect' QR patent number of 1884 so I can add it too?
ta
Steve

 

[SteveB58]

Whatever you do keep the wire whizzy wheel well away. By all means remove the rust, but if that is original paint don't over paint it. Clean with 000 wire wool and oil. Keep the patina, keep the history. You wouldn't give Tutankhamen's tomb two counts of emulsion would you.

 

[ranger08]

Whatever you do keep the wire whizzy wheel well away. By all means remove the rust, but if that is original paint don't over paint it. Clean with 000 wire wool and oil. Keep the patina, keep the history. You wouldn't give Tutankhamen's tomb two counts of emulsion would you.

Yes I agree I’m going to clean the rack and spindle, will leave the levers original with oil and wire wool to clean only
cast iron body I’m not sure, very rusty however if I de rust in liquid it will ruin the original paint, so won’t soak and will leave as much paint as possible, new jaw plates and screws as these are broken

 

[SteveB58]

Yes I agree I’m going to clean the rack and spindle, will leave the levers original with oil and wire wool to clean only
cast iron body I’m not sure, very rusty however if I de rust in liquid it will ruin the original paint, so won’t soak and will leave as much paint as possible, new jaw plates and screws as these are broken

Sounds like a plan.

 

[StevieO]

Now it's Question Time.

For the technically minded who can navigate through the verbose language of patents which was developed to be unequivocal in meaning so that it’s patent protection was guaranteed and written in stone never to be misinterpreted…..

Can you figure out what William Alexander Armitstead designed and patented under GB1064885 (A) ― 12.04.1967 for J Parkinson and Son Shipley Ltd?
It was a new Quick Release mechanism.... or seems to be.

The attached are the Patent documents.

br
Steve

PS. No prizes - just hope someone can get it because my brain got stuck part way through. One pdf is a computer generated english version of the original patent application but some spellings were badly identified - you will see the correct spellings on the original patent doc.

PPS. Currently the patent is shown as A. Patent applied for - not accepted.. However, I believe the online system which supposed to show the GB number B (if approved) also is let down when patents expire - seems like there is no identifier for a patent which was a B then expired.... so all patents are showing as A.

 

[StevieO]

After some hours burning the midnight oil - latest list

If anyone wants to search for patents I use this link.
eg to search for Parkinson vice (change the years for other searches...just reduces the results list)

https://librarysearch.wlv.ac.uk/discovery/search?query=any,contains,Parkinson,AND&query=any,contains,Vice,AND&pfilter=dr_s,exact,18800101,AND&pfilter=dr_e,exact,19701231,AND&tab=ALL&search_scope=MyInst_and_CI&vid=44UOWO_INST:MAIN&lang=en&mode=advanced&offset=0

Then open the link to the patent you seek.

Then open this link

in a new tab.

You see this

Click on MOSAICS for drawings
Click on Original document for the actual typed patent application.

 

[SteveB58]

Stripped the leg vice, no makers marks. Found several witness marks, 4 centre punch marks, which may have been used to identify the parts at one time. Having a tough time removing the wedges, don't want to take a saw of grinder to it so soaking in oil for a while. Must have removed about 5kg of old grease and rust from it this morning. It's in very good nick and had obviously been cared for and well used in its day. What I need is a bigger 'shop with more bench space. I boy can dream can't he?