Early Bird Gets the Worms

Manufacturers, configurations, Shovels, Axe, Wrenches, Oiler, F/E etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
Wingnutt
G-Lieutenant General
G-Lieutenant General
Posts: 5029
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 1:17 pm
Location:

Re: Early Bird Gets the Worms

Post by Wingnutt » Mon Dec 19, 2016 4:52 pm

henry501 wrote:...like the Brookins model 808- 8qt measure that is also part of Second echelon set 1 from 1942 on.
It was also part of the 2-2, 3-1, 3-2, and 4-2, but not the Armored Force sets.
TEMPORARY DUTY


henry501
G-First Lieutenant
G-First Lieutenant
Posts: 681
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2013 12:53 am
Location:

Re: Early Bird Gets the Worms

Post by henry501 » Mon Dec 19, 2016 5:05 pm

Greg,

My pleasure. By the way I suspect that the 8 quart measure in the upper left corner of your RA PD montage is a Huffman. Why??? Because if you look carefully at the stopper locking mechanism, just barely visible in the upper left part of the top opening, it looks exactly and uniquely? (Based upon my limited exposure to them) to Huffman, like the locking mechanism of my Huffman 1qt measure. What do you think?

Thanks,
Henry

henry501
G-First Lieutenant
G-First Lieutenant
Posts: 681
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2013 12:53 am
Location:

Re: Early Bird Gets the Worms

Post by henry501 » Mon Dec 19, 2016 5:09 pm

Greg,

Thank you for the update on the other upper echelon sets that included the 8qt measure/filler. I figured it was in other sets and did not mean to imply otherwise. It's just that since I'm really concentrating on the 2-1 I tend to focus on that. I think I'm going to really have to sit down over Christmas with the ORD download that got from WWIITM.

Thanks again,
Henry

User avatar
Wingnutt
G-Lieutenant General
G-Lieutenant General
Posts: 5029
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 1:17 pm
Location:

Re: Early Bird Gets the Worms

Post by Wingnutt » Mon Dec 19, 2016 7:25 pm

Henry,

I know that you're only focusing on the 2-1, but the subject was the 2-quart measure I had found, not what tool-set you're collecting that a 2-quart measure happens to belong in. Attributing it only to the 2-1 presents an incomplete view of this tool, making it appear to those who have no references to know otherwise that the 2-quart measure was only, exclusively issued to that set. Same thing with the 8-quart. You tend to want to limit the context, and I tend to want to expand it to its fullest.

As for the identity of the Mfgr of the 8-quart measure in the April and July 1945 ORD 6 RAPD figure, I haven't studied the features enough to make any conclusions, and I'm not sure we have a large enough sample size to use that feature as a distinction.
TEMPORARY DUTY

henry501
G-First Lieutenant
G-First Lieutenant
Posts: 681
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2013 12:53 am
Location:

Re: Early Bird Gets the Worms

Post by henry501 » Mon Dec 19, 2016 10:14 pm

Greg,

Thanks for the further info. and your clarification for the rest of the gang on these forums.

On a related note... Hope I'm not being paranoid and reading an intent in your reply above that you didn't intend but I'm not sure where you got the idea that my comments above about my focusing on 2-1 lead to the conclusion that I think or want others to think that the 8 qt. measure is ONLY (emphasis mine) in 2-1, especially when I specifically said, in my post just prior to your reply, "I figured it was in other sets and did not mean to imply otherwise. It's just that since I'm really concentrating on the 2-1 I tend to focus on that." In that statement I was acknowledging that it is included in other sets and in the opening of that post I thanked you for pointing out that it was included in other sets.

Anyway perhaps it's just the lateness of the hour and we're both misunderstanding each other's tone and intent but let me say clearly that: I fully understand many of the tools are included in multiple sets and when I refer to a tool being in 2-1 or the GMTK or whichever kit, set or grouping I happen to be writing about, it should not be presumed that I'm saying said tool is EXCLUSIVE (emphasis mine again) to that set unless I specifically say it is exclusive to that set.

Did the above sound like a legal disclaimer? :D

So... yes I fully understand and agree with your position and hopefully I cleared up where I'm coming from.

