Sailmakers Tools.

As a club with sixty or more members, we also have a number of trade backgrounds, some of us managing to cross over to more than the usual single trade that our Fathers probably had. Some of us have been involved in trades such as myself where some of these go hand in hand and it is quite easy to make that transition as I have had to do through my working life: Sail maker, Rigger, and Seaman. Some may argue that they are the one trade. Some of the tools cross over the borders, some do not. The Carpentry and Joinery side of things do not really overlap the other three, however the change was gradual and relatively easy for me to do. The sailmakers’ tools - and here I am talking of the gear that was used in this trade up until about the late Seventies when the ‘art and trade’ disappeared. At about this time cotton canvas and flax had disappeared, terylene had been in for a few years, the early computer programmes, double-taped edges, pressed corner rings and good quality eyelet gear came in and the handmade sails went out of the door for the last time. The tools of trade were the Sailmaker’s Bench and its associated gear: wooden fids, steel marline spikes, setting fids, shears, seaming and roping palms, needles and thread, beeswax, stitch or heaving mallets, bench hook on a lanyard, die sets for the brass liners on hand sewn rings, leather headed mallet, 30 to 60 scratch awls, sheath knife and or a small folding knife. Sail Lofts, as the term implies, were often upstairs - most of the gear required was light enough generally to be handled up there without any strain to the people and buildings, hence the terms, Sail Loft, Mould Loft and Hay Loft etc. It was also not uncommon for small boats to also be built in lofts, sometimes going up to the 30 and 40 foot mark and ‘launched’ out through double doors and under gantry beams. The traditional sail loft always had a softwood floor; this was easy on the sails when they were being pulled around and when the sails were being cut and shaped, you were able to peg it down at various points with small scratch awls to hold it all in place. Again, no different to the ladies pinning down multiple pieces of material for patchwork, quilting etc, just much bigger. 

The rule of the day in The Sailmaker’s bench, usually about 14 to 16 inches high, 12 to 15 inches wide and anywhere from 4.0 feet to 8.0 feet long was normally fitted with a series of holes in one end to house the various wooden Fids and steel Marline Spikes; they were just dropped into the holes to suit their sizes to stop them rolling around. Which end the holes were in depended on the hand of the user , right handed and the holes were obviously in that end of the bench. Very often there might be one or two canvas bags attached to the rear of the bench to carry reels of thread in several sizes to suit the work that was done through that particular loft. most good sail lofts would be separate leather soled shoes for use on the floor, these would patchwork,quilting etc, just much bigger. The rule of the day inbe religiously changed if you were leaving the floor for any reason. Other loose tools that were to be found on the bench were the two types of Palms for hand sewing, one for Seaming and the other for Roping. These are a leather strap which fitted around the hand and were fitted with an iron pad with dimpled holes in it similar to a lady’s thimble for the end of her finger. These were designed to put the whole thrust of the needle into the middle of your hand and you were able to push with the whole weight of your arm, wrist and fingers, unlike the ladies which just needed the index finger for their lighter materials. The difference with the two Palms were in the size of the dimples. Seaming work generally used smaller needles, roping work used larger ones, so small and large dimples are relative to the work. Roping Palms also had a thumb guard built in to ease the strain on the thumb. Bench Hooks were usually found tied in through a small hole to the right-hand side, which generally had a small swivel and was used to hook into the sail to your right hand side and then the cloth was stretched over your knees and a bight tucked under the left knee. In this fashion, you could move along the seam or edge of the sail easily whether you were hand-seaming or hand-sewing rings or boltropes. Beeswax was used to protect the thread, this being threaded to the needle and then pulled though the wax several times to give it a protective coating.

The Fids and Marlinespikes referred to earlier were used for splicing fibre rope and wire cable respectively. Generally, sails had hand sewn bolt ropes to their edges; however the leading edge of some headsails, the Luff, was fitted with a wire, particularly if it was set free-standing and not hanked on to the vessel’s forestay. 10 to 12 mm diameter wire was about as big as most sails would require, so the spikes were under about 12 inches long. Additionally, these small spikes would normally have a wooden handle riveted to them for ease of handling. They would not see the hard service that they would get with the guy doing full time rigging work. Riggers’ spikes would normally have a forged knob on the end to fit the hand better, this was occasionally used to tap out the splice to make it lay fair when finished and also tended to make them fall “head first”, if accidentally dropped. This knob would always have a lanyard hole drilled through for aerial work, as with any tools that were taken aloft. Wooden fids were turned from a variety of hard woods, Lignum Vitae was traditionally the best if it could be obtained locally here in W.A. I have used Jarrah, Jam, Brown Mallat, Wandoo, Tuart, Victorian Ash and American White Ash; their sizes would be 12 inches though to 36 inches in length and 1 inch to 3 inches in diameter as they got longer and rounded on the ends to suit the hand. These were used to open the lay on fibre ropes for splicing eyes into the boltropes for the corners of the sails. Setting Fids were larger and square-ended for use on the floor, 36 inches in length, 4 to 5 inches in diameter at the base and square topped, maybe 1 inch across. The rope cringle corners were pounded down over these to stretch the eye prior to slipping the bronze ring into place. Stitch mallets or heaving mallets are 6 or 8 sided steel shafts about six inches long with a wooden ‘T’ handle riveted to one end, the other end being tapered away with a small shallow hole drilled into the end. These are used as a small form of winch or windlass. When the work required that the stitching be under some tension, several turns were taken around the sided section and revolved like a winch by twisting the handle, this process being repeated every few stitches or turns of the seizings as required. This is a quick and efficient way of keeping the job very tight without wearing your fingers out in the process, the hole in the end was used to give an extra push on the end of the needle, generally when roping around the corners. The rope and splice being quite bulky here, you needed to push the needle deeply in to the lay of the splice to get enough of it to pull out the other side of the sail. I would like to note here that the Saddler’s Palm has a short ¼ inch round shaft extending from one end of it; this also has a hole drilled into the end for the same reason, to deeply bury the needle in thick bulky work. Wooden fairing battens for shaping the edges of the sails were in lengths of up to 30 feet long and of varying dimensions to give a ‘soft’ or ‘stiff curve’, there are no straight lines in sail making. Flexible fibreglass measuring tapes will also give a very good curve over a long length when “swung” right. In recent years solid fibreglass fairing battens have replaced the wooden ones.

