# Evolution of the Record 52 1/2 quick release vice



## nabs

many of us own or have used one of the venerable quick release vices manufactured by Record and others, but I wonder how many people are familiar with the history? I certainly wasn't so I did some digging, and it appears we have a lot to thank a chap called Joseph Parkinson for. Dare I say it, it seems JP did for vices what Leonard Bailey did for bench planes, by coming up with a design that has become a defacto standard that has dominated the market for well over a century.

David Fell's father worked at the company founded by J P and has created a web site that provides some great background on the business (J Parkinson and Son, Shipley, Yorks) and about the man himself, who was clearly an impressive chap:
http://www.parkinsonshipley.co.uk/

The company survived into the 2nd half of the 20th century, and according to a booklet produced to celebrate the centenary of its founding (and summarized in the site above), JP invented his quick release vice in 1884, having come a cropper in his dealings with another company who had copied the the design of his 'handy' line of vices and began manufacturing the same in competition. Having had his fingers burned once he registered patents for the new invention in multiple countries during the next year or so. Here is the US patent (1886):

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=pate ... 361445.pdf

...and a picture of the key working bits, taken from the Canadian patent (this patent shows the joiners vice, omitted from the drawings in the US application)







c.f Fig 6 for the joiners vice - there is a spring loaded flat bar (k) which engages with a grove in the base of a half nut (N). The bar is attached to a lever (L) next to the vice handle and when squeezed the lever causes the flat bar to pivot downwards, taking the nut with it and disengaging it from the screw. In this position the vice moves freely back and forwards.

Unfortunately the text of the Canadian patent is hand written and not very well scanned which makes it almost illegible, so we have to go just on the drawing for details, and this seems to show (fig 6) the spring that holds the bar/nut in the engaged position for the joiners vice is directly under the half nut, rather than next to the trigger (which is the familiar arrangement today). 

Certainly Parkinson eventually implemented the flat spring used in more recent vises, but I suspect, but do not know for sure, that his original implementation was per the patent. Both approaches were implemented by Record, and here is an early example from them where the flat spring on the face of the vise is missing, but another spring is just visible under the nut shown below:










Parky with flat spring:










Can anyone share any more information on these details? 

Although not mentioned in the patent above, it is possible JP was also the first to use a buttress thread for the screw. These threads apply a strong force in one direction, at the expense of the effectiveness of the reverse direction (not a problem when the vice can be opened without the screw using the 'instantaneous grip'). C.f toothpaste screw tops for an example of this type of thread:






The new range of vices was called the 'patent perfect' range, and in the terminology of the day it was an 'instantaneous grip vice' - the earliest reference to the term we have settled on in recent times ( 'quick release') was about 15 years later, in a patent filed by an American. Quite probably the choice of terms reveals some deep underlying differences in our cultural identities at the time!

They were clearly very successful (and well built), since the frequently turn up for sale on ebay in working condition today. An early model is shown below (note that the vice runs on parallel cast 'sliders' rather than the round steel guides in more recent vices from Record at al (on which more in a later post). Note also unconventional (for the uk) spelling of 'vise' - no doubt to contrast with the competition (of which more in the next post).

It would also be good to hear more about the 'handy' vices that were available in the 10 years before this new design was released - was there a vice aimed at woodworkers?

Before the Joseph Parkinson design could take over the world of joinery vices, he had to overcome the competition of which there are two notable examples - The 'syers' standard instantaneous grip vice and the 'Riley' instantaneous grip vice. Find out more in the next post - gripping stuff!


----------



## AndyT

Excellent stuff Nick - keep it coming!

(And I had never noticed about the toothpaste tubes - but you are quite right.)


----------



## nabs

I found a few references to Parkys in books aimed at headmasters and teachers - perhaps their adoption in classrooms helps explain why there are so many around (mind you they had a decent production run, there is some evidence to suggest the distinctive design with the unadorned front jaw with the writing circling the handle continued until the 1920s - more on that later)

Here are some yoofs enjoying their Parky vices at a school in Ireland (1907) where 10 were installed 






https://books.google.com/books?id=EP5HA ... ip&f=false


----------



## G S Haydon

Great bit of research. Love the look of the "Parky with the flat spring", doubt it works any better than Record though.


----------



## nabs

quite possibly it is worse than the Record, since the vice moves on two cast 'arms' rather than the polished steel rods used in the Record, and the movement is pressumably subject to more friction as a result. Hopefully someone who owns both will be along shortly to tell us for sure!


----------



## G S Haydon

I think you're right, however you'll look cool using it


----------



## toolsntat

On the Parky side of things I have a most wonderful miniature Gunmetal? Parkinson's engineers vice, although not named as such.
Originally supplied in a cardboard box with a picture of Mr Parkinson and company details.
These I believe were given to Ironmongars etc.
I do not have the box, so if ever you see one let me know please :wink: 
Great thread by the way =D> 
Cheers
Andy


----------



## gwr

nabs":1abr6fh0 said:


> quite possibly it is worse than the Record, since the vice moves on two cast 'arms' rather than the polished steel rods used in the Record, and the movement is pressumably subject to more friction as a result. Hopefully someone who owns both will be along shortly to tell us for sure!



Hi I don't own both but have a parkinson, not the perfect I was having trouble with it jumping threads if I tried to clamp anything from the centre to the right hand side. I stripped it down and gave it all a good clean including scraping the threads on both the half nut and screw to no avail.

Then I noticed there was quite a bit of play with the front jaw moving up and down where the cast has been worn on the runners over the years it looks to be different as the frame goes to the back of it making it very heavy.


----------



## nabs

I'd be very interested to see some pics of your vice, if you have any...

it turns out that Steel Nut & J. Hampton ltd (Woden) filed a patent in 1906 that aimed to resolve potential issues with the cast sliders (they suggested adding rollers to reduce wear and friction). I doubt it ever got made, though, since US manufactures had already come up with the better idea of using steel rods as guides for the moving part of the vice and this eventually got adopted in the UK also.
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publica ... 5134A&KC=A

Credit for the steel rod idea seems to belong to the Toley brothers (?) of Chicago. See this patent of 1894 for a quick release mechanism:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=pate ... 528190.pdf

also this advert in a 1896 catalogue suggests Toley was making them for a few years before that (perhaps without this quick release device mentioned above):






*Chas A Strelinger catalog*
https://books.google.com/books?id=bgbiA ... se&f=false


----------



## nabs

a quick detour into US made vices. Having mentioned the Toles QR vise I thought I take a look at how it worked.

The advantage of this quick-release mechanism is that it allows you to rapidly adjust the position of the jaws and then grip the work-piece without changing the position of your hand on the handle. Counter-clockwise to engage the QR and clockwise to grip.

it is not entirely clear to me how the QR works - there is a slot running down the length of the screw where the screw thread is cut away (this slot is slightly wider than the thread in the half nut) and when the nut engages with the slot the jaws are free to move. 

