Friday, January 4, 2019

Brace Yourselves

If I was a good tool historian, I might be able to give a timeline of when certain brace features showed up.  But I'm not that guy.  When I recently bought a box of tools that included three 10-inch braces and an unattached brace chuck, I was intrigued with the similarities and differences among them.  I also compared them to the two braces I already own.
From left to right:
Millers Falls #1662-10 IN
John S. Fray Co. #123 (12 in.)
Stanley #923-10 IN-Y
Stanley Handyman #H1250 (10 in.)
Dunlap 10 F (10 in.)
You can see right away that the top handle attachment is different for the MF and Fray braces than for the other three.
The metal part supporting the handle is about half the area of the underside of the handle
On the two Stanleys and the Dunlap, the metal supports the entire handle 
I'm really just guessing here, but I think the latter three braces are from the 1960's and that the MF and Fray braces are older (the Fray is probably from the early 1900's).

While we're on the top handles, the MF and the two Stanley top handles were rosewood.  Not sure what light-colored wood (stained reddish-brown on the Dunlap) was used on the others.

All these braces have basically the same ratcheting mechanism and I don't know a lot of details about them, so I'll focus on the chucks, the jaws and the springs.

The Millers Falls brace is first.
Millers Falls #1662-10 IN
The MF jaws with opposing triangular teeth
MF spring captured permanently(?) by punching the jaw around the groove
The Fray brace is next.
John S. Fray #123
The Fray jaws with no teeth
Fray spring captured permanently(?) in a drilled hole
Now the Stanley #923-10 IN-Y.  The chuck and spring are very different from the MF and Fray braces.
Stanley #923
Note that the chuck looks like a cylinder from the outside.  The braces above had shaped chucks.  The Stanley #923 also has most of the outer surface knurled, whereas the MF and Fray braces has smaller portions of the chuck knurled.
The jaws have teeth, but not triangular in shape.
The spring and jaws easily come apart.
This spring is totally different from others I've seen.  It's made to wrap around the shaft just behind the threaded part of the brace.  With this spring configuration, the jaws come out of the chuck and stay with the brace when the chuck is removed from the brace.
Spring in place, with jaws removed
This shows the spring in place with jaws attached
Because the back end of the spring straddles the rear of the threaded part of the brace,
 there is a groove to house the straight part of the spring
This shows how the front of the spring attaches to the jaws
The Stanley Handyman #H1250:
Stanley Handyman #H1250 - cylindrical chuck, mostly knurled
Handyman jaws with triangular teeth
Jaws were punched to capture the end of the wire spring, similar to the MF brace
And the Dunlap 10 F brace.
Dunlap 10 F with chuck shaped similarly to the MF and Fray
Look ma, no teeth!
The spring end is permanently(?) captured in a hole, similar to the Fray brace
For good measure, I'll throw in an unknown maker chuck that came with the box of tools I won in an auction.
Unknown maker non-cylindrical chuck, interestingly shaped spring and toothless jaws
This spring is captured by a punched jaw, but is easily removable
Interesting that this chuck has a hexagonal base, as well as a knurled area.  I can't imagine any case where I'd want to use a wrench to tighten a chuck onto the brace, but what else could that be for?  BTW, if anybody recognizes this unknown chuck and wants to have it, I'll be happy to ship it, for free.

I'll finish this post with an end-on view of the five braces, in the same order as the first pic.  The jaws are all set right at the chuck opening.  Look how different the hundred year old Fray is from the others.
MF, Fray, Stanley, Stanley, Dunlap

It's interesting that in tools that do the same job, there is so much diversity in chucks, springs and jaws.  I guess I shouldn't be surprised, as there was a lot of competition and tool makers were always trying to come up with something unique and patent-able to separate their tools from others.

2 comments:

  1. Damn Ipad and blogger it ate my reply..grr
    These braces are looking pretty good.
    Between them you got the three styles of head, two types of ratchets (there are 3) and a few variations of chuck and jaws (of which there are many) Refer to my post on the Stanley 811 for the three types Im talking about.

    All good braces, but the better of the bunch is the Stanley 923 (middle one), it sport a fully clad ball bearing thrust head and a box ratchet. All your braces except the Fray have BB thrust heads, The Fray only had two screws on the head, someone drilled three new holes/screws. The MF seems to have no screws left holding the head which is probably screw in (wood threads) You also got 3 variations of the ubiquitous Barber chuck.
    Dunlap is a lower cost line of tools from Sears (similar to Handyman, and etc.) Most likely made by MF.
    See the hole in the head flange? That is an oil port, put in a drop of oil in there once in a while.
    The Achille heel of these ratchet design is the selector ring. Watch that it is not bent or deformed. It has to ride above the pawls to lock the action CW or CCW. Sometimes they are mangled from trying to turn a stiff or gummed up mechanism. Yours all look like they been under the wire wheel, which I cae to found out is the best and easiest way to clean them braces...

    Bob, who does not understand why Ipad does not post on your blog (just goes in lala land), while it works on other blogs or give me error message on others WT...Heh!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Bob, thanks for going to the trouble to respond - twice. Yes, I had cleaned these braces with wire wheel and lubricated with 3-in-1 oil. All ratchet selectors are in good shape and work smoothly. I went back and re-read your November post on the #811 and it made so much more sense to me this time now that I have some of these things right in front of me.

    ReplyDelete