Robin Hicks.

The Stanley No 1 Replica. Introduction by Nigel Burgess.

Many of our older members may remember Allan Bunn. I had the pleasure of knowing Alan in my early days in the club and as a Novice tool collector found him to be very helpful and fascinating to talk to. Alan was a perfectionist and fine craftsman and made and repaired many tools for fellow collectors some of which I also have in my collection. The most notable being the Replica Stanley No1 plane. Many years after Alans passing I managed to acquire one of these planes and knowing that only 12 existed I have been chasing them ever since. To date I have managed to acquire 4  being one each for my grandchildren, well that justifies my obsession! However I am still chasing the dream to acquire as many of the 12 or at least document the location of as many as I can as a legacy for the Hand Tool Preservation Society and its member Alan. I have information/location  details for two more so I’m half way there!. In addition one, I believe may have been sold as part of the Toppy Geer estate and suspect another one was purchased by one of our founding member  Don Alexander, who’s collection was sold over east many years ago. So that's 8  and counting…..

Len and Jude Bunn, Alans children, have kindly furnished me with this document of provenance  to keep with my planes for authenticity. It’s a fascinating document, full of information, and no doubt will be a future historical document for us tool collectors. They have kindly given permission for it to be released  in print within our newsletter the Benchmark. If any one has any info on the location/confirmation of the other 6 of these planes, then I would love to hear from you to complete my data base and records. Information on Alan Bunn is also included in the Book Australian Plane Makers by Trevor D Semmens second and 3rd editions for further research.

Replica Stanley No. 01 Wood Planes Made by Alan Bunn

Providence notes by Len Bunn, April 2026

General 

During the early 1990s, Alan Bunn (Perth, Western Australia) made a series of replica Stanley No. 01 hand planes. The high quality and attention to detail of these replicas have been reported in several sources (especially wood-working tool collectors’ newsletters). 

These notes are developed from recollections and deductions by Alan’s son, Len, and Alan’s miscellaneous original notes and documents remaining from the period of manufacture.

• One batch of eleven replica planes was made over the 1992-93 period. Nine were sold to friends and two were kept. One additional half finished “kit” was sold to a tenth friend.

• The original rationale for making these replicas was for Alan Bunn to help complete his own (and some of his friends’) private collection of Stanley planes. The Stanley No. 01 plane was particularly difficult to obtain at the time and expensive.

• Alan Bunn made the Stanley No. 01 planes as complete replicas and all components were newly created for them. No original parts were used. This was part of the challenge that excited Alan.

• Some components may have been made separately, to complete other planes in Alan’s and his friend’s private collections.

•  Alan borrowed an original No. 01 plane from a friend and made molds for castings and took detailed dimensional data for the remaining crafted components (see Illustration 4). He completed research into material requirements for all components to ensure the quality of the completed planes matched that of the originals.

• The majority of his work was completed in his 5x3m backyard workshop. Castings for the body and frog were made by The Dobbie Dico Meter Co. Some other base materials were purchased from FJ Sweetmans and the Phoenix Sawmill Supply Co.

• Alan was very concerned that the replica planes might be passed of as original versions by people in the future. He implemented several steps to minimise this risk:

o   Alan required purchasers to agree they would not misrepresent the replicas as originals. However, this commitment appears not to have been honoured    or not passed on to descendants by some purchasers.

o   Alan introduced a key physical difference in his replicas to allow them to be easily distinguished from genuine originals. This was made clear to  purchasers at the time. The difference was in the overhang at the rear of the main body that supports the wooden handle (see below for details).

o   Alan did not place any markings on any components of the planes. Unfortunately, the small size of the original Stanley No.01 means it does not have a marking on the main body - markings are only on the machined components.