It is clearly more sophisticated than simply relying on the operator to align the nut and the slot, but I couldn't really follow how it works - it seems the nut can move move forward and backwards, up and down + laterally in its housing and that it somehow moves in a downward spiral to engage the thread when the screw turns forward and then moves in an upward spiral away from the thread when in reverse. But what would stop the nut dropping into the slot when turning the vice to forward?

I selflessly watched these two long and talkative videos showing a chap dismantling and reassembling one but I am none the wiser. Warning viewer discretion required - some unconventional tool fiddling techniques are used in this film!

I also discovered the same mechanism was used in Morgan 'rapid action' vices. The company was bought by Milwaukee Tools and they still do a QR woodworkers vice, although I do not think it is the same mechanism. I did read they can still supply the nuts to fit the older vices though, which is pretty cool.











[youtube]zkOQj0DXdtI[/youtube]
[youtube]njTGhso4oJo[/youtube]


----------



## dickm

When I was young and foolish (50-ish years ago!) bought a Parkinson Perfect Vise from an auction in Morecambe. Didn't check it closely before bidding, then having parted with the princely sum of 25 shillings
got it home and discovered it was the cast slide type and one of the slides was fractured where it joined the front jaw. So there's at least one downside to the "cast in one" style, which with hindsight seems a pretty silly design.
The break was actually completely clean, so clamped it all together, drilled through the front face and into the slide, tapped the hole in the slide and secured the whole shebang with an HT bolt. Served me well for a while, then learned to weld. Chamfered the break, heated it all on a primus and did a remarkably good weld! But finally saw sense and bought a Record 52.


----------



## nabs

yes it makes you wonder how many were lost due to breakages - in comparison it is hard to imagine breaking any part of the Record unless you were really making an effort!


----------



## nabs

there is a second patent (1896) for the Toles vice and it shows a slightly modified design of the half nut (that matches the picture of the dismantled vice above) and this patent has a clearer explanation that made me look again at the photo of the parts laid out. If you look closely you will see a small nib on the top of the green collar that receives the handle and a matching projection on the face of the vice above the central hole where the screw is inserted. 

These nibs mean the vise will not work as a conventional screw vice, instead the handle is brought up until the nibs engage (at this point the part of the screw with threads removed is aligned with the nut) to move the vice in or out. When the jaws are close to the work-pieces the handle is rotated the other way to cinch up the jaws tightly.

The oddly shaped half nut is designed to move in a way that makes it easier for the threads to realign after they have been disengaged in 'rapid action' mode.

Not quite as clever as I thought, but no doubt a big improvement on a conventional continuous screw vise... (not as good as Parky's idea, mind you!).

This patent also explains the bench stop that is integrated into the jaw (the dog is missing from the dismantled version above), which will make a reappearance on later day Records, as we shall see.


----------



## bugbear

IIRC Melhuish made (or certainly sold) an early version of that "half turn to disengage" design. 

BugBear


----------



## nabs

so they did! - you can see it on the bottom of p165 of the 1905 catalogue:

https://archive.org/stream/MelhuishCata ... 7/mode/2up

twice the price of the parky :shock:


----------



## bugbear

nabs":2q1y4g5f said:


> so they did! - you can see it on the bottom of p165 of the 1905 catalogue:
> 
> https://archive.org/stream/MelhuishCata ... 7/mode/2up
> 
> twice the price of the parky :shock:



I was thinking of 772, top of the page, not 774 (bottom of page).

Although I hadn't seen that particular catalogue!

BugBear


----------



## Cheshirechappie

What a cracking good thread - you've done a fair bit of research to put all this together, Nick!

Just as a very minor footnote, the Parkinson company did not disappear completely. They developed a very fine reputation for building solid, dependable industrial milling machines branded 'Parkson', and in the 1990s were absorbed into a amalgamation of several Yorkshire machine tool builders still trading today as Broadbent Stanley - http://broadbentstanley.co.uk/our-history

I don't know when the last vice was made, though.


----------



## nabs

bugbear":1i53r1it said:


> I was thinking of 772, top of the page, not 774 (bottom of page).
> 
> Although I hadn't seen that particular catalogue!
> 
> BugBear



I am pretty sure that 774 is in fact a rebadged Toles, apart from the use of their marketing phrase of 'rapid action' there are lots of visual similarities, not least the nuts used to attach the steel rods. 


I glanced at the one in 772 and assumed it was a Entwistle and Keynon, but there is a bit in the 1891 appendix of 'Every Man his own Mechanic' that suggests it is a different vice. The hunt continues!

https://archive.org/stream/everymanhiso ... 3/mode/2up


Thanks for the extra info on Parkys Cheshire.


----------



## nabs

following the slightly disappointing denouement to my Toles investigation, I thought I'd mention one other US vice I came across while researching. It is made by Richards Wilcox, Illinois, and is interesting because it has an elegant gravity fed quick release and is clearly an extremely well made vice. If you ever see one of these you should snap it up without question!

Rather than try and explain how it works you can see for yourself in video below where someone in the US does an excellent job of demonstrating the mechanism it uses:

*question* what is the advantage of using a brass half nut vs cast steel?

Back to Blighty made vices in the next post!





[youtube]kC4tG0uVEoM[/youtube]


----------



## gwr

Hi I just recently deleted some pics from phone that I tried to post here for advice when trying to sort the jumping threads problem but failed to post them from iphone.I will take some pics at the weekend and try again to post them.


----------



## gwr

. 
My mistake it is a perfect


----------



## nabs

thanks gwr - I was trying to see if it is possible to date Parkinson's vices but I suspect it will be very hard to tie down to a very narrow date range. Here is what I found out:

We know the Parkinson _perfect instantaneous grip_ was made from 1895 onwards, the earliest picture I can find of the woodworkers' model is from the Charles Nurse 1891 catalogue*, and it shows a design I have not seen elsewhere:






... possibly this is the very first model?

After the model with a front jaw like yours is introduced there are some variations (some have a long rear carriage, some short; some have three holes to mount a wood insert to the front jaw others two) but I haven't been able to find any evidence that would match dates to the features. 

The only aspect I am reasonably confident about is that at some point Parkinson's moved the spring from under the half nut to behind the front jaw/next to the lever. 

I am not sure why having the spring near the trigger is a better solution, but it was clearly the later development and the one that caught on in all subsequent QR vices of this type. I can't find out exactly when this changed occurred, but I believe it happened after Record started manufacturing their QR vice (1917/18 earliest) because Record made both kinds early on. This is based on an assumption that if Parkinson had already discovered that changing the location of the spring was a better design then Record would have copied them immediately when they launched their version. It is also possible, of course, that Record were the originators of the change rather than Parkinson.

I did manage to find a late-ish catalogue entry with both the Parky that looks like yours (including 3 screw holes in the face) and the Record model that would eventually render it obsolete:






https://archive.org/details/illustrated ... us+grip%29

archive.org has this catalogue dated as 1910, but there is no date on the catalogue and I do not think it can really have been produced before 1927, which is when Miller Falls introduced their electric drills (see p. 80 where they are listed)


As you can see, Record undercut the price of the Parkinson vice and, since theirs' was clearly a superior design, my guess is that they would have quickly eroded Parky's sales. Indeed, by 1930 pretty much all UK QR vice production had switched to using a Record-like design (even Parkinson had a 'perfect' version) and by 1935, at least according to the Buck & Hickman's catalogue, the old Parky pattern was no longer available.


so after all that, we can conclude (what you had probably known anyway  ), that your vice was most likely made in the 1920s.


