Drawing,Taxi Numbers and Piecemarks on Tools

[Silly's MB]

I briefly mentioned this before but I didn't put any pictures up.
I recently picked up a Wrench made by TAC in Amco USA. Alloy Artefacts doesn't have much to say about them .
"Tubing Appliance Corporation (T.A.C.)

In the mid 1950s Plomb Tool acquired the Tubing Appliance Corporation (T.A.C.), a maker of speciality tools for refrigeration and hydraulic line service."

For me this size wrench has been harder to find, it is the 13/16" X 7/8" 41-W-605. The drawing number is cast onto the back of it. TKHX 4F.

TAC.jpg (83.91 KiB) Viewed 5551 times

Tac Amco wrench.jpg (81.2 KiB) Viewed 5551 times

I know Luca has a Fairmount 27C with the Drawing number stamped on.

Has anybody else got pictures of tools with drawing numbers on them ?

Edited to correct my bad memory !

[lucakiki]

I know Luca has a screwdriver with the Drawing stamped on.

Has anybody else got pictures of tools with drawing numbers on them ?

Actually, it was an open end 27C Fairmount, not a screwdriver. At least, not that I remember.

[Silly's MB]

Thanks Luca, I have edited to correct.

Roger

[lucakiki]

Roger, I cannot tell if this is the actual wrench I owned or if it is just one I have in my files. Difficult to keep track of so many tools I compulsively purchased!
Anyway, it is an example of Fairmount with ORDNANCE DRAWING NUMBER.

I have seen in the past a couple of repacked wrenches where the number was not neatly stamped but rather crudely etched.Whatever the reason.

[Wingnutt]

Roger,

The forged-in "TAC" mark on your wrench is not an acronym for Tubing Appliance Company, but Tank-Automotive Center, which was located in Detroit, Michigan during the war. The TAC was established in September of 1942 when the ORD took over for QMC. This is also when the ORD gained responsibility for the supply of all of the tools for those vehicles as well.

TAC ES followed by a number is an Ordnance engineering specification number. The ORD adopted these from the QMC. These numbers can be seen in many WW2 documents, including many of the Willys drawings. (Note: there is alot of misinformation on various WW2 vehicle related forums, to include right here on the G, usually in the middle of some paint debate, that "ES" has only to do with finishes. I have seen this myth go so far as to assume that it stands for "enamel, synthetic". This is false.)

I would wager that TAC ES No 702A was the specification for a 13/16 x 7/8 DBE 12-point wrench, which was 41-W-605 in the Federal Standard Stock Catalog.

Yours was made by AMCO, in Erie, Pennsylvania. I never heard of them. That acronym was used by American Metal and Tool Company, which manufactured machines and tools for Craftsman, but they were on the other side of the state. Perhaps they had a plant in Erie?

[Silly's MB]

Thanks for pointing that out Wingnutt, it makes very interesting reading.

I shall do some more reading and see what else I can find out.

I suppose that means it is the definitive design for the 41-W-605 but I still don't know when it was made.

[Robin]

I have this un-named 731A that has the drawing number. It looks very much like a Fairmount.

[Wingnutt]

Roger,

I am of the firm opinion that all tools with an Ordnance "taxi" number (different than more typical Ordnance drawing numbers prefixed by A, B, C, D, or E) - such as your forged-in "TKHX4F" DBE wrench - should be safely considered wartime. More precisely, I believe these tools had to have been manufactured and marked that way sometime between September 1942 (when the ORD took over all motor transport supply operations, including tools, from QMC) and June 1944 (when the ORD established the Official Stock Number system and abolished ALL other preceding systems). Spreading the word on the new system and publishing the necessary cross-reference lists (ORD 15, ORD 5) took time, so I am sure some of the tools could be late 1944 or even early 1945, but I don't think it's logical to date tools with "taxi" numbers to 1946. Is it possible that some maufacturers continued using an obsolete numbering system after the war and the ORD continued to buy them anyway? I suppose. But I think the burden of proof to the contrary in those cases should fall on those who would deny them.

As my back up, consider these quotes from the “United States Army in World War II Series, The Technical Services, The Ordnance Department: Procurement and Supply" (Harry C. Thomson and Lida Mayo of the Center of Military History, U.S. Army, Washington D.C., 1959), which I call "the ORD book" for short.