Alan Bunn’s Background

• Qualified as a Fitter and Turner from an Air Force apprenticeship

• Trained and worked as a gunsmith for several years, including developing the first rifle locally produced in WA.

• Technician and eventually Chief Technician at the University of WA Mechanical Engineering Workshop until retirement. The equipment developed at the workshop provided him with an excellent understanding of materials science and manufacturing techniques, along with access to facilities with high-quality equipment. He, through the workshop and staff, was responsible for producing projects for staff and students, often involving new and exotic materials and manufacturing techniques.

Other related projects by Alan Bunn

Other related projects included:

• Design and manufacture of two small milling machines, based on a design out of the UK but with modifications to address issues and add functionality. The original was made for his private use and the second for use at the UWA workshop.

• Manufacture and sale of replica Meccano gears and assorted components (with his son and daughter) over several years in the 1980s and 1990s to fill a supply hole when Meccano went into liquidation for a period.

• Restoration of many old microscopes, clocks and watches including manufacture of missing components.

• Extensive production of components for friends to assist with their restorations.

Introduced Difference

In the genuine Stanley No. 01 plane the overhang at the rear of the plane supporting the handle is slightly recessed up from the sole on the main body of the plane. In Alan Bunn’s replicas, the overhang is not recessed and is a continuous part of the surface of the sole.

Alan purposely introduced this difference by removing some material from the mold in that area, so that the casting would be thicker and could be ground with the main body.

Photo A  Upper: Model 104 - Patent  Apr 13 1897 (First version). Lower: Model 106 - Patent Apr 13 1897

Photo B Model 104– Patent Mar 28 1905 (Third version)

 Stanley No 905 Breast drill.

Restoration

I have just been the proud recipient of an old breast drill and on inspection, found that neither the crank nor chuck would move, all seized up. I thought with my eyesight I could make out Stanley 603 stamped on the crank handle, she’s been around for a while, I gave it a bit more of a clean, lo and behold it was a 905 from 1951 vintage.

Hang on, I was born in 1951and displayed similar problems with seized parts, maybe I should help this one back to life. Stripping it all back revealed nothing was broken or in need of replacement, not like myself, so began its restoration.    

Into the electrolytic bath to remove all the rust and crud, it came out quite clean, next I nickeled all the appropriate parts that needed doing, painted the body and gears and put it all back together.

Both of us are now ready to continue our journey.

Les W.

Stanley No 78 Rebate - Fillister Plane.

This article was written in conjunction with my Type Study Chart,

which was produced after rigorous detailed research.

Read in conjunction with the seven attached sheets of sketches and photos,

all marked with the Types as required.

Starting with Stanley USA Type 1 1884 to 1892, 8 1/2" long, plus handle, Victoria shaped body japanned finish, and machined sides, graceful Miller's slim ornate handle with a dimpled background, covered with a beautiful curlicue scroll pattern. Designed to fit small hands. Both sides of the body are machined, LHS has a shaped recess with #78 and Stanley, the inner body rear has a pat-Jan-30-83 pat-Oct-23- 83. The blade: has a Traut markings pat-Nov-18- 84, centre slot ending with an arc shape on the bottom LHS. the rear is blank "being no adjustment” the cap has a graceful, rounded face with a small upward lip on the bottom LHS, japanned. Cap screw knob, early ornate and attractive, ¾" diameter. Depth stop standard japanned and stayed the same throughout time. Fence standard design japanned and bright steel, 1884 to 1892 USA only. [2 large, raised clearance surface] also a standard 2 3/4" x 1/4" diameter die threaded rod, plus a cast wing nut.  

Stanley USA Type 2, 1893 to 1899 mainly the same as Type 1, except body has a casting of “S” behind the first blade rest. Blade has markings Stanley Rule & Level Co. Pat-Jun-30 '83, Pat-Nov-18-84 [ln part circle before Tm came in) and still blank on the rear. Cap has an “S” on the rear. Fence “S” on rear corner, otherwise same as Type 1. 

Stanley USA, Type 3, 1899 – 1903 mainly the same as Type 1, except body has casting of “B” behind blade rest, but no more patent dates on the inside of the body.  Handle still Miller’s shape but no curlicue scroll and background has a fish-scale design. Blade has markings “Stanley Rule & Level Co.  Inner half a circle Tm “Y” and the rear is still blank. Cap has “B” on the rear. Fence has “B” on the rear corner. Last of USA 1st fence. 

Stanley USA Type 4, 1904 – 1910. Now, in modern new body shape, finished as Type 1. LHS recess has a #78 Stanley [all in scroll script] inner body has a Pat 6-7-10. But the biggest change is the handle bottom palm rest, no more.  This allows for modern day larger hands, finish fish-scale pattern. Blade, new style, now slot has both straight edges, large curve to the LHS and small to the RHS, the rear is still blank. Cap, new modern style, has flat face surface and a large curve uplift lip to LHS and a small curve to the RHS. (not straight like type 1) All japanned.  Cap screw knob now new with 11/16” diameter and Stanley in circle and coarse knurling, all nickel plated. Depth stop standard. Fence new USA second design, now has a hanging hole, now has three raised clearance surfaces, Note: one being in the centre. This becomes USA second fence from here on. 