As to the 8qt in the RA PD photo being a Huffman... more on that in the following post. :D

Thank you,
Henry

henry501
G-First Lieutenant
G-First Lieutenant
Posts: 681
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2013 12:53 am
Location:

Re: Early Bird Gets the Worms

Post by henry501 » Mon Dec 19, 2016 10:50 pm

As to the 8qt measure in the top right of the RA PD montage... In my earlier posting I asserted that it was a Huffman measure due to the unique style of locking mechanism for the PUSH DOWN style stopper opening mechanism on that measure. Well in order to further substantiate (or refute) that claim I went back and did a thorough search for Huffman oil cans and then Brookins oil cans on e-Bay (admittedly one of my go to sources for contemporary color PHOTOS of tools and gear, even though I may not always put much stock in what a seller describes an item to be). By way of explanation and clarity, I use the search term oil can because that is what I've found most e-Bay sellers call these measures. What I found after pouring through the photos of the locking mechanisms on each manufacturer's measure shown in all of the the various listings is that, based upon the photo evidence in e-Bay lisitngs, the two manufacturers use two distinctly different and exclusive locking mechanisms to hold the PUSH DOWN style stopper mechanism in the open position.

The Huffman brand uses a rectangular locking mechanism:
IMG_1364.JPG
Huffman locking mechanism
IMG_1364.JPG (130.33 KiB) Viewed 2045 times
The Brookins brand uses a rounded locking mechanism:
IMG_1363.JPG
Brookins locking mechanism
IMG_1363.JPG (153.63 KiB) Viewed 2045 times
One can also see additional photos of the Brookins' locking mechanism in my photos of the 2qt / 1/2 gallon measures that i posted up thread. Of course if anyone has photos or other evidence that disproves these observations please post away since it will serve to further our collective knowledge and I will be happy to be proven wrong in the advancement of knowledge.

And... let me be very clear. While I do believe the 8qt measure in the top left of the RA PD montage is a Huffman brand measure, I am NOT saying that the 8qt (or any measure used in the higher echelon sets) is EXCLUSIVELY the Huffman brand. I fully believe that Brookins brand measures, of all the spec correct sizes called for in the Circular 4, SNL's and ORD docs. were used as well.

I Hope my above observations help further the collective knowledge.

Thank you,
Henry
Last edited by henry501 on Tue Dec 20, 2016 2:40 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
d42jeep
G-Brigadier General
G-Brigadier General
Posts: 2290
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2014 4:06 pm
Location: Albany/Fallen Leaf Lake, CA
Contact:

Re: Early Bird Gets the Worms

Post by d42jeep » Mon Dec 19, 2016 11:51 pm

Henry,
Thanks for posting the pictures of your measures. Those are very nice examples. I hope we see more shots of your collection in the near future! :D
-Don
Ford GPW 76344 DOD 11/42 Built in Richmond, CA

henry501
G-First Lieutenant
G-First Lieutenant
Posts: 681
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2013 12:53 am
Location:

Re: Early Bird Gets the Worms

Post by henry501 » Tue Dec 20, 2016 3:47 am

Don,

Thank you for your kind words. I know I have repeatedly promised to do the "big reveal" of my tools (which after you guys see it you may deem it the "big fizzle") :D and have repeatedly discussed the hurdles I need to overcome to do so, "can't figure out how to post photos to the Gee", etc., etc. But it seems that I have finally gotten that figured out. So now my only other excuse is a combination of laziness (can't seem to prioritize it on my "to do" list) and trying to figure out how best to present what I have accumulated in a way that is organized and logical so that it can (hopefully) add some useful insight to this forum and our collective knowledge.

So, let me start the process by saying that while my focus started out specifically collecting the "on board" tools for my MB, it has morphed into also specifically collecting the tools of the GMTK and now the Second Echelon Set-1 with a randomly collecting tools of the "specialist" sets, as I come across them. However, rather than present my tools grouped into those sets it might be more logical to group them together by tool type (tool boxes, #4 Philip's screwdrivers, #3 Philip's screwdrivers, ISN 723 DOE's, ISN 25 DOE's, DBE's, etc.) and present them that way.

Do I detect some further procrastination opportunities in trying to figure out the above? :D

Thank you,
Henry

User avatar
Wingnutt
G-Lieutenant General
G-Lieutenant General
Posts: 5029
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 1:17 pm
Location:

Re: Early Bird Gets the Worms

Post by Wingnutt » Tue Dec 20, 2016 4:06 am

Any way you present them might help. We all have different ways of showing our stuff. Sometimes on a particular topic that someone else started. Sometimes in our own "my GMTK" type thread. Etc.