*available, with other catalogues, from taths.org if you sign up as a paying member.

Buck & Hickman 1930:
If I had to guess then I would say this is the final version of the 'Parky pattern' (including two screws and short rear carriage).






B&H 1935:


----------



## AndyT

Great stuff Nabs.
The John Hall catalogue was more accurately dated by Bugbear to 1931-4 in this thread

old-catalogue-from-john-hall-tools-online-t101148.html


----------



## nabs

thanks Andy , I must have missed that at the time. Hats off to bugbear for rather more thorough detective work than I managed!


----------



## nabs

I have become obsessed with finding out more about the Parky pattern vices, in particular I would like to find out about the change in spring design. Possibly I have too much time on my hands at the moment!

There is a HUGE thread on vices on the garage journal forum - https://www.garagejournal.com/forum/sho ... 782&page=1

I had glanced at this but concluded it was largely about mechanics vices, however, on closer inspection it seems there are some UK members who have acquired 'Parky pattern' woodworkers vices branded by Record and Woden. I knew the Woden model was produced from the 1918 advert below, but had never seen one. They seem a well informed bunch so have asked some questions and will report back!


----------



## Rhyolith

Thanks for this thread! Will be continuing to follow it.

I don't quite understand what your talking about with the springs.... I have two a parkison vices one an engineers one a carpenters (come to think might have a third in bits somewhere), if theres anything if can photograph (ect..) to help with your investigation let me know.


----------



## nabs

I have added a couple of pics below which will hopefully make it clearer.


Here is a (relatively!) recent Parkinson vice - you can see there is flat coiled spring on the inside of the front jaw - this spring pushes on the flat bar which in turn pushes up on the half nut, pressing it to the screw:







Here is an old Record vice - there is no spring on the inside of the jaw, instead you can just see a spring under the half nut:







my theory is that the arrangement in the Record is what Parkinson implemented first, but I have never seen an example of a Parkinson with the spring in this position.


----------



## Rhyolith

Yes thanks, I understand now. 

My Parkinson (carpenter vice) is the sort that slides in if you push it, but has not mechanism (I am aware of) that allows it to come out (aka quick release). So probably little use in helping with your theory. 

Does what you describe with the springs apply to engineers vices too? I.e. the oldest Parkinson's have the same arrangement as the records.


----------



## nabs

I have not really looked at many of the engineer vices but the pics I have seen all have the spring near the trigger, as per the original patent (e.g below).

There is a listing for an early Record woodworkers' vice on ebay at the moment with some pics of the underside (reproduced below). My guess is it would be one of their earliest versions and seems to be a direct copy of the Parkinson. Confusingly it uses a flat spring near the trigger (the spring is missing in this example but you can see the castellated nut that is used to adjust the tension on the spring). 

I can't think of any obvious reason why Record would adopt this design and then later move the spring in a different position, only to switch it back it again. One explanation would be that this old vice was made for them by Parkinson, but this does not seem likely I think - firstly the casting of the undercarriage is subtly different than all the other Parkinson vices I looked at (and it also is not as well finished), and secondly I can't think of any commercial reason why Record (or Parkinson) would set up an arrangement like this. 

C & J Hampton registered the 'record' trademark in 1908 by which time Parkinson's patent would have expired, and Hampton's trade listings from this time have them as owning a foundry and manufacturing vices (amongst other things) so there does not seem to be anything to prevent them from simply making a copy. Also, since Record was a new brand, it is not like they could convince Parkinson they had lots of loyal customers who would rather buy from them than directly from Parkinson.

So I have concluded that C J Hampton originally copied the (then current) Parkinson's design until they switched to an improved version in 1917/1918 and, at some point during the production of this range, experimented with the spring under the nut, only to confirm the other design was better and thus switching back to it.

Well that's my theory anyway!

I have not had much luck finding information on C &J Hampton/Record before the 1930s so if anyone has better information feel free to correct me!
engineer's vice


----------



## nabs

Here is some info on a couple of quick-release vices that predate Parkinson's design:

* Entwisle & Kenyon's (Accrington) Instantaneous Grip Vice 
* Standard Instantaneous grip invented by Smiths Marks & Co, Keighley and sold by Thomas Syers and co.

Both vices are described by Francis Young in _Everyman His Own Mechanic_ (1881):

https://archive.org/stream/everymanhiso ... 4/mode/2up

Starting with the E&K, which was invented by Wilson Riley in 1877. He filed for a US patent in 1880:

https://patentimages.storage.googleapis ... 227582.pdf

The design was also licensed to Massey in the US who marketed it as the 'Lightening grip’. 











see also Charles Strelinger and Co. catalogue 1896:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=bts ... e&q&f=true

You could be forgiven for thinking it was all Massey’s own work, but here is a letter from E&K clarifying matters!






This letter was printed in _English Mechanic and World of Science, Volume 45_ (1887) https://books.google.se/books?id=0Z5AAQ ... &q&f=false

You can see how it works in the partial cross-section below - There is a toothed rack (E) and a toothed block (L) - when the handle is turned upwards the block is disengaged from the rack, and a half-turn downwards causes the cam (H) to engage the teeth in the block with those of the rack. The cam has a spiral shape which causes it to draw the movable jaw slightly forward so the work is gripped. 







I have reproduced a picture of the internals of the vice from the mig-welding forum below - in the same thread you will find a link to a dropbox area where the sections on vices from Buck & Hickman’s catalogues from 1913 to 1958 are reproduced:







http://www.mig-welding.co.uk/forum/thre ... ost-813777

David Barron has one here:
http://davidbarronfurniture.blogspot.se ... -vice.html
and so does Wizard of this forum:

name-that-vice-t73975.html


*Identification*
In addition to the cam/rack arrangement and unusual bulbous handle, the casting is sometimes stamped with [STEEL RACK] as in the example above - the Massey version is clearly marked "Massey No 17 LG” (lightening grip) on the front face.

*edit*
forgot to mention that Young talks about the Melhuish quick release vice in the 1891 appendix (p783) of Everyman his own Mechanic and it seems he is describing a different vice. Certainly by 1905 the Melhuish 'Joiners' vice was by E&N:







https://archive.org/stream/MelhuishCata ... 7/mode/2up

it does seem there was a different vice offered by Melhuish at the end of the 19th century, but I do not know who made it (see pic on p784)


----------



## nabs

those of you with a long memory may recall from an earlier post that Francis Young - writing in the early 1880s - talked about a couple of quick-release vices being available. We covered the E&Y 'lightening' instantaneous grip above and the second was the 'Standard' instantaneous grip

The vice was made by Smith, Marks and company (Keighley) and sold by Thomas Syer, London. The earliest reference I could find was 1880 but it may have been available earlier - the casting is stamped 'patent' so presumably Smith and Co applied for a patent, which would have given another clue to production dates, but unfortunately I could not locate it. 