Stanley USA Type 4.1, 1910 – 1924. Mainly the same as Type 4, except cap screw knob now 5/8” diameter all clear nickel, but has very fine knurling and becomes standard for future planes. Still no blade adjustment lever.  

Stanley USA Type 4.2, 1925 – 1935. Production was small and periodic. Mainly the same as Type 4, except it is aluminium, still LHS recess and with #78, Stanley (in scroll) Inner body has Pat 6- 7- 10 and 1925- 1926 or made in USA in 1927 – 1935. But now it has a blade adjustment lever. Depth stop is standard but in aluminium.  Fence is same as type also aluminium. Blade still standard but now toothed on the rear to allow for new blade adjustment till 1925 – 1944 (?) I believe, maybe through the uncertainty of aluminium, the Type 5 were produced through the same period.  Note: all have blade adjustment lever from hereon. 

Stanley USA Type 5, 1925 – 1935. The same period as Type 4.2, except body is now 8 ¼" plus handle, now we are back to a cast iron plane, still with machined sides, LHS recess has notched Stanley [1 9/16” x 7/16”] Inner body has no more patent numbers, but #78 made in USA. Handle remains the same as Type 4, [still the fish-scale texture] blade standard type 4, but has Sweet heart mark, notched Stanley Tm BB and Made in USA. Cap standard, cap screw knob standard 9/16” diameter and nickel, fine knurling. Depth stop standard T-nut. Fence standard, second USA model with T-nut. 

Stanley England Type 6, 1935 – 1961. Same as Type 5, but, made in England. Except English fence “show” and having hanging hole, two raised clearance surfaces. Depth stop the same but slotted thumbscrew. 

Stanley USA Type 6.1, 1935 – 1961.  Note: at that time both England and USA were in production, so, all the same as Type 6, except, second USA fence and still with cast T-nut. Depth stop standard and now non- slotted thumb screw. 

Stanley USA Type 7, 1962 – 1964. Last of USA’s #78, all finished in Stanley blue, and it only lasted for two years. Still has USA fence, depth stop standard, but thumb screw slotted.  

Stanley England Type 8, 1964 – 1984. As Type 5. This is the start of the English use of decals, all other markings are now England. 

Stanley England Type 9, 1984 – 1994 (?) Virtually the same as Types 5 and 8 except, I was really surprised the body must have been a new casting as the LHS recess notched Stanley, is now longer and narrower than the old one. The past was 1 9/16” x 7/16” and the new one is 1 13/16” x 3/8”. I am not aware of when the decals finished.  

This is my story, bringing Tools to their original  glory.

                                               Gerry Gradisen

                                                7-Nov-2024

Gerry G.

Gerry's extensive ongoing research into Stanley Spokeshaves and Planes  cannot be adequately covered in these brief articles. He is more than happy to talk to interested parties on the subject. If you wish to contact Gerry please email our secretary at htpswa@protonmail.com who will be happy to forward your details on. 

Sympathetic Tool Restoration.

Vic W.

 My last article described restoration and major repair of a Spiers plane, and expressed misgivings about the value of doing such repairs (Benchmark Vol 17 Nos 3 and 4 April-May 2018, reprinted in HTPAA's Toolchest Issue 129 August 2018).                 

This article shows my approach to restoration where repairs are not needed. In all such cases the aim is to alter as little as possible. 

A Mathieson infill panel plane was generously donated by a member of the public to the Handtool Preservation Society of WA, on the condition that it be held by the club for its numerous public display events. I volunteered to restore it for that purpose. 

According to HTPSWA President Kim Mitchell, the plane had been preserved 50 years ago with a generous wax coating. The rosewood infills are in remarkably good condition with a lot of original finish intact. The main issue was the rusted steel body, which suggests the wax coating had degraded over time.

 Cleaning the Rosewood Infills 

This was the quickest part of the job as the infills needed no more than a light clean mainly to remove the wax residue. My usual cleaning recipe applied and wiped off with soft rags provided a good start. 

For new readers the recipe is:  3 parts of mineral turpentine,  3 parts raw linseed oil,  3 parts white vinegar,  1 part of methylated spirits. Since these ingredients unmix readily you need to frequently shake their container to re-emulsify them. 

This recipe has good pedigree. I first read of it in an article by Melbourne handtool luminary, the late Frank Ham in HTPAA’s Toolchest Journal Vol 14 No 1, Issue 63 of February 2002. He described it as “the British Museum mixture”. (I prefer to use raw linseed oil instead of boiled as Frank Ham presented it)

The old wax coating took a few repeated applications. I also lightly cleaned the gunmetal screw lever with this mixture.

 The Mathieson Trademarks on front of the infill and on the screw lever came into view during this work. They were so well hidden that I think a past owner might even have tried to conceal them. This reminds me of a comment made to me 20 years ago by a Sydney collector whose opinions I respect, that Mathieson tools had not been favoured by collectors in the 20 years or so before then. How things have changed!

