Thread: One for Boringgeoff

Originally Posted by Boringgeoff

...there's a place here in WA called Damboring I'm thinking of moving up there.

My heritage is Dutch. So when you Damboring folk have finished boring holes in dams, guess who's gotta go put his finger in the damned thing...

Merry Christmas everyone.

Cheers, Vann.

Geoff,
here it is...not a real flash type, but a basic idea that I hadn't seen before.
There was a cast rod that was broken off, so I drilled and threaded a hole and replace it with a steel pin.
No surprise the cast lug had broken.
There is a spring in the hole to open the two halves up against the thumb screw.
Can't find a name on the brace, or any numbers...any thoughts??

Regards,
Peter

Peter,
That's a nice example of Henry V Smith of Plantsville Connecticut 1883 patent (No 274040). It's in the same class as the Spofford and the AECO where they employ two clamping halves to grip the bit.
That's a tidy repair job you've done, mine arrived minus its spring but I was able to find a suitable replacement.
I don't know whether Henry made them himself or sold the patent to another company, the only marks I can find is the patent date stamped on the rear of the moveable part of the chuck.
Thanks for taking the time to post the photos.
Geoff.

Originally Posted by Boringgeoff

Peter,
That's a nice example of Henry V Smith of Plantsville Connecticut 1883 patent (No 274040). It's in the same class as the Spofford and the AECO where they employ two clamping halves to grip the bit.
That's a tidy repair job you've done, mine arrived minus its spring but I was able to find a suitable replacement.
I don't know whether Henry made them himself or sold the patent to another company, the only marks I can find is the patent date stamped on the rear of the moveable part of the chuck.
Thanks for taking the time to post the photos.
Geoff.

Thanks Geoff,
I went and read that patent.
There might be a number on the chuck, I'll clean it up and look.
Regards,
Peter

Stop the press!! Sorry I made a mistake in my reply to Graham in posts 4 and 6. I believe John s Fray was purchased by Stanley in 1909 not 06 as I said.
Right, that's my good deed for 2014 out of the way.............
Geoff.

Originally Posted by Boringgeoff

Hi Graham,
This is a Spofford brace made by John S Fray of Bridgeport Connecticut USA, and one of my favourite manufacturers. The chuck was patented by Nelson Spofford in 1859 and Fray started making them soon after that.
The two piece handle is usually held together by two pewter bands, which appear to have been replaced by wire on yours. This method of handle retainer was used by Fray, on some models, long after the one piece handle, put on prior to bending the frame, was common practice. Fray probably used it as a trademark of a good quality tool.
The Fray company was taken over by Stanley in 1906 but continued manufacture at Bridgeport for about 27 years.
I believe the Spofford brace was made into the early 1940s. Your example could be pre or post Stanley, it is hard to tell when the brand is illegible.
Generally if it is pre Stanley it would read "John S Fray & Co", post Stanley would be either "The John S Fray Co" or "Stanley Rule & Level" and included the sweetheart brand.
The sweep should also be on the frame, 108 for 8 inch, 110 for 10 in and so on.
Hope that helps and thanks for posting.
Geoff.

Hi Geoff,

Another Fray donated to the Hall mens shed museum.

It is only marked Fray No 105. It has a 10" sweep.

As no other words appear assume it predates Stanley takeover.

Any information would be appreciated. What colour stain would have been used on the handles?

Regards Graham

Hi Graham,

A very handy publication for Stanley information is Stanley Woodworking Tools by Walter Jacob published by The Early American Industries Association and I acknowledge this book as being the source of most of my information on John Fray.