It seems Mr Syer was a successful marketeer and he managed to get the same puff-piece included in various periodicals during the 1880s, and he also took his vice (along with his ‘registered’ workbench) around to several exhibitions about this time. Here is an example from _The Builder_ 1883:






https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Wzd ... ce&f=false

There is an attempt at explanation of how it works here, but I am none the wiser for reading it:






From _The cabinet and furniture maker 1881_ 
https://books.google.com/books?id=zXIOA ... e&q&f=true


I begin to wonder about how successful this vice was - has anyone ever seen one?

And with that, back to Record vices in the next post.


----------



## Rhyolith

I have never knowingly seen one in the flesh, but found what I think is one on Flickr:



INSTANTANEOUS GRIP VICE - 1880s by Glenn MacLeod, on Flickr


DSCF2236[1] by Glenn MacLeod, on Flickr


STANDARD INSTANTANEOUS GRIP VICE by Glenn MacLeod, on Flickr

I could message the photographer if you like?


----------



## nabs

excellent - that's the one! If the photographer still has it, it would be very interesting to know how it works (and if it is any good!)


----------



## nabs

many thanks to Rhyolith for tracking down the pics of the Standard Instantaneous grip vice above - with that as a clue I was able to find out the date for the patent (6th Nov 1877). 

You can just about make out the patent number (4129) on the handle in the photo above. The GB Patent office produced an abstract:





https://books.google.com/books?id=Ss9OA ... &q&f=false

I also noticed from the same publication that Riley got his instantaneous grip patent a few weeks later in November 1877 (Riley is the inventor of the Entwistle and Kenyon's 'lightening' instantaneous grip)






So it seems there were two vice makers, both living in a small northern town (Keighley) and both filing patents for 'instantaneous' grip vices inventions in the same year. Most odd - I wonder who got into production first? It would be very interesting to see the workings of the Smith version to see how similar/different they are.

PS both patents use the term 'instantaneous grip', raising the tantalizing prospect that there were others before them.


----------



## Rhyolith

I have had a reply from the photographer, he's going to post some additional photographs once he has dug up the vice from the shed. Don't know how long this will take, but will post them here soon as they appear.


----------



## nabs

excellent and many thanks for asking - having looked at his impressive collection of vices on flickr I think he must have a very large and well built shed!


----------



## Vann

nabs":1tm23vhh said:


> ...Unfortunately the text of the Canadian patent is hand written and not very well scanned which makes it almost illegible...


I struck something similar when looking at the patent for North Bros "Yankee" drills. Taking my drill apart, and working through the gobbledegook, I managed to work out almost all of what they meant. I've been meaning to do a thread on that for several years (where's that damned round tuit?).

I'm enjoying your research - but waiting for you to get around to the versions of the Record itself (impatient so-and-so that I am :roll: ) - and while your title says "52 1/2" I'm assuming the No.52 and No.53 vises share the same evolution?

Cheers, Vann.


----------



## nabs

I can only guess, I'm afraid - the earliest catalogue I can find with Record vices (Melhuish 1925) has all three models. Despite the fact that the "1/2" designation used for the 9'' model might seem like it was an afterthought squeezed in between the bigger and smaller one, I am pretty sure Record would have made it available from the start just because the two incumbent QR vice makers already had all their's available in 7'', 9'' and 10'', e.g Melhuish 1905

https://archive.org/stream/MelhuishCata ... 7/mode/2up

Happy to be proved wrong!


----------



## Vann

Having a glance through "Record Tools", the reprint of Record's Catalogue No.15 of 1938, I see there were then three versions of the No.52, 52½ and 53 woodworkers' vices. These were:
- the No. 52, No. 52½ and No.53 which are described as "With Quick-grip and Continuous Screw Action" (i.e. quick release);
- the No. 52A, No. 52½A and No.53A which are described as "With Quick-grip and Continuous Screw Action and fitted with Patent Screw and Nut Cover" (with the addition of a cover over the thread);
- the No. 52P, No. 52½P and No.53P which are described as "With Plain Screw Action only" (no frills).

These vices have five ribs on the front jaw (one vertical; two at 45deg; & two almost horizontal); "RD 664 709" toward the top; and an elliptical boss on the screw where the handle passes through. They are described as having "Unbreakable Steel Slides", suggesting the jaws might not be steel. That year these vices are also described as having "...the following NEW FEATURES:-
1. A metal plate is fitted into the Body covering the Nut mechanism to prevent sawdust or shavings falling on to the working parts.
2. Improved method of anchoring the Half-Nut which enables it to be quickly taken out for cleaning."

There are later versions and later front jaw designs, but I'll have to research those a bit more. However I know there is a "D" version of these vices, which have a dog on the front jaw, and an "E" version which, IIRC, has an additional plate over the mechanism (how many plates can you have over the mechanism? (hammer) ).

Cheers, Vann.


----------



## memzey

I thought that the "E" version was for schools (Education)?


----------



## nabs

Early line up (pre 60's)

P = plain screw
A = Quick release + patent screw and nut cover
C = combined vice and cramp to attach to bench
no letter postfix = Quick release

Post 60s:

P= plain screw 
C= combined vice and cramp
E= QR
D= adjustable dog with QR (available as plainscrew too ('DP' although I think the castings were only marked D)
no-postfix = lightweight plainscrew, 'amateur ' and junior range

Not sure what the E stands for!


----------



## nabs

With apologies to Vann for further delays to actual info on the 52 1/2, I shall now warble on about the beginnings of the Record woodworker’s vices.

We know that both C & J Hampton ltd (aka Record) and Steel Nut & Joseph Hampton ltd (aka Woden) copied the original Parkinson pattern quick release vice:






http://www.historywebsite.co.uk/article ... oden63.gif






The Woden advert is apparently from 1918. When did Record start making their Parky copies, I hear you cry?!

Tony Hampton told Scott Landis (c.f _The Workbench Book_ p144) that when Charles and Joseph jnr left Woden to set up C & J Hampton in Sheffield (1898) they took the Woden tool line with them and began making vises patterned after Woden's.

It is very unlikely that Woden had started producing a Parkinson's pattern vice at this time as Parkinson's patent was still in force until 1904. More likely I think is that Woden and C & J Hampton independently chose to make copies after the patent expired.

We also know that the C&J Hampton registered the 'Record' trademark in 1909 (c.f David Lynch http://www.recordhandplanes.com/history.html) and they chose to name their woodworker's vice the “Record” model 23. 

http://taths.org.uk/ have made an early C&J Hampton catalogue (June 1910) available to members, and the model 23 vice gets a full page spread.

Interestingly the trademark ‘Record’ seems to have been taken out specifically for their vices, which were a signficant part of their line-up (they also advertise wrenches, spanners, cramps and tube cutters, holdfasts and a few breast drills) 

As we will find out later, C&J Hampton started production of the more familiar Record 52 1/2 and siblings only a few years later, thus I think it is safe to say that the picture above of a Record model 23 is an example of the earliest type of Record vices ever made, and that it was made some time after 1909. Any more info on these vices greatly received!