 After cleaning, I used a French polishers method to rejuvenate the preserved polish: 2 parts raw linseed oil, 1 part methylated spirits, (also mixed vigorously to emulsify them). 

I rub this on sparingly with my fingers and rub it off soon after with a soft, clean cloth. This step does not add, remove or compromise any original finish but sometimes brightens it considerably. I learned of this from Ray Bellinger, who used to give French polishing talks at the Perth Woodshows.

 Cleaning the Steel Body 

When presented with a surface rust coating, you don’t know what sort of horrors might be lurking beneath. I started by lightly scraping the rust. The purpose of this is to skim over the steel substrate without biting into it, and to clear off the loose surface rust. After this you can get a better idea of the state of the metal underneath. In this case the steel was not too badly rusted with mostly scattered rust pits. 

In cases of bad rust-pitting, you might have little choice but to file the surface down to bare metal. This would of course irreversibly alter the tool, and result in an unnatural shiny surface. I opted for a gentler approach to preserve as much of the original metal surface as possible. 

I rubbed the turps-linseed-vinegar-metho solution onto the body with 240 grit emery cloth. This was also done as gently as possible, aiming to avoid biting into the metal.

In my experience it is very common for this work to soften the rust coating to the point that it coalesces into gummy beads that smear across the metal and can be easily wiped off with a turps-soaked cloth. This plane did the same and I wonder if the degraded wax coating applied 50 years ago has allowed most rust to form within it rather than the underlying steel. 

After this I used a wire brush to clean out as much rust from the scattered pits as I could. This keeps the original surface that left the Mathieson factory, even though it is altered by the ravages of time. I gave the metal a final light waxing that will need to be kept up over time. The resulting plane looks more like an authentic antique tool than one with a shiny bright steel surface would. If I owned this plane I would try to live with it in this condition rather than file the surface down to bare metal.

We may be tempted to restore tools a lot more than this, especially if we are new collectors. My most considered view, based on experience is that many of us come to regret doing that as we learn to appreciate the finer points of tool restoration. In this article I have not touched on restoring the plane to usable condition. The Sydney collector whose opinion I respect once told me that a tool is not collectible if it can’t be used, but that will have to be another story. 

Tough Braces. Made in WA.

The three models of the Major, apart from their sweep sizes, are basically the same with some minor dimensional differences to the head and the housing of the chuck and ratchet across various examples. This is to be expected for a tool which was made in the thousands over a 20 year period. Shown above a 10 inch & 14 inch versions.

There are a number of subtle differences across the models. Below illustrated differences  between two heads, knurling on chuck shells and the bend radius of the rear section of the  frames. 

      Under head profile.                          Knurling on chuck shells.                     Radius of frame bend.  

                                                                             Head and Handle Construction

          Exploded View of Head.                             Cut-away Head.                             Cut-away Wrist Handle.

Tough may have utilised this patent of James Chapman of Sheffield, England for their head assembly.

Bearing cup pressed onto 3/8” dia. shaft, nine 3/16” balls sandwiched between two hardened bearing washers, which sit inside the bearing cup. A larger diameter flat washer provides a rudimentary bearing cover, followed by the hub and all secured by the “C” clip. The head is pressed over the hub and locked in place by two hardened pins.

The cut-away (centre) shows the method of locking the two parts of the head together and how the head shell is locked to the hub by two hardened pins (one visible).

The cut-away of the wrist handle shows the tube locked inside the outer shell. This tube turns on the frame of the brace and does not use ball bearings.

                                                            Major Chuck

.                                                                                   Spindle.

 The steel spindle has twelve ratchet teeth machined near one end where it is 7/8” diameter. There is a shoulder machined where it steps up to 15/16” for the threaded section that holds the chuck shell and jaws. At the rear, the spindle has a boss with a flat machined on one side, this boss protrudes through a hole in the back of the housing, has a lock washer located on the flat and is held in place by a wide headed flat screw. The purpose of the lock washer is to avoid the screw loosening when the ratchet is employed.                                                                                            There is a thrust washer located inside the rear of the ratchet housing which takes the wear from the rotation of the shaft when in ratchet mode. There are two styles of thrust washer, one the usual shape, the other with a small tab out to the side. The tab locates in a recess in the housing to stop it turning so that all the wear occurs between the washer and the shaft. The other "non-tab" has the danger of rotating with the shaft and negating its intended purpose of reducing wear to the rear of the housing. I consider the tabbed thrust washer to be an improvement, therefore a later model brace.

Tabbed Thrust washer.                                 Plain Thrust washer.            Thrust washers, lock washer & screw

 Two types of thrust washer in position inside the housing.  

                                             Major Ratchet pawls, Pins & Spring.

The ratchet pawls are located in the housing by two pins and are held in engagement with the teeth on the spindle by a coil spring running between them behind the pivot pins. A rotary collar normally in the central position with pawls locked on the spindle is turned one way to select forward ratchet and turned the other way for reverse.  The upper part of the pawl locates in a groove machined inside the selector.  Part of the groove is blocked or pressed in to create a cam, when this cam encounters the top of the pawl it causes the pawl to pivot on the retaining pin and lift clear of the spindle.