"A further means of identification was the "piece mark," or drawing number. The great bulk of artillery and small arms items, and some combat vehicle materiel, bore the numbers that appeared on their engineering drawings. These were usually nonsignificant numbers prefixed bv "A," "B," "C," "D," or "E.". The letters indicated drawing sizes, "A" the smallest, "E" the largest; the numbers assigned for each size began with 1 and continued serially. But if an article was of a common kind called "standard," like automotive parts, hardware, or tools, it would be marked with a number prefixed by four letters, the last of which was always "X." These were known as "taxi" numbers after the first number of this type, TAAX1. Standards that were common to other government agencies might also carry a Federal Standard Stock Catalog number assigned by the Treasury Department: for example, 42-C-4625 was the number for a certain kind of gasoline can."

"Four types of numbers—Ordnance drawing, Ordnance standard parts (“taxi” system), Federal Standard Stock Catalog, and manufacturer's — were primarily for procurement purposes."

"Early in 1943 a breakdown in the effort to convert manufacturers' numbers to the Ordnance taxi system resulted in the formation at Detroit of a committee to study the whole numbers problem."

"The implementation of the new numbers program took time. Concurrently with the interchangeability project, designers both in Ordnance and industry had to be given blocks of the new official part numbers to apply to new parts. New drafting-room regulations had to be developed. The cross referencing job (except for Federal Stock Catalog numbers, which were handled in Washington); the assignment of numbers; the screening of parts; ... [ ] ... But it was woefully short of personnel. Strenuous efforts...resulted in the employment by contract of a commercial firm...made possible a round-the-clock operation from October 1943 to May 1944...In June 1944 the Cross Reference List of Ordnance Part and Stock Numbers, known as ORD 15, appeared in two parts of ten volumes each...Revisions in the spring of 1945 increased the total of the numbers listed from 600,000 to 750,000... The realization that a similar cross reference list was needed for tools and tool equipment resulted in the publication of ORD-5, Stock List of Items, and ORD 5-1, numerical Index of Manufacturer's Part Numbers and Drawing Numbers."

[Fred Coldwell]

I know Luca has a screwdriver with the Drawing stamped on. Has anybody else got pictures of tools with drawing numbers on them ?

Actually, it was an open end 27C Fairmount, not a screwdriver. At least, not that I remember.

Hi Silly's MB:

You may have been thinking of my Phillips No. 2 bit screwdriver purchased 9 months ago in December, 2012. As you may now recall, the Vlchek screwdriver had "taxi" number "ORD TGAX3B" stamped into its shank along with U.S. Patent No. 2507231. But that patent number was not issued until May 9, 1950, so the Phillips screwdriver could not have been manufactured until after that date, sometime in the early 1950s. Here is that thread:

viewtopic.php?f=48&t=214658&p=1258233#p1258233

Nine months ago Wingnutt seemingly had a slightly different view of things, a " . . . general philosophy that consistent, institutionalized part or stock number stamping was probably a post-war or at best a late war thing, exceptions and anomalies notwithstanding, which your little No. 2 bit was temporarily, unwittingly threatening to undermine! And, post-war or not, it's a very nice Vlchek. "

Perhaps the distinguishing difference between the "taxi" stamping on my 1950's Vlchek Phillips screwdriver and the genuine WW II era "taxi" stampings is that mine has an "ORD" prefix before the 6 character "taxi" number, as opposed to a plain six character "taxi" number found on a few WW II era tools. Wingnutt, would you care to expand on this possible distinction? Thanks.

[Wingnutt]

No seemingly-ness about it, Fred; I have definitely changed my mind, and I credit it all to reading "the ORD book," an invaluable discovery.

Two fatal flaws in my thinking on this prior were (1), generalizing part numbers (a rose is not a rose is not a rose), and (2), generalizing the practice of stamping or forging-in part numbers (it has to be looked at on a case by case basis). It now seems incontrovertible to me that Ordnance part numbers - both "taxi" type numbers and piecemark or drawing type numbers (e.g., D66675) were being marked on parts, including tools, during the war. How institutionalized and consistent it was remains questionable. Your Vlchek screwdriver is a good example of what I meant by other evidence (patent number) proving that there may be exceptions to the contrary. Barring anything like that for Roger's DBE, however, I have to consider it wartime.

[lucakiki]

A side note, of no importance most likely: "taxi" numbers or other information like a gov. stockage number when forged in rather than stamped (like in the Fairmount I posted) denote in my opinion a stronger connection with military contracts, as if manufactured on purpose rather than picked up from regular production.

Your thoughts?

[Silly's MB]

Thanks Robin for posting that pic of your wrench. Its nice to see another wrench with the number forged in. You would think that there must be a lot of them around somewhere.

You may have been thinking of my Phillips No. 2 bit screwdriver purchased 9 months ago in December, 2012

I think you are right Fred. I knew I had read about it somewhere.

Thanks Wingnutt for providing some more information which helps with the dating of it. I am really just interested to know as it was found with the first set of tools in this thread viewtopic.php?f=48&t=224023.