----------



## nabs

C&J Hampton, having created their first quick release woodworker's vice (copying the Parkinson pattern) in 1909, soon released a new version of the woodworker's vice. They retained the 'Record' trademark which, at the time, they had reserved for their QR vices, presumably with a view to distinguish them from Parkinson's well known 'Perfect' brand.

The new version improved on the previous by the use of steel rods rather than the cast steel slides used in the Parkinson pattern.  The cast iron sliders were comparatively fragile and the polished steel rods afforded a smoother mechanism - a much better design and all manufacturers switched to it (including Parkinson) by the 1930s.

Record take credit for introducing this improvement (see catalog entry below) but can't claim to have had the original idea (as we saw previously, WC Toles, a US maker, was using steel rods in his vices 20 years earlier). 





Record pocket-edition no 16 (1950)

The likely launch date was 1918, which is the date of the Registered Design that is cast into the front jaw of their early vices. Since there were no original inventions to patent, a registered design would have been the best C&J Hampton's could have done to get some protection for the new model - the RD reference is 664709:

http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.u ... r/C1741112 (note that this publication covers RD for the period between 1918 and 1919, but since the Record RD is early in the sequence it would most likely have been filed in 1918).

I am assuming C&J Hampton would have been ready to start production as soon as the RD was filed with GB patent office, but the earliest evidence of the vice being for sale that I could find is this 1923 catalogue:


----------



## Vann

nabs":396bky2v said:


>


A-ha, that's what I was trying to describe when I wrote "...These vices have five ribs on the front jaw (one vertical; two at 45deg; & two almost horizontal); "RD 664 709" toward the top; and an elliptical boss on the screw where the handle passes through...". A picture is worth a thousand words (well, more than my 35 words anyway :roll: ).

Keep it coming nabs. I'm following with great interest.

Cheers, Vann.


----------



## nabs

eventually C & J Hampton (I'll just refer to them as "Record" from now on) came up with a couple of improvements that they considered worth patenting.

The first idea is actually rather good, but the second, described in the next post, is a bit of a duffer (it does at least help with constructing a timeline for the vices). 

A weakness of Parkinson's quick-release design - perhaps the only serious issue - is that the screw is exposed when the vice is opened and sawdust and shavings falling on the screw can be carried onto the half-nut. If enough debris builds up in the half-nut it can start to ride up the screw thread causing the mechanism to slip, potentially damaging the threads in the process.

In August 1927 Record took out a patent (GB292381) for a "Screw and Nut Cover" - this is a metal cover that extends the length of the screw, preventing sawdust and shavings dropping on the thread. An excellent idea - they gave vices that included the cover an 'A' post-fix, which is stamped on the face. The As were about 10% more expensive than the standard model.

Glenn MacLeod - flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/7070272571/ :





patent:





https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publica ... 2381A&KC=A

Parkinson's catalogue of 1940 (which is a reprint of their 1937 catalogue but with updated prices) shows they have dropped their old steel slider design and now make the 'Record' version. They also licensed the "Screw and Nut Cover" from Record:


----------



## nabs

The GB _Patents and Designs Act 1907_ granted Record a monopoly on their registered design for up to 15 years, so in theory from the end of 1933 other manufacturers would be free to copy the design (confusingly the Record no 14 catalogue, first published Jan 1934 still mentions the registered design, although I suppose the copy was most likely written while it was still in force).

Since the design was so good it is not surprising that copies soon followed. For instance, the Buck and Hickman 1935 catalogue introduces their own-brand (Toga) version of the vice and mentions that Parkinson have also made the same design available. 

There is a version of the Record front jaw casting where the registered design number is removed, but the raised box that originally contained the reference number remains. I think this is a transitional design used after the RD expired and until the next significant design change later in the 1930s (this casting is uncommon so the period of use may have have been short). 

so all in all a slightly unclear picture, and difficult to be precise on dates - I think the best we can say is that it is likely that the transitional casting was probably introduced around 1934/1935 and that it was used for a short period until a new design was introduced later in the 1930s. to be continued...

Early copy (Buck and Hickman 1935 catalogue):





Transitional design (~1935):


----------



## nabs

in November 1932 Record applied for another vice patent, this time for a "sawduster excluder plate"

This innovation was so mysterious that they put a sticker on the said plates to explain what they were for:






some of the plates were engraved with the patent number (just about visible in the example above).

You may well wonder how a part of the vice that is fixed to the underside of your bench could be the cause of sawdust falling in and clogging the working parts - the answer is in the patent:



> The nut housing is usually provided with external flanges, lugs or the like by means of which the vice is secured to the under surface of a bench, the bench itself closing the housing. There is, however, often a passage from the bench surface to the housing between the back of the plate like portion of the fixed jaw and the bench mortise in which it is let and this passage, especially in the case of faulty or careless work in erecting the vice on the bench



https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publica ... 9804A&KC=A

I leave it to the reader to decide how much of a problem was caused by all this careless vice fitting that was going on in the 1920s and 30s, but suffice to say Record go on to acknowledge (in the same patent) that the problem was already solved by their 'screw and nut cover' (see previous post) which they invented 10 years earlier. 

The second claim (about the nut being easily removed for cleaning) although stamped on the 'sawdust excluder plate' actually refers to a modification to the housing for the half-nut (the excluder-plate being of course useless for this purpose, since it is inaccessible when the vice has been fitted to the bench):

old housing:





new housing (the metal cage can be removed and the half nut extracted - the more complicated casting above gets in the way):





At this stage you will note that the 'excluder plate' is rendered even more redundant, since it is no longer necessary to get at the nut from the top (thus you don't need a removable plate at all and can simply create a casting without a gap in the first place - and indeed, this is what Record eventually did just that with the 'E' model). I am sure Record would have patented the new nut housing if they had thought of it - my guess is they copied it from Parkinson who used both style of housing in their vices.

Also of note is the different mechanisms for holding the half nut to the screw (in the original design there is a spring directly beneath the half nut - the new housing design would have necessitated a different solution, and a flat watch spring was added to the QR lever instead)

The first mention I can find for these improvements are in the 1938 catalogue (although it is possible that they could have been produced after the patent was filed at the end of 1932, there is no mention of them int the 1935 catalogue):






My first thought about the 'sawdust excluder plate' patent was that it was a rather lame attempt by Record to extend IP protection for their vice given that their Registered Design was due to expire a few months later in 1933, however, I have started to question my original conclusion about the 'RD' model dates.

The first problem is that 1938 catalogue still shows the RD number stamped in the casting and, although this could be explained by the use of out-of-date drawings, the fact is that most of RD model vices I have looked at also have the sawdust excluder plate, and this is not so easy to explain. We know they must have been sold after the patent application for the sawdust extractor plate at the end of 1932, but it does not seem at all likely they were all made during before the RD protection expired (which should have been a period of less than a year after the daft sawdust excluder patent was filed).

I think it is therefore more likely that Record continued to stamp the Registered Design on their vices after 1933, but this is not something I am not currently able to explain.

to be continued - try and contain your excitement if you can!


