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*

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*

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.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 
wrote:
   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*

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.

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.

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  wrote:

> 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.
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> OldTools is a mailing list catering to the interests of hand tool
> aficionados, both collectors and users, to discuss the history, usage,
> value, location, availability, collectibility, and restoration of
> traditional handtools, especially woodworking tools.
>
> To change your subscription options:
> http://old
tools.swingleydev.com/mailman/listinfo/oldtools
>
> To read the FAQ:
> http://swingleydev.com/archi
ve/faq.html
>
> OldTools archive: http://swingleydev.com/ot/">http://swingleydev.com/ot/
>
> OldTools@s...
> http://old
tools.swingleydev.com/mailman/listinfo/oldtools
>

On Sep 1, 2015, at 3:13 PM, kurt schmitz via OldTools  wrote:

>  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.).

My head is going to explode!!  How can I have been using auger bits since 1969
and not know this?

> What I can't decide is why I have so many, when I need so few holes?
> VR,
> Kurt

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.


Ed Minch

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

> On Sep 1, 2015, at 13:34 , Steve Reynolds  wrote:
> 
> 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.

FWIW, I seldom reach for my RJ bits, either; those damn 
double-lead screws strip too easily, and I end up cleaning 
them out. Cheap Irwin-pattern bits are where it's at for 
users, since nobody wants them, IMNSHO. Or Cook's pattern,
but good luck finding a set of those :).

Not that I'm getting rid of my tiered box of RJs, let alone
my #3 RJs or that NOS spare set that I picked up for $20.

> 
> 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.

That is the best drive-by that I have seen on the porch in
years. 10/10, would say 'you suck' again.

Adam
Port Angeles, WA

>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.