As for the distribution issue, much ado about nothing, henry... But if it helps explain where I am coming from...
henry501 wrote: I'm not sure where you got the idea that my comments above about my focusing on 2-1 lead to the conclusion that I think or want others to think that the 8 qt. measure is ONLY (emphasis mine) in 2-1
I have no interest in what you’re thinking or your intent. But what you wrote was this: “(like the Brookins model 808- 8qt measure that is also part of Second echelon set 1 from 1942 on.” That is incomplete and potentially misleading. So I included its total distribution in a reply. In the same way I included the total distribution of the 2-quart measure I recently found, after you wrote, “Good for the second echelon set 1 as of 1942 and thereafter.” You can find other examples of this in several other threads, the Flaring Tool thread, to name one off the top of my head. Again, when the subject is the tool, not a particular tool-set, and the context is research, I think it’s best to be as expansive and as inclusive as possible.
henry501 wrote: I fully understand many of the tools are included in multiple sets and when I refer to a tool being in 2-1 or the GMTK or whichever kit, set or grouping I happen to be writing about, it should not be presumed that I'm saying said tool is EXCLUSIVE (emphasis mine again) to that set unless I specifically say it is exclusive to that set.
The topic was not the 2-1 set or grouping and you were not writing about the 2-1 set or grouping. The topic was the 41-M-491 and 41-M-492 and you were writing about those tools in particular. If you fully understand they are included in other tool-sets, why would you limit your comment to their distribution to the 2-1? If someone reported finding an ISN 731-A engineers wrench, for example, and asked what kit it belonged to, an answer like, “the Jeep toolkit,” would be incomplete. An ISN 731-A DOE wrench was issued to the Jeep, Dodge, Chevy, and Studebaker on-board kits, at least, and also the GMTK.
henry501 wrote: …especially when I specifically said, in my post just prior to your reply, "I figured it was in other sets and did not mean to imply otherwise. It's just that since I'm really concentrating on the 2-1 I tend to focus on that.“
I saw that. I was explaining why I had corrected you in the post before, and why I corrected you initially. I know you’re concentrating on the 2-1. But the 2-1 is not the only higher echelon tool-set. When the subject is bigger than the 2-1, it’s incomplete and potentially misleading to only and declaratively cite the 2-1 for a tool’s distribution.
TEMPORARY DUTY

User avatar
d42jeep
G-Brigadier General
G-Brigadier General
Posts: 2290
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2014 4:06 pm
Location: Albany/Fallen Leaf Lake, CA
Contact:

Re: Early Bird Gets the Worms

Post by d42jeep » Tue Dec 20, 2016 5:54 am

Here is another shot of my Huffman showing the trigger lock that Henry referred to, hopefully a little more clearly.
-Don
Attachments
image.jpeg
Huffman top view
image.jpeg (109.35 KiB) Viewed 2018 times
Ford GPW 76344 DOD 11/42 Built in Richmond, CA

henry501
G-First Lieutenant
G-First Lieutenant
Posts: 681
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2013 12:53 am
Location:

Re: Early Bird Gets the Worms

Post by henry501 » Tue Dec 20, 2016 8:30 am

Greg,

Again, I get your point and agree about the fact that these tools may be in tool sets beyond 2-1. So, yes we are totally on the same page there. I also understand your point about focusing on the tool itself versus extraneous comments about its applicablity to various sets unless the particular thread is specifically discussing such applicability.

As you say much ado about nothing. However in an effort to commit no more sins of omission and draw the ire of you or others on this forum and to prevent misinformation whether intended or not from getting out there, how about this...

Going forward, if and when I ever comment about the application of a particular tool to a particular set (and believe me I'll keep that to a very rare occasion) I'll be sure to add the following "and just because I note that (insert name of tool here) is included in (insert name of specific set here) does not mean that it is exclusive to that set and in fact may also be part of other military sets and may have applications in the civilian world as well." I will also develop a similar caveat when it comes to statements about a particular brand of tool being represented in the RA PD photos. Just like I did upthread with the Huffman 8qt measure/filler.

So in the end yes... We are still in it together to provide as much useful knowledge to all who come to these forums and I still look forward to seeing you at the Flea Market and our always enjoyable, yet unfortunately brief, technical discussions there.

Thanks for understanding.

Henry

henry501
G-First Lieutenant
G-First Lieutenant
Posts: 681
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2013 12:53 am
Location:

Re: Early Bird Gets the Worms

Post by henry501 » Tue Dec 20, 2016 9:15 am

Don,

Thank you for the clearer shot of the "PUSH DOWN activated stopper" locking mechanism on your Huffman measure. It is a much better view than the photos of mine and thus does perfectly illustrate the (what I am for now calling unique to Huffman, until further evidence proves me wrong) Huffman style of locking mechanism for the "PUSH DOWN activated stopper" measures.

For clarity's sake I am calling these measures, whether Huffman or Brookins, "PUSH DOWN activated stopper" measures because in order to open the stopper in the bottom of the measure one has to push down, even if it is ever so slightly, the thumb knob on the top of the mechanism to open the stopper. This as opossed to the "flip style activated stopper" mechanism on the measure Greg posted upthread because I believe that to open that measure's stopper one has to either flip the thumb knob to the left or right to open and or close the stopper.

