Help required to ID this brace.

[Boringgeoff]

I recently purchased this brace from a friend and I'm trying to find out a bit more about it. It's made of bronze, has a 4 1/2 inch sweep and is what I think was called an Armourers brace. I also think it's British.
It's branded on the side of the chuck, OSLER 1918 with a broad arrow and on the other side the Roman numeral IV.
Any help would be most appreciated.
Cheers,
Geoff

 

[lurker]

The arrow in the first photo suggests it was made for the war dept so your description of amourors brace seems reasonable.

Nice if its bronze. I suppose to be spark free if you dropped it ?

 

[Cheshirechappie]

'Fraid I can't offer anything on the maker, but I can offer a bit of background information about 'non-sparking tools' which are still made. They are for use in certain areas of the oil, gas, paint and explosives industries, and are made from a material called 'beryllium bronze', being 2 - 2.5% beryllium, 0.5% cobalt and the balance copper. This needs heat treatment to attain full hardness and toughness, but it's good enough to make hammers, chisels and hacksaw blades. Performance doesn't quite match their toolsteel equivalents, but it's better than going bang in a big way!

About twenty-five years ago, I called into my local engineer's merchants to buy some fox wedges (small wedges used in heavy engineering for wedging machine parts apart and such duties). All they could offer was spark-free ones (we're not too far from Stanlow oil refinery and several related chemical plants). I declined because they cost a King's ransom!

 

[bugbear]

I can't ID it, but I can offer an observation; the OSLER was made with single letter stamps.

If it was a multi-part "logo" stamp you couldn't double-stamp just the 'R'.

Whoever stamped the name and date was d*mned good though - the spacing is lovely.

The combination of bronze, high skill, and unusual tool would normally speak of patternmakers'
tools, but for a small brace I'm not so sure.

EDIT; between 1900 and 1950 in England there were 402 children born with the family name OSLER.

For comparison (being a Prog Rock fan), there were 1747 with the family name Wakeman, so OSLER
is a name, but not a common one.

BugBear (thinking aloud)

 

[Boringgeoff]

Thanks chaps, I suspect the IV is an indication of the sweep although it actually measures 4 1/2 inches. It's not uncommon to find a brace with the sweep displayed on the tool to not be exactly correct.
Bugbear if the OSLER is by individual letter stamps would that suggest an owner rather than maker stamp?
Cheers,
Geoff.

 

[bugbear]

Thanks chaps, I suspect the IV is an indication of the sweep although it actually measures 4 1/2 inches. It's not uncommon to find a brace with the sweep displayed on the tool to not be exactly correct.
Bugbear if the OSLER is by individual letter stamps would that suggest an owner rather than maker stamp?
Cheers,
Geoff.

I suspect a skilled individual made it for his or her own use.

BugBear

 

[swb58]

Thanks chaps, I suspect the IV is an indication of the sweep although it actually measures 4 1/2 inches. It's not uncommon to find a brace with the sweep displayed on the tool to not be exactly correct.
Bugbear if the OSLER is by individual letter stamps would that suggest an owner rather than maker stamp?
Cheers,
Geoff.

I suspect a skilled individual made it for his or her own use.

BugBear

Sorry, can't agree with you on that point BB. The name, arrow and date certainly look as though they were stamped at the same time by the maker (although each digit is stamped individually as you say), which I think would be expected in a tool destined for a government contract.

There's no reason why any maker would add that sort of detail just for the hell of it. Doing so without the correct authority would be more than slightly wrong.

 

[toolsntat]

I would say production name stamp as there is also shadow stamping to the E and 8 by the same amount of offset :idea:

I vaguely recollect seeing this pattern of Beryllium brace before ?

Cheers
Andy

 

[Boringgeoff]

You've got good eyesight Andy, I had another look at it today and could see the shadow of the E and decided it might be a one piece stamp. Thanks for all the input everyone.
Cheers,
Geoff.

 

[bugbear]

You've got good eyesight Andy, I had another look at it today and could see the shadow of the E and decided it might be a one piece stamp. Thanks for all the input everyone.
Cheers,
Geoff.

Can you take a hi-res macro photograph of the stamp?

post795656.html?hilit=axial%20lighting#p795656

BugBear

 

[Boringgeoff]

Some more photos including two of the head and attachment method.
Apart from Aus' NZ and UK what other nations used the broad arrow to denote government property? Other commonwealth countries perhaps, or would it be easier to ask who did not use that sign?

Cheers,
Geoff.

 

[memzey]

Sorry to jump on to someone else's thread like this but can anyone help me identify this old brace please? The only identifying marks are the words "Warranted" in a couple of places and the initials "C K":

 

[JohnPW]

C.K Tools?
http://www.carlkammerling.com/products/ck_tools/
http://www.ck-tools.com/

 

[memzey]

Wow that was easy! Cheers John. I need to see if it has "Foreign" stamped on it anywhere but I don't think it does. I wonder how old it is?

 

[Boringgeoff]

Memzey, did you find "foreign" on the brace anywhere? I haven't got any CK braces or enough Germans to do a study but some of the ones I've got do have "foreign" on them. According to CK's site it couldn't be any earlier than 1904 but it seems to have a 30's look about it to me.
A brace by Eduard Engels & Co, a German maker, advertised in an Australian hardware merchant, McPhersons, 1935 and 1937 catalogues, is not marked "foreign" or even Germany for that matter.

In regard to my little bronze brace I have been advised that beryllium copper was not developed until after WW1 so that counts that out I'd say.
Cheers,
Geoff.