----------



## AndyT

Can't stop - I'm off to check how carelessly I fitted mine!


----------



## Vann

nabs":3rtggvu3 said:


> ...to be continued - try and contain your excitement if you can!


I'm really enjoying your "series", and I'm impressed with your research. Keep it up.

Cheers, Vann.


----------



## nabs

apologies for the delay but I was awaiting inspiration. 

We left off with a conundrum where the Registered Design taken out by Record for their new QR release vice design in 1918 ought to have expired no later than 1933, but the RD number continued to be shown on the vices literature after that point.

Although this could be explained if Record simply never got round to updating their catalogue pics, the catalogue entry above (and indeed many extant examples of the vice) shows the RD number on a vice with a patented improvement (the saw dust excluder plate) which can be dated to 1932. This in turn would imply that all the surviving examples with both the RD number and the 'sawdust extractor plate' were made between November 1932 and some point in 1933. Hmm

I contacted the National Archive to get a copy of the design registration records to see if it offered any clues (search and copying fee of £9.10 - no need to thank me!)




as you can see the date it was filed was July 1918 and an extension was noted in July 1923 (the 1907 Patent and Design Act granted you 5 years copyright with the option to extend for two more 5 year periods: http://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/ ... b228en.pdf)

... so not very helpful. 

My best guess is that Record did renew for the third and final term granting them copyright until July 1933, but that they had enough old stock of the 'RD' casting to carry production through after it expired. 

The best we can say is that any of the vices with an RD stamp were made between July 1918 to 1933 or thereabouts.

Not very precise I'm afraid!


----------



## nabs

one more bit of trivia about the RD models - there is a version that does not show 'made in England' on the face. Pressumbably the sequence of production is as below.

Also, is it my imagination or do the steel rods look smaller on the first one?


----------



## Vann

nabs":28bnv4vo said:


> ...Not very precise I'm afraid!...


I've been doing a lot of research into Wadkin machines - and I'm finding the same thing. Conflicting or illogical results :? In the end you can only show what you've found, and propose a theory or two about why it doesn't stack up.



nabs":28bnv4vo said:


> ...Also, is it my imagination or do the steel rods look smaller on the first one?


To me, it looks like the second (and third) ones have the ends of the rods peined or riveted over, which would expand the ends - but I don't know if that accounts for all the difference.

Nice work and thanks for being prepared to cough up some cash. 

Cheers, Vann.

Note: Archives New Zealand don't charge if you do your own search through the files. They provide the files if you pre-book (I had to register) and you can photograph what you find. If they have to photocopy it costs you. No pens allowed, only pencils.

Oh, and New Zealand Railways ordered 452 vices from Record in 1926 - but I think these are engineers vices




Prices in NZ £.s.d.


----------



## nabs

the later vices have a distinctive rippled surface on the ends of the rods which I always thought might have been from them being peened over, but I wonder also if that would have been sufficient to stop them moving both backwards _and_ forwards? Is there some other way to attach the steel rods to the cast iron face?

Incidentally, having looked at hundreds of pictures of these vices the first picture above is the only one where a rod has come loose, so presumably whatever they did to stick them in was quite effective!


----------



## clauskeller

Shrink fitting perhaps?

Very interesting thread -- thanks a lot!

Claus


----------



## nabs

I had a closer look at the rods on mine and the first thing I noticed is that they are not flush with the surface - one is slightly recessed and there is a thin edge of steel that seems to have been raised along one side of the hole which might be an indication that it was somehow peened to fit. I suppose they must have had some clever way to stop the rods bending/case cracking when they did this.


----------



## squib

Fascinating thread, thank you for posting your research.
A quick pic of my instanteneous vice, no makers name but patented..


----------



## nabs

thanks squib - that's an interesting one. it might have been made by Smiths Marks and co - Can you make out a patent number on the handle?


----------



## nabs

reminded that I need to get on with concluding this thread I now need to confess that I am stuck. Please let me know if you can help with the dates for the next version of the vice:






given all my warblings about the registered design model I am convinced this later version must have been made from the 1940s, but the earliest catalogue I can find showing this casting is the Record no 16 pocket catalogue (1950). 

Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your perspective) by the 1940s Record had perfected their vice design and, having ran out of ideas to improve it, filled no more patent applications for us to refer to. Unreliable as they may be, I think the only clues we can get at this distance of time will be from old adverts and catalogues - has anyone come accross any earlier pictures of the vice that has this casting?


----------



## AndyT

Looking back at this earlier thread about dating Record vices, dating-this-record-vice-t93195.html, I linked to a photostream on Flickr from another enthusiast, who agrees thst it's probably 40s or 50s

https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected] ... otostream/

And I agree that vices of that vintage are good - here's mine.


----------



## Phil Pascoe

I must admit I sold a round boss 52 1/2 and a round boss 53 and kept a flat boss 53e that was already fitted to the one bench I still have - I can't see any significant difference in them.


----------



## nabs

the differences are subtle - that will all be in the next thrill packed edition of this thread


----------



## nabs

right, we are lurching to the end of this survey - hold on to your hats!

although we have not managed to pin down an exact date for the previously described design, it was clearly a success and was produced unchanged for decades - in fact the next (and final) design change was not made until the 1960s. The changes made included:


* a new design for from face casting
* a new square boss (previously oval)
* the part holding the sliding bars parallel at the far end of the vice is now made of sheet metal (previously cast iron)
* the removeable steel 'sawdust excluder plate' in the rear carriage that covered the half-nut is gone and instead the casting is solid in this area 
* the cast webs that braced the rear jaw and the horizontal face of the carriage are gone
* the two rear bolt holes in the carriage are now slotted
* The screw and nut cover that runs the length of the screw is now standard on all the QR models
* Finally, they introduced a new model that included a dog in the front jaw.

On the cosmetic side, Record adopted a lighter blue colour and a new 'record' logo/sticker around this time and also came up with new post-fixes to describe the various models:


* P= plain screw 
* C= combined vice and cramp for attaching/removing the vice 
* E= Quick Release
* D= adjustable dog with QR (available as plainscrew too ('DP' although I think the castings were only marked D)
* no-postfix = lightweight plainscrew, 'amateur ' and junior range

The new range was first announced in their 1963 catalogue:







As you can see the new range is deemed by Record to be an improvement on the previous version - I leave it to the reader to decide how many of these changes really do improve the design!


----------



## Phil Pascoe

My 53e must be a frankenvice - newer face design, square boss, screw cover, slotted bolt holes - but it has webs and a cast end.


----------



## AndyT

I do think that those cosmetic changes were important at the time, when it really did matter that things should look modern, not old-fashioned. I can remember how as a teenager I looked down on the old wooden handles on my dad's tools and wanted all of mine to have superior plastic...  
If I had been buying a vice in the 70s I would have wanted a new one.


----------



## Rhyolith

AndyT":49dskqtm said:


> I do think that those cosmetic changes were important at the time, when it really did matter that things should look modern, not old-fashioned. I can remember how as a teenager I looked down on the old wooden handles on my dad's tools and wanted all of mine to have superior plastic...
> If I had been buying a vice in the 70s I would have wanted a new one.