                                          Ratchet Selectors.

                                                           Pressed Cam                                                                                  Machined Cam

There are two styles of ratchet selector, a small section of the selector wall is pressed in to create the ratchet activating cam. The machined cam example appears to have been made with a thick wall and then a section of about 80% machined out to create the groove that the top of the pawls ride in with the unmachined section becoming the cam.    My Initial thought was that the latter may be an early example and possibly superseded by the pressed type which may have been cheaper and quicker to produce. But since discovering the two types of thrust washer, as documented above, and that the example of the machined cam also incorporates the tanged thrust washer turns this theory 180 degrees, leading me to believe the machined cam is, in fact, a later improvement.  

In researching this article I dismantled fourteen braces. Eleven had the pressed cam ratchet selectors, three had machined ratchet selectors. Of the eleven, seven used plain thrust washers with no recess in the housing while three had tabbed washers with, obviously, a recess in the housing. One had a recessed housing but used a plain washer.  This single example may be transitional but more likely the original thrust washer has been replaced by a plain washer for whatever reason. It would seem logical that the company, after upgrading the housings, would immediately start fitting the tabbed washers.                                                                                                                                                    The three machined ratchet selector examples all utilised the tabbed washers.

 The tabbed thrust washer and the machined ratchet selector cam are improvements through the journey of the Major brace manufacturing and evidence of the Tough company not content to rest on their laurels but to continually strive to produce a reliable tool with an ongoing reputation for excellence.

                                                                TOUGH MINOR.                                             The Tough Minor was offered in two sweep sizes 10 and 12 inch ratchet models plus a 10 inch non-ratchet model. Tough’s advertising touted the Minor as “a first quality brace for heavy duty, moderately priced.”  Cheaper to purchase than the Major, the Minor is still a very good quality brace.                                                                                                 The Minor ratchet housing is cast steel, the head and handle are made from Bakelite with colours varying from green to red. All the heads appear to be similar in construction  I have seen three handle versions.        

Minor 10in Ratchet Brace.                     Minor 10in Non-Ratchet Brace.              Three Different Handle styles.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      The handle shown at the top (R H Photo) is in two halves held in place by two double turns of copper wire soldered in place. This handle is a bit of an anomaly, in the past, this style would have been used on a cast brace or where the frame was bent prior to putting the handle on. This style was made popular by USA brace manufacturer John S. Fray, in the second half of the 19th century and well into the 20th, where they used pewter rings to hold the two halves together. Though not as frequently seen as the one piece handles the two-piece could be an early version or simply a marketing feature.              The one piece handles illustrate that Toughs were using machinery that bent the frame after the handle was in position. Nothing new about this process which was patented by  Harry Bartholomew in the USA in 1861 (US Pat 32347) and widely adopted by all brace manufacturers by the time F & R Tough started making braces in the mid 1940’s. The one-piece handles shown here have different shape profiles.

HTPSWA member the late Frank Bowyer bought a 10” Minor new in 1948 prior to building his house and it was of the one piece handle variety.                        

                                 Cutaway Minor Bakelite handle bears directly on the frame and end ferrules.

                                                     MINOR HEAD

As with the handle the head is made from Bakelite. It has a steel hub cast into it that rotates on the shank. The hub is 7/8” OD, ½” ID, 1 3/8” long and protrudes from the base of the Bakelite by 3/8”. Unlike the Major the Minor head does not run on ball bearings, instead it has two hardened steel discs which act as thrust bearings between the base of the hub and the end of the shank. The shank has a groove machined in it about ¾” from the end and the hub has three hardened screw rivets inserted which locate in the groove to keep the head in place.

                                                            SPINDLE COMPARISON.

      TOP: Type 1 Spindle, 12 Ratchet Teeth.                                                  Lock Washer & screw.

        BOTTOM: Type 2 Spindle, 13 Ratchet Teeth.

  Though both spindles are the same diameter (15/16”) the type 1 has 12 teeth, cut deeper with narrower lands. The type 2  has 13 teeth. In both examples the rear the spindle has a boss with a flat machined on one side, this boss protrudes through a hole in the back of the housing, has a lock washer located on the flat and is held in place by a wide headed flat screw. Unlike the Major there is no thrust washer between the shoulder of the spindle and the inside of the housing.

                                                                                                                      MINOR RATCHET

Minor Pawls Pins & Spring.                                                    Two pawls showing with and without rivet finger grip.

The ratchet pawls are located in the housing on two pins and are held in engagement with the teeth on the spindle by a brass leaf spring.  The pawls are disengaged by pressing the upper end in with your finger, press the pawl back down to reengage. On the model which I think is the earlier the pawl has a smooth surface which may have resulted in difficulty in gripping it, which has been alleviated on later models by the addition of a small rivet pressed into a hole in the pawl.

Of significance, the 13 toothed spindle is from the brace with the non finger-grip pawls.

                                      MINOR JAWS.

NOTE:  Care should be taken when using brace jaws in a type study as many hardware outlets stocked these as spares in the event of damage or breakage of the originals. 