Your no 105 is a medium quality brace and could have been pre or post Stanley but was discontinued by Stanley by 1927. After the takeover in 1909 Stanley wisely retained the Fray name on braces coming from the Fray works at Bridgeport,until the closure in 1927.
To quote directly from Mr Jacob's book "Top grade braces used cocobolo heads and handles while lower grade braces used ebonised or mahogany finished hard wood." I guess Mahogony or perhaps Jarrah stain would do the job.
I don't do any repairs to the woodwork on my braces as I have purchased a few which have been "restored' in an amateur fashion and, frankly, they look bloody horrible in most cases. But you're on the right forum to get good advice on what you could do to try to improve the look of the woodwork on your 105.
All I would do is remove any rust from the metalwork with steel wool or judicious use of the wire wheel and very fine steel wool to smooth and remove grime from the woodwork, then oil the whole thing and once again there is plenty of advice available here on oil suitable for the purpose. I use a product made here in WA called L10 lubricant/Penetrant by Industrial Chemical Technologies.
Your photos look like the brace is in good condition, ready to go to work.
To hark back to an earlier conversation on this thread about the pewter rings used on some of the Fray handles. When I was at the TTTG tool sale at Thornleigh in February I spoke to a TTTG member (Fred I think) who explained the technique used to fit the rings. They were slipped onto the frame before the head was fitted and were a push fit over the ends of the two halves of the wooden handle and sat loosley in the grooves in the handle. They were then sat in a jig with each ring supported on two rollers and another roller was lowered and as the handle was rotated, downward pressure was exerted and the rings were shrunk into position.
Finally, your 105 looks like a good user and is an example of John Fray's 1889 patent (395889) ratchet which went on long after the demise of his company.
Geoff.

Originally Posted by Boringgeoff

Hi Graham,

A very handy publication for Stanley information is Stanley Woodworking Tools by Walter Jacob published by The Early American Industries Association and I acknowledge this book as being the source of most of my information on John Fray.

Your no 105 is a medium quality brace and could have been pre or post Stanley but was discontinued by Stanley by 1927. After the takeover in 1909 Stanley wisely retained the Fray name on braces coming from the Fray works at Bridgeport,until the closure in 1927.
To quote directly from Mr Jacob's book "Top grade braces used cocobolo heads and handles while lower grade braces used ebonised or mahogany finished hard wood." I guess Mahogony or perhaps Jarrah stain would do the job.

Thanks for the information Geoff,

I saw reference to a Fray's No 26 catalogue but could not access it. Wondering if this would give additional information.

There seems to be some confusion when Stanley acquired Fray. I have seen dates of 1906, 1909 (confirming your advice and even 1914. The link below specifies 1906.

http://www.sydnassloot.com/Brace/Fray2.htm

Although the Fray in the my photo was my main interest, I was wondering if you had any comment on the German breast drill in the background.

Regards Graham

Hi Graham,

No sorry, don't know anything about the breast drill. Is that German embossed on the cover? You may find another brand on the chuck perhaps.
The link to Sandy Moss' site that you supplied is a very good source of information but he has made the odd error, 1906 being one of them, I'm going with Walter Jacob on that one he's been collecting and writing about Stanley tools for a long time. As with any research, cross referencing with other sources gradually builds up a picture. Catalogues are a very good resource, pity you couldn't get hold of that one you saw. I'm still looking for a pre Stanley Fray catalogue, if such an animal exists.

Thanks for your interest,
Geoff.

Originally Posted by Boringgeoff

Hi Graham,

No sorry, don't know anything about the breast drill. Is that German embossed on the cover? You may find another brand on the chuck perhaps.
The link to Sandy Moss' site that you supplied is a very good source of information but he has made the odd error, 1906 being one of them, I'm going with Walter Jacob on that one he's been collecting and writing about Stanley tools for a long time. As with any research, cross referencing with other sources gradually builds up a picture. Catalogues are a very good resource, pity you couldn't get hold of that one you saw. I'm still looking for a pre Stanley Fray catalogue, if such an animal exists.

Thanks for your interest,
Geoff.

Thanks Geoff,

Attached is the link I found to Fray's No 26 Catalogue, but I was unable to access the document. You may have better luck. Because it is Fray and not Stanley I assume it could predate the takeover.

http://www.librarything.com/work/9650296

Graham

Hi Graham,

I checked my library (a small shelf in the shed) and that is the Fray catalogue I've got.
The No 26 is a reprint by Antique Tools and Trades In Connecticut (ATTIC) of Fray's 1911 catalogue. ATTIC published the reprint in 1994. I think Stanley allowed Fray to run fairly autonomously from when they purchased them in 1909 until eventual closure in 1927.
I'm wondering if there are 25 earlier editions or did they just pluck no 26 out of the air?

Cheers,
Geoff.