How the wheels turn! Heritage, History and Conservation are a really big deal thesedays, think this is maybe linked to a disillusionement with the modern world and the apparent lose of things from the past (like practical skills). I notice modern tool companys will really make a deal out of tradition and heritage, to link themselves to a past commonly assocaited with superior practical arts possibly. 

Wonder how long it will be before we all want new tools again... suppose many already do.


----------



## nabs

many plastic utilitarian objects are starting to be recognized as retro-classics - and rightly so, there is nothing inherently 2nd-rate about plastic as a material and it can be used to excellent effect. A good example are the rhubarb and custard handled stanley chisels which have now been around long enough to earn a nostalgic air.

Personally, if I ever see a Millers Falls drill or plane with permaloid handles I will buy it like a shot!


----------



## AndyT

Indeed, so would I. And anyone who looks at posts of mine in the projects section will often see my 1970s blue handled Stanley chisels in use, alongside older tools and my 1940s-50s Record 52 1/2.


----------



## toolsntat

nabs":oh46hj62 said:


> I had a closer look at the rods on mine and the first thing I noticed is that they are not flush with the surface - one is slightly recessed and there is a thin edge of steel that seems to have been raised along one side of the hole which might be an indication that it was somehow peened to fit. I suppose they must have had some clever way to stop the rods bending/case cracking when they did this.


 
An observation on this occurrence Nick if I may.
In my experience I have found the bars to be screwed into the front jaw.
The ribbed peaning thus preventing them from unscrewing.
Have you tried screwing that one back in at all?
Any slight unscrewing with wear could cause that burr to occur.
Cheers
Andy


----------



## nabs

now you say it, a screw thread is indeed the obvious way to attach the rods! doh! I shall have a closer look when I am next in the shed.


----------



## nabs

never one to leave a dead horse unflogged, I was looking into whether there were any significant improvements to Record's design from the 1920s/30s. The short answer seems to be 'no' - the Record QR is a lulu. 

However, I think an honourable mention should go to the 'Twentieth Century' vice that, should you have seen one, you will surely remember:






Bugbear in an earlier discussion ((old-vice-t73056.html)) did all the leg work to uncover the history - there are two patents for the vice taken out by Abraham Chris, a Russian immigrant living in Brick Lane London:

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publica ... cale=en_EP
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publica ... cale=en_EP

The earlier patent from 1922 describes a base plate designed to simplify the attachment of the vice to a bench, and the second is a modification to accomodate a QR mechanism.

I mention it now because one recently came up on an ebay and we can see what Mr Chris was up to:





Although the patent describes a base-plate with one or more transverse ribs that engage with corresponding mortices on the underside of the bench, the actual implementation is a series of raised pointed cylinders. This seems like a decent idea since you could use the points to mark the underside of the bench and then drill holes rather than chopping a mortice. 

Fair play to Mr Chris for getting someone to make them for him and selling a few. Extra plaudits for naming the vice 'The twentieth Century' and then coming up with an ornate face that harks back to the 18C. The few that have appeared online are all different colours, so it is not possible to be sure what they originally looked like - hopefully they were suitably garish!


----------



## Paul200

What a fascinating read. Just been looking around online for some way of dating 52 1/2 vices and found this 'under my nose', so to speak!

The info in this thread helped me a lot today in trying to decide which 52 1/2 vice to buy. Thanks Nick and others.

Paul


----------



## mikey78

This is my recently aquired 52 1/2,
I've gone through the whole thread, reading some posts more than once but,
could not figure out exactly how old is my Record ...
From what I read I guess it is pre 1960, can any of you help in further restricting its age ?


----------



## Paul200

It has the patent number on the face so I'm guessing pre 1934 (ish) - see Nick's post at the top of page 4 of this thread. Well done! I've just bought one that dates somewhere between yours and 1960.

Paul


----------



## mikey78

Thankyou very much Paul for pointing out the correct years,
as long as I see in this discussion my vice should date in between 1918 and 1933 ... great !!!


----------



## nabs

given the disjointed nature of these posts I thought it would be handy to have a summary timeline which I have reproduced below - this is the nearest I could get to a type study:






PS I also cleaned up the original posts and put them in a more sensible order on my blog (there is a bit of new content but not worth reading if you already waded through this lot!)
cheers


----------



## Rhyolith

Really like this timeline, thank you!


----------



## toolsntat

[quote #1183158 quote]


squib":2v9k0g7e said:


> Fascinating thread, thank you for posting your research.
> A quick pic of my instanteneous vice, no makers name but patented..



Hi Squib, could you please tell me if when you remove the sliding jaw there is a separate unattached part ?
I assume that this is lifted by the cam to engage with the fixed part ?
Cheers Andy


----------



## dannyr

Hello - I'm a new member today, much liking your posts --
but not managing the system for attachments v well - even after resizing seems to only allow me one - is this correct? oh and where do I find my saved draft? this is the 3rd try, each attempt briefer.
anyway here's the very heavy 8 1/4" wide Syers -- J Syers London model 2A patent -- that I have on my bench as a front vice --- works just fine - I love to have a century++ old working vice.
I have a Parkinsons Perfect 10 1/2" first version (3 screw holes, long base, very heavy) as an end vise - also works just fine ditto for this (couldn't upload pic, even after resizing to <2M)

Anyhow - regards to all - this seems like a helpful and friendly site


rgds

danny (Sheffield, UK)


----------



## dannyr

Hmm - - getting there slowly - hope this upload works (still lost my drafts) 

and here is the Parkinsons Perfect Vise 10 1/2" (first version, I believe, heavy, long base, 3 front plate screw holes) which is the end-vice for my bench. It also works very well.

I finally finished the bench last year - solid beech top (from saw-mill in 1989) and oak base (from door frame made in 1865) immodestly proud (my heirs will have to figure how to get it out of the cellar workshop - the top unbolts, but weighs a ton (not quite)).

looks fine outside, so off to the allotment
danny


----------



## nabs

two lovely vices Danny! Somewhere on this thread we found the patent description of the Syers but I could not really understand how it works - have you ever examined the mechanism?


----------



## dannyr

Here goes, nabs, three pix, I have more, from when building the bench last year.


I actually think the Syers may be the simplest version of QR - I forget the sequence - could the other patents have been to get round this one? - there is a long fixed rack and the axially rotating bar operated by the lever has a segment of multi-start helicoid thread affixed.
Thus the moving jaw on this bar moves freely back and forth if the lever is vertical (say, this free position can be chosen by a fixing screw) until in clamping position, then rotate clockwise to engage at about 30deg and good pressure by say 60-90deg. This works very well for clamping wood. Something very squashy might compress so much that you'd overshoot and release, likewise trying to use the vice to say, slowly force in an oak dowel over a long distance of travel - I just use it for holding wood or tools and it works very well. It all seems well machined (the slideways aren't to the kind of fine tolerance some US piano-makers metal (non-QR) bench vices seem to have been in the 19thC, but they are long and solid).
two more pix coming
rgds
danny


----------



## dannyr

that was the rack - here's pic two the moving jaw assy


----------



## dannyr

and pic 3 has the two together - no loose nut (unless all is completely disassembled) to get lost over the century and a half (nearly)

let me know if it's not clear -I'm not going to take it all to pieces until needed, but I have a couple of other pix.

hope this adds to the knowledge
danny


----------



## nabs

many thanks for the clear explanation and pictures Danny - I get it now! Would you mind if I used the photos on my blog about the history of QR vices?