None of the examples of Minor braces that I have use the “alligator” jaws, all are smooth, sprung type. The one on the far left has a pin rivetted behind the spring in the rear of one jaw the other end of the pin “floats” in an oval hole in the opposite jaw. This jaw has a narrow groove in its face designed to grip round drill shanks while the other three have the grooves designed to grip the square tapered tang of a standard auger bit.  Dimensions are variable with length from 2 3/8” to 2 1/2”  the width similar to the major, 13/32”.

WARNING: Some braces were harmed in writing this article.

My thanks to fellow HTPSWA member Bob W. for his assistance with historical facts of the Tough family.

Geoff E.

Family Heritage Tool Storage.

My wife Marilyn’s family lived in South Fremantle and ran the blacksmith shop in Hampton Rd. On her Uncles passing in the 50's the shop had been left as was with work still in forge and his apron hanging on the wall. Came the 80's and the Aunt passed, and we had to clear the property for sale, hence many blacksmith tools came home as well as his carpentry tools. This day it started, my interest in family items salvaged from days of old set me off to clean and preserve these items. Now my background is from a family of plumbers and sheet metal workers, so I loved using my hands. Using these old planes and saws was a distraction from my real work. You know what happens next, more tools are needed and Gregsons Auctions with its monthly treasure sale became a draw card. Where to keep all these hard won treasures, in a cupboard of course. Now to bring all these tools back to life and use them as intended, this was my project, a slab of sheoak was acquired which was then hand sawn to the many sections I needed with of course all the many hand planes to dimension the wood, I harvested some old Sheoak off my block to finish my project which added another touch of history to the cabinet. Mulberry was used for the panels. Tools are in fitted trays in the drawers with larger ones on the shelves or hanging up for access. 

Les W.

               Split Chuck Braces

On November 1st 1859 Nelson Spofford of Haverhill Massachusetts, USA was awarded a patent (US25984) for a brace with a bit holding socket split in the middle and clamped together by a thumb screw.

The manufacture of this brace was soon taken up by John S Fray and Horace Pigg at Bridgeport Connecticut. The Fray & Pigg partnership was dissolved in the early 1870's and John Fray continued on his own making them right up until his company takeover by the Stanley Rule & Level Co in 1909. Production of the Spofford brace was continued by Stanley until the late 1920's. Fray made these all metal and also with wooden head and featuring their elegant pewter rings which retained the two piece handle. They were available with 7, 8, 10, 12, 14 and 17 inch sweep. John Fray also made a double crank or Wimble brace based on Spoffords invention, shown below, these were made in 10 and 12 inch sweep.

On the 7th of May 1878 Nelson Spofford was awarded a reissue of his brace patent (US RE8,215) which he assigned to W. A. Ives & Co. of New Haven Connecticut, USA.  These are not as frequently found as Fray's version  nor do they carry much information apart from the sweep size on those I have seen.                                                                                                              Below,  an example of an Ives brace and a comparison of the chucks of Fray (upper) and Ives, showing a slight difference between the two in the profile of the curve of the neck.

Alexander  Mathieson & Sons of Glasgow listed a Spofford style brace in their 1932 catalogue described as "Split Socket Brace, Colonial Pattern". The important feature of this version is the thickened dimple at the threaded side of the casting thus reducing the danger of stripping the thread when tightening the thumbscrew.

W & C Wynn of Birmingham England made this Spofford version which has the thumbscrew located on the opposite side to the two previous mentioned models.

On September 16th 1879 John Fray was awarded patent No. US219,574, for an improvement to the previously mentioned Spofford design, which Fray had been manufacturing for close to twenty years. This new  patent retained the split frame but utilised a threaded "gib-shaped" binder with wedged shoulders which interacted with a pair of rectangular slots in the jaws.  The threads on the extremities of the wedge correspond with the threads on the inside of the chuck shell or sleeve.  After an auger bit is inserted in the chuck the shell is tightened and the cone on the inside of the shell squeezes the ends of the chuck against it. At the same time the tapered shoulders of the  wedge  are forcing the lower sides of the chuck against the bit.   

Nelson Spofford had another patent awarded on November 16th 1880 (US 234,624) for a hinged split chuck brace.  The photo's of the brace below are unbranded and look nothing like the hinge depicted in his patent drawing, neverthe less, a brace of this style appears in a 1901 catalogue of Canadian  Hardware company, Caverhill, Learmont & Co (P588) as Spofford's Brace. Available in three sweeps, 8, 10 and 12 inch. 

On March 13th 1883 Henry V. Smith of Plantsville Connecticut USA. patented (US274040) a split chuck brace which he claimed was superior and cheaper to produce than the Spofford brace. In his words "... to simplify the construction and cause the two parts of the jaws to work parallel to each other". The supporting shaft visible in the third photo is spring loaded to assist the jaws to open.

Note: the thumbscrew on this example is not the original.

On June 24th 1884  William Ives, a prolific inventor, came up with the idea of a pair of steel jaws (US301058) with long tails which were placed in the mould prior to the casting of the body . Strictly speaking this is not exactly a split chuck brace but the fact that the jaws spring open as the sleeve is unscrewed and grip the bit when tightened in a manner similar to the split chuck, I've decided to include it here. This brace differs from the others in that it utilises a ratchet. 