Thank you,
Henry

User avatar
Wingnutt
G-Lieutenant General
G-Lieutenant General
Posts: 5029
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 1:17 pm
Location:

Re: Early Bird Gets the Worms

Post by Wingnutt » Tue Dec 20, 2016 9:26 am

henry501 wrote:Going forward...
Do what you want, of course, but for what it's worth, that seems like an awful lot of work to me. If you're intent on saying anything at all about a particular tool's distribution in the higher echelon sets, wouldn't it be easier to either look the total distribution up first, or simply add some common caveat like the rest of us do? Paraphrasing, 'I'm pretty sure it goes in at least the welders' and machinists' sets, probably others.' 'That belongs in the 2-1 at least, most likely others.' Etc. Anything less declarative and definitive than "Good for the 2-1 after 1942" would avoid the misperception that it was the only set it was "good" for.

Then again, your easiest way out yet is to just continue to cite only the 2-1. If I catch it I will surely amend it. :lol:
TEMPORARY DUTY

User avatar
Wingnutt
G-Lieutenant General
G-Lieutenant General
Posts: 5029
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 1:17 pm
Location:

Re: Early Bird Gets the Worms

Post by Wingnutt » Tue Dec 20, 2016 9:38 am

henry501 wrote:This as opposed to the "flip style activated stopper" mechanism on the measure Greg posted upthread because I believe that to open that measure's stopper one has to either flip the thumb knob to the left or right to open and or close the stopper.
Just three notes to this foray into the mechanism you and Don have going.

(1) Remember that my measure has Huffman patents on it. That suggests that Huffman also used a flipper, not just a push-down. Which raises the possibility of other measures with flipper style dispensers to also be Huffman. On the other hand, my can doesn't say Huffman anywhere on it. So it might be third party filler making Huffman style fillers under license and use a different stopper mechanism.

(2) Some of the RAPD figures that look like Huffman cans also have a flipper style mechanism, not a push down mechanism. I can't identify the mechanism in the period photos.

(3) If the measures are vintage, spec correct, and marked with the maker or patents, does it matter? Unless I'm missing something, seems like the only instance any conclusively identifiable distinguishing feature (and I'm still not convinced this is one...) would be needed would be a measure that was not marked. Am I missing something?
TEMPORARY DUTY

henry501
G-First Lieutenant
G-First Lieutenant
Posts: 681
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2013 12:53 am
Location:

Re: Early Bird Gets the Worms

Post by henry501 » Thu Dec 22, 2016 8:29 pm

Greg,

1.) agree all the way (for now). Thus far my observations/research have not allowed me to definitively conclude whether the flip type mechanism is specific to Huffman or whether it was incorporated in other manufacturer's measures. I suspect other manufacturers used it too. Another possibility is that your measure is a Huffman but one that had a decal with the Huffman name and manufacture details (now worn off) vs. having the the Huffman name and manufacture details stamped into the measure itself. I have an Brookins model 808 (8qt measure) that has a decal like the one I'm (speculatively) describing for your Huffman. However, I'll do some more looking around on e-bay for additional photographic evidence and even search for info about the Huffman and Brookins companies and see if any of that leads to a definitive answer. In the mean time, what patent numbers are on your measure.

2.) not definitively disagreeing with you but to my eyes it does not look like any of the measures in the RA PD images I've seen (admittedly limited to the 2-1 in the: 1938 Circular 4, 1942 SNL N-19 and the RA PD images in your measure collage upthread {and I'm also away from my computer so I can't double check my copy of the ORD 6 from WWIITM's to check out the RA PD images of measures there}) utilize the flip style mechanism. So, could you point me in the direction of the RA PD images that you feel show the flip style mechanism? Also, if the period photos you are referring to are the recent ones from Chad that you added up thread, I too can't discern the stopper mechanism in the first photo but the ones in the second photo look to me to be push type. I'll try to take another look and see if my eyes are any more able to spot something in the first photo than yours. (Doubtful though). If it looks like a more high resolution photo might reveal something I'll ask Chad if he could send me one.

3.) well... yes the detail in and of itself might be important if it is determinative of the date or era of manufacture of a tool, especially if that detail was distinct enough to be noticeable yet not significant enough to trigger a patent application, or reapplication to modify or refine a previous patent, which in itself would help date a tool. As one example, the way Craftsman stamped its logo on its tools is one of several key determinants of when that tool was manufactured. Also the knurled band Craftsman put around the base of its pre-war and wartime sockets is determinative of manufacture during those eras.

Specifically to the measures... I have some additional thoughts but don't want to accidentally put my foot in my mouth by talking about them until I confirm or deny them with further research per items 1 and 2 above.

Thank you,
Henry


Post Reply

Return to “G503 Tools & Equipment (Vehicle & Pioneer)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 46 guests