----------



## dannyr

absolutely fine by me - your blog is VG
danny


----------



## dannyr

Alert - anyone there live near Colchester?

there's an Entwhistle and Kenyon for sale on eB at a good price - collection only

I'm only telling you so I don't have to drive across the country to get it

on the other hand I should really visit my aunt there 

to self --- no stop stop - you already have enough fine C19th vices

but it's a Lightening

please someone else buy

danny -- Sheffield


----------



## AndyT

Here's a belated footnote to this story - Vices of the rich and famous!

I spotted this high grade lump of cast iron recently:






It was attached to this bench:






It belonged to the sculptor, Barbara Hepworth, and is on display in the Hepworth Gallery in Wakefield.

Here she is, next to the bench and its Perfect vice, showing the sort of work possible if you have one!






Clearly, it's the one we all need.


----------



## dannyr

great - and a great museum 
I'm not so keen on the pieces with 'harp-strings' or too much white paint, but some of Hepworth's purely abstract wood shapes are some of my favourite wooden constructs
(only with a Parky's Perfect, eh?)
Danny


----------



## Trevanion

Also goes to show you don't need the absolute most overkill, built to park a tank on it, Roubo workbench in the world outfitted with Moxon vices, leg vices, dog holes and not a single scratch on it, to produce great work.

Look at that thing! One parky vice, riddled with holes, saw cuts, hammer marks, the top is all out of whack and not flat and is very simply made with no extreme joinery involved. Most hipster woodworkers would look at in disgust and see it only fit for the fire!


----------



## mwr

Hello gents. I have an otherwise very nice circa 1950s Record 53 vice which is missing the end bracket, which locates the tail ends of the rods and screw. It would be easy enough to make something, but ideally I could find the original cast iron part. Unfortunately down here (NZ) they aren't as plentiful as in the UK. Does anyone specialise in old spares for something like this?

Thank you


----------



## dannyr

Looking back at this excellent thread (thanks for all the work NABS and others) there is an agreement here that 'of course' a pair of steel rods/bars was the way to go after about 1920 - much sturdier than cast iron etc etc.

Now I know that woodworking vices open further than most metalworking types, so have greater leverage force. However metalwork bench vices of all sizes, including those by Record et al, which surely take more hammer, largely have a cast slide moving in a cast way (and yes they do fail at this point).

Further - the bars have a definite weak point where they meet the casting. Even the classic period Records much loved here (fixable unless the casting cracks).

What are your thoughts on this?


----------



## dannyr

As you may guess, been re-reading this thread - it's great on the history of QR woodworking vices (but there's more to be discovered).

Is it time to look at the history of non-QR vices? Before Parkys etc? Obviously woodworkers used blacksmith-type vices and wooden vices (first with a wooden screw then a metal acme thread) but I believe there were some early English cast iron non-QR predecessors to Woden and Record. I like my Syers and Parky QRs, and like a large ww vice (8ins plus) but QRs do need a clean and the spring can break. A fully 'manual' acme screw is awfully tough.

Time for a new thread?


----------



## Vann

dannyr said:


> ...A fully 'manual' acme screw is awfully tough.
> 
> Time for a new thread?


No pun intended? 

Cheers, Vann.


----------



## Phil Pascoe

It is the acme of puns.


I'll get my coat ...


----------



## Badol

Hi from New Zealand.
I've just picked up this vice and was wondering if anyone could help with more information about it... I can find references to other Woden vices but not the 189 c/1
Thanks very much


----------



## dannyr

Woden, like Record, adopted the Parkinson 'Perfect' style of quick release when it went out of patent in the early years of the 20th century and applied it to many bench vices and woodworking vices. However, unlike Record, there seems to have been a feeling in the Woden works that another form of quick release would be advantageous.

Without doing any double check to verify details, this one was a variant of the rack and cam/pinion QRs patented for the Syers and the Entwistle and Kenyon w-w vices of the 1870s, also licensed to US companie(s), I believe it was made for a very short while in the 1930s. Then in the 1950s/60s they had further short-lived No. 120 and 130 and X130 vices in the usual sizes this time with a 'wind back' QR (different to your 'hold vertical then 90deg to clamp).

Unlike the 19th cent vices all the Woden w-w vices except for a scarce first model, used twin bars in place of the machined slides.

good find -- I have a Syers from about 1880-- been using it this afternoon with grandson.


----------



## Badol

dannyr said:


> Woden, like Record, adopted the Parkinson 'Perfect' style of quick release when it went out of patent in the early years of the 20th century and applied it to many bench vices and woodworking vices. However, unlike Record, there seems to have been a feeling in the Woden works that another form of quick release would be advantageous.
> 
> Without doing any double check to verify details, this one was a variant of the rack and cam/pinion QRs patented for the Syers and the Entwistle and Kenyon w-w vices of the 1870s, also licensed to US companie(s), I believe it was made for a very short while in the 1930s. Then in the 1950s/60s they had further short-lived No. 120 and 130 and X130 vices in the usual sizes this time with a 'wind back' QR (different to your 'hold vertical then 90deg to clamp).
> 
> Unlike the 19th cent vices all the Woden w-w vices except for a scarce first model, used twin bars in place of the machine slides.
> 
> good find -- I have a Syers from about 1880-- been using it this afternoon with grandson.


Thanks so much for the history, that's very interesting. Hunting the shop in the label, I think it closed in about 1940 so your dating of the 1930's would fit nicely. I'll give it a clean (I like the battered look and the 'story' in the paint splashes etc so won't repaint), it seems to work OK but jams sometimes... but I think cleaning, oiling and mounting properly will help. Thanks again. Cheers


----------



## Badol

Would any of you have an idea of what's missing from this? the end plate (if that's what it's called) moves and the mechanism jams - I'm guessing whatever should be here is the cause. Thanks once again.


----------



## toolsntat

Badol said:


> Would any of you have an idea of what's missing from this? the end plate (if that's what it's called) moves and the mechanism jams - I'm guessing whatever should be here is the cause. Thanks once again.


The bars section seems to be overshooting the casting. Are you saying it's jamming as you try to open from this position?
Could this be because it's being closed up too far without timbers fitted on the jaw faces?
As for the threaded hole, it looks a bit recent and in a position liable to cause weakness in the casting, perhaps it's not original to the design.
Do I see some broken casting on the end of the slides? Is this an issue?
Cheers Andy


----------



## Chisteve

Interesting thread I have a parkinson vice picked it up at a farm sale around 30 years ago have to say it’s a good piece of kit


----------