Another split chuck which is a lot more recent than those above are these two, one with a flat profile thumbscrew , the other using a knurled knob. Both branded AECO AUSTRALIA  on the chuck, and although  a few examples are owned by HTPSWA members we are unable to find any information on where or when these were made.

Coincidentally, as I was writing this article HTPSWA member Nigel was holidaying in South Australia and he came across this smith made brace in a mining museum at Moonta. This is another example of a split chuck brace, an extension of the frame which is divided and widens toward the front. A ring encircling this extension, once the bit is in place, is driven forward to tighten the two jaws, thus locking the bit in position. The museum refers to this as a Costeen auger, in this case used for mining, but could well be used in other occupations.

Robin, a fellow HTPSWA member, has one similar to that above in his collection and he allowed me to examine it. It's a whimble, that is, double cranked, about 3' 81/2" long with a 14'' sweep, made from 5/8" round bar with the split chuck forge welded to the end.  The rotating handles are pipe and as can be seen from the wear at point of contact with the ferrule  this brace has done a lot of work.  The chuck itself is offset with one side making three quarters of the socket and the other side being quite flat. It's about 2 1/4" deep and tapers from 27/64" at the bottom, to 1/2" at the mouth. I found that by putting a small piece of wood between the flat face of the chuck and the shank of a square tapered bit, it held it firmly and enabled me to bore a hole successfully in a piece of pine.

This 10inch sweep brace with a split chuck is branded Bleckmann Solingen Germany and is very similar to that of Nelson Spofford.

The next two braces, which are very old,  were purchased by HTPSWA life member Desmond Miller many years ago in Europe. 

First is this 'cage head' brace, so called due to the method of connecting the head rotatably to the frame. The front extension, which is quite roughly made in comparison to the rest of the tool, is designed to close on something with a bulbous end. It is easily removed by undoing the screw which reveals a slotted socket which may be capable of holding other tools, although it's too big to fit the standard flat tanged bits of the era.

This second of Desmond's European braces, has a hinged split frame chuck with a pair of concave "grippers" with a small notch in each leading edge. The leading edges don't completely close when the thumbscrew is done up tight. We don't know what this brace was designed to do, though one suggestion is for rotating hand awls, as demonstrated in the last photo.

Whilst traveling through Barraba in the North West plains area of NSW I came across this specialist axe. The attachment on the handle end caught my eye  and on closer inspection I discovered it had a tube running down the handle to a spray head either side of the axe head.

It was on display at the local Mens Shed and luckily the owner was available to explain how it worked.

The top assembly is actually a trigger pump arrangement that feeds the liquid poison via a pressure tank carried as a back-pack.

The axe is struck into the tree and held fast. The operator then squeezes the trigger assembly forcing liquid down the tube the spray heads which are directed at the incision made by the axe.

This is repeated several times around the tree, the poison then kills the tree as its absorbed by the sap under the bark.

These were supplied by the poison suppliers and could be fitted to any standard axe. The  Keesteel or  Kelly style axes were preferred having the flutes and grooves that help the poison to penetrate however this unit was fitted to a Hytest branded axe.

Unfortunately the owner couldn’t remember the poison supply company name but mentioned there were several at the time so further research is required for this part. If anyone knows of one of these or has seen other styles I would be keen to see pics etc

Many thanks.

Nigel B.

                           THE HUMBLE PENCIL.

While visiting the Lakes district in UK we stopped off in Keswick the home of the Derwent pencil.

Now I've never really given any thought to the humble pencil , so a chance to drop in to the museum I thought may be of interest.

I was not let down, albeit, only a small museum it was packed with many interesting displays.

Being a tool collector these little planes immediately caught my eye. Simple hollowing and rounding that were used by the early cottage industry makers before the industrial reveloution took over with mechanisation. Still today they are made in to half's in a  cedar timber billet which is then planed in to shape and then sawn producing 6 or 8 pencils from each billet.

There were other tools on display such as the  fly press for making pen nibs and the micrometers etc used in making the name stamps. Even today each pencil is individually printed with part number, colour and lead style. No longer the simple graphite filled grey,  there is now several hundred different colours and styles. 

Many of us grew up with these and who knew the Lakeland pencils by Derwent were named after the area ..The lake District  with Keswick being on the shores of Derwent Water.

Another very interesting pencil was the WW2 secret map pencil that was issued to RAF crews to help escape if shot down over enemy lines.This humble looking pencil with its lead tip and rubber or eraser end worked and looked like any other pencil right down to the the military green color  but this one contained a detailed rolled map of Europe made of extremely thin paper that was was rolled up and inserted inside, it also had a tiny compass hidden under the metal band at the eraser end.

They even distributed them to POW camps through red cross packages with maps showing escape routes depending where they were.

These pencils were made after hours in the factory by special workers sworn to secrecy.

The Lake district is a magnificent place and if there, a visit to this museum is a must.

Nigel.