OldTools Archive
Recent | Bios | FAQ |
256066 | kurt schmitz | 2015‑09‑01 | Russell-Jennings Bit Sets |
Dredging up just a small coin within the wealth of knowledge held within the OldTools Archive last night. From 1997... / / SNIP / / >1. What does "32 1/2 quarters mean?....does it have to do with the flute >pattern? Auger bits were sized in sixteenths, i.e. the number of 1/16 inches in the bit's diameter. Thus a 1/2 inch bit was a number 8 (8/16) and a 3/4 inch bit was a number 12 (12/16). If one had purchased a "roll" consisting of these two, the half and three-quarters inch auger bits, it would comprise two quarters for the 1/2 inch, and three quarters for the 3/4 inch, or a total of five quarters. Therefore add the numbers of the bits (8+12) and divide by 4. Your set would have had a group of bits whose size numbers would have summed to 130 (32.5 quarters X 4 = the total number of sixteenths). Your set would have been a #4-#16 (4+5+6+7+8+9+10+11+12+13+14+ 15+16= 130 = 32.5 quarters.). >2. Their are 14 compartments for the bits in the roll....I'm missing the #3 >or 3/16" NO you're NOT! It was never there! :-)) Best regards, Dan Weinstock Geneva, New York weindan@h... / / ENDSNIP / / Why care now, you might ask? My son went to a local auction over the weekend and brought home seven pristine R-J No. 100 bits and a R-J L-101E bit that is also pristine. Found reference to a "No. 17 1/2 Qtr" bit set, but alas, mine don't fit the description as the numbers are 15, 11, 8, 7, 5, 4, and 3. So either he didn't find them all at the auction, or the owner bought only what he needed. I'll never know. But because he found what he did, I learned the obscure "Part Number" nomenclature for brace bits from the early-to-mid 20th century. Thank you, OldTools and The Porch! VR, Kurt "Who is now deciding on the best approach to assembling a 'set' of No. 100s... *sigh* |
|||
256067 | Steve Reynolds <s.e.reynolds@v...> | 2015‑09‑01 | Re: Russell-Jennings Bit Sets |
On 09/01/15, kurt schmitz via OldTools wrote: [snip] Why care now, you might ask? My son went to a local auction over the weekend and brought home seven pristine R-J No. 100 bits and a R-J L-101E bit that is also pristine.[snip] Kurt "Who is now deciding on the best approach to assembling a 'set' of No. 100s... *sigh* |
|||
256068 | Tom Dugan <tom_dugan@h...> | 2015‑09‑01 | Re: Russell-Jennings Bit Sets |
Haarumph! BTW, I've got a couple of dozen #4 RJ100s for sale at some place at some time. Might be the PATINA 2016 tailgate, where I'll be undercutting Reynolds' prices. And to tell the truth, I don't even remember if I found that #4 RJ100 Made in England (the original to the set which I snapped, donchaknow.). Speaking of Price, where is he? -T > > On 09/01/15, kurt schmitz via OldTools wrote: > > [snip] > > Why care now, you might ask? My son went to a local auction over the weekend and brought home seven pristine R-J No. 100 bits and a R-J L-101E bit that is also pristine.[snip] > > Kurt > "Who is now deciding on the best approach to assembling a 'set' of No. 100s... *sigh* > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > You poor bastuhd. The last poor soul I saw dragging himself across the face of the Earth looking for a particular RJ bit to fill out a set was Tom Dugan. Just HAD to have the one with every tiny detail of the marking JUST SO. I must have bird-doged a thousand for him, only to have his rising ire explain it wasn't JUST SO. I know, it must puzzle you to think that there is a Galoot somewhere named Tom who is curmudgeonly, but it happens. > > Anyway, I pity you set collectors. It's like a self imposed rule to have only blondes, no redheads. Ales, no Porters. Spices, no herbs. > > Somewhat related, and I have no idea why it is so, but I no longer reach for my pristine tiered box of RJ bits. I tend to grab the denim roll of mixed bits. I will probably sell it at PATINA 2016. > > Oh yeah, I just remembered, I need to make a roll for that complete set of bitstock Forstner bits I got at the flea market earlier this year. Don't want to let those 16 bits that I paid $7 for to get rusty. > > Regards, > Steve, JUST SO you know, nothing serious is contained herein. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
|||
256070 | kurt schmitz | 2015‑09‑01 | Re: Russell-Jennings Bit Sets |
Oh, Steve. Not to worry, and no pity needed. As with so many shop items, bits of all kinds have appeared and indeed multiplied in my shop over the past several years. Blondes, brunettes, Guiness, Magic Hat, etc., if you will. Irwins, Diamond Edge, Belknap, Stanley, etc. etc. are each represented. So, getting additional No. 100s of 'just the right kind' will be a slow-burn activity, not a spring. No angst, or drama, but I'll promise to notify the list when I've reached any of the "Qtrs" levels! What I can't decide is why I have so many, when I need so few holes? VR, Kurt On Tuesday, September 1, 2015 3:34 PM, Steve Reynolds |
|||
256071 | Mark Pfeifer <markpfeifer@i...> | 2015‑09‑01 | Re: Russell-Jennings Bit Sets |
SNIP: auger bits How timely! Some weeks ago I picked up a roll of Mephisto BIG 1-3” auger bits on the bay. The roll they came in lists the size in normal sizes, then in 16th sizes, then says “for #[n] copper”. Question 1: What does “for #{n} copper” have to do with LARGE auger bits? Perhaps they are sized to correspond to OD of copper pipe? I know less about plumbing than I do old auger bits . . . I didn’t look at the pictures closely enough to realize that they’d been “sharpened” by some dimwit who had no idea how an auger bit works. Think Dremel tool at 10,000 rpm, chain saw stone. Fortunately he didn’t “sharpen” the outsides of the nipper teeth so they were savable. But they were also denuded of their lovely brace-friendly 4-sided shanks . . . . flattened in some cases to 6 roughly equal sides. In others you can see the Jack Daniels had taken hold of the dimwit, because they were irregular . . . some 5 sided, some “kinda sided” but still round. Last night I painstakingly sharpened them with my new and (free) Nicholson detail files (gloat) and I also squared off the shanks as best I could to 4 sided with my (also free) Simonds files (gloat2). I say “best I could” because some of them were really screwed up. Some shanks were so hosed up that getting them to 4 sided left them no longer on center to the threaded tip. Question 2: what do the assembled Galoots think will strip first, the alligator jaws in my Pexto brace, or the irregular but mostly now 4 sided shafts? The bits seem very soft to me, if the speed with which I could hand-file the shanks is any indication, so I’d expect that to round off before it had a chance to tear up jaws. The Pexto was a cheap pickup, but I like it a lot, and it’s the biggest brace (8” throw) I’ve been able to find without selling a child to the circus. Question 3: does anyone have experience with using a bit where the shank is not centered to the tip? These are BIG bits, 1”-3”, the threads on the tips are coarse, not fine, so I wouldn’t expect them to ever turn fast. I’m wondering more about the entry geometry and the ability to create a round hole. I can experiment on some light wood . . . . and can make up an old fashioned auger handle using an old 4-sided tap and die wrench . . . . but before I go to the trouble I thought I’d look to the Voice of Experience. Thanks in advance, MPf. |
|||
256072 | Kirk Eppler <eppler.kirk@g...> | 2015‑09‑01 | Re: Russell-Jennings Bit Sets |
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 12:13 PM, kurt schmitz via OldTools < oldtools@s...> wrote: > Kurt > "Who is now deciding on the best approach to assembling a 'set' of No. > 100s... *sigh* > I gave up on that a while ago, after keeping an eye out for a few years.. Gave the 7 of 8 set away to a friend who could use it. Then found the 8th three months later. Bought it and gave it to him. Set me back $0.50, from an antique store in Ohio. A few weeks later, I found the exact same bit, in slightly worse condition, for $5 at a SF Bay area Antique store. So the simple answer is, don't try. Ignore the little devils. The correct one will show up when you no longer care. -- Kirk Eppler in Half Moon Bay, CA, wondering what ever happened to our plans for setting up a web site to share orphan auger bits, to reunite the lost sheep with their brethren. |
|||
256073 | Dragon List <dragon01list@g...> | 2015‑09‑01 | Re: Russell-Jennings Bit Sets |
The good Dr. is riding his bike down Delaware's backroads, looking for rust in the fields, like lilies. Bill Felton, CA On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Tom Dugan |
|||
256074 | Ed Minch <ruby1638@a...> | 2015‑09‑01 | Re: Russell-Jennings Bit Sets |
On Sep 1, 2015, at 3:13 PM, kurt schmitz via OldTools |
|||
256075 | Champ Herren <champherren3@g...> | 2015‑09‑01 | Re: Russell-Jennings Bit Sets |
I liked many of you have searched and searched. I have decided that it would be easier to build the damn box that I want, with my bits than to hunt for it. I have even toyed with superimposing the Champion DeArment label. Why you may ask? Because its cool....says I Of course Kirk the minute its built; guess what I'll find....? Yes it will be cool too. TSGFH Champ |
|||
256076 | "Adam R. Maxwell" <amaxwell@m...> | 2015‑09‑02 | Re: Russell-Jennings Bit Sets |
> On Sep 1, 2015, at 13:34 , Steve Reynolds |
|||
256077 | David Nighswander <wishingstarfarm663@m...> | 2015‑09‑02 | Re: Russell-Jennings Bit Sets |
>From: Ed Minch >Hear, hear. Why do I have so many 18 and bigger bits when I have never used one? Why did I buy the complete set (including #3) of >Irwin “Bluwin” bits in near mint condition - dark blue with orange decals? Because they were the shiniest object I had seen for a while >and I believe that is what motivates most of us. The individual prices are so low that a whole set can creep into the tool kit one piece at a time with no more notice than a mosquito bite on a rhinoceros. Says Dave with a full 25” square by 6” deep drawer full of beam, barn, brace, and t handle auger bits. Waiting for the second coming of St. Roy? Dave N. aka Old Sneelock’s Workshop. |
|||
Recent | Bios | FAQ |