A side note, of no importance most likely: "taxi" numbers or other information like a gov. stockage number when forged in rather than stamped (like in the Fairmount I posted) denote in my opinion a stronger connection with military contracts, as if manufactured on purpose rather than picked up from regular production.

Your thoughts?

I think you are right Luca. This wrench fits the spec of a 41-W-605 better than the others I have as it is the closest to the length in the December 1943 TM10-475 at 11 3/4". (Barcalo Buffalo 13 1/4" and Vlchek WBH2628 13 3/8") . It feels like a substantial wrench feeling beefier than the others. Unfotunately it has no discernible markings as to what material was used to make it.

Somebody else must have some more pictures of cast in Ordanance Drawing "Taxi" numbers ?

[Wingnutt]

Somebody else must have some more pictures of cast in Ordanance Drawing "Taxi" numbers ?

Here are some pictures of an Armstrong HI-TENSILE 1728 (3/4 x 9/16) DOE wrench. While this wrench doesn't have a G503, G506 or GMTS application that I know of, there is no doubt that it is wartime. HI-TENSILE was the name Armstrong gave to its carbon-manganese line of wrenches during the war, when other elements (including chromium) were restricted. (All manufacturers adhered to the policy, most used no special composition markings, although Herbrand marked theirs with the AISI number (1340)). And, as you can see, this wrench was also marked with the Ordnance "taxi" number: TKKX2E. This wrench is in my collection, but there are other examples of HI-TENSILE taxi number marked wrenches in the Alloy Artifacts collection.

[Chuck Lutz]

I would have to ask a question about those Drawing Numbers.....

We know there is a QM Drawing #585 dated 4-23-34 referenced on the Ford Wrench drawing dated 12-10-40.

Would it then be wrong to suppose that a Drawing Number was assigned to each wrench in 1934?

I ask that because of the pictures posted of the bigger clunky wrenches we associate with the pre-war era and I don't see any markings on them that indicate they are an alloy steel as opposed to the earlier carbon steel types.

I believe the repacks also yielded some of the WWII wrenches.....the sleeker, less clunky types with an alloy steel composition....that had the drawing number SCRATCHED into the jaw face. This would indicate to me that:
a) there was no requirement to put the drawing number on WWII-production wrenches
b) there was a usage of the drawing numbers to inventory wrenches BEFORE the WWII-production wrenches were obtained.
c) the supply room needed to have not only the WO number or the Ford number but another number to list a wrench by in case a guy needed one for a Dodge for instance.

[Wingnutt]

there was no requirement to put the drawing number on WWII-production wrenches

I disagree. According to "UNITED STATES ARMY IN WORLD WAR II, The Technical Services, THE ORDNANCE DEPARTMENT: PROCUREMENT AND SUPPLY," there was. This is a government document published by the Center of Military History, U.S. Army, Washington, D.C., in 1959. As in the finish discussion, I think you are drawing conclusions from inferences where no inference is necessary. In the case of painted wrenches, your unnecessary inference happens to agree with the bonafide reference (1942 Federal Standard Stock Catalog specifications). In this case, it does not.

In case you missed it the first time:

"A further means of identification was the "piece mark," or drawing number. The great bulk of artillery and small arms items, and some combat vehicle materiel, bore the numbers that appeared on their engineering drawings. These were usually nonsignificant numbers prefixed bv "A," "B," "C," "D," or "E.". The letters indicated drawing sizes, "A" the smallest, "E" the largest; the numbers assigned for each size began with 1 and continued serially. But if an article was of a common kind called "standard," like automotive parts, hardware, or tools, it would be marked with a number prefixed by four letters, the last of which was always "X." These were known as "taxi" numbers after the first number of this type, TAAX1."

I'm not sure how or why anyone could or would argue with that, especially when we have specimens that back it up. This doesn't mean that every part or tool with an Ordnance piece mark (drawing) or "taxi" number is wartime. But it does flatly and frankly refute the idea that all parts and tools that have these numbers are somehow relegated to post-war. (By the way, the quote goes on to include Federal Standard Stock Catalog numbers.)

the supply room needed to have not only the WO number or the Ford number but another number to list a wrench by in case a guy needed one for a Dodge for instance.

It's been discussed in several threads, and now very well-established by the document I referenced above, that the Ordnance Department was using piece mark (or drawing) numbers, "taxi" numbers, Federal Standard Stock Catalog numbers, and manufacturers' numbers for supply and re-supply. It's what caused the effort during the war to establish a single common universal stock number (Ordnance Department's Official Stock Number) near the end of the war, and which eventually led to the truly universal federal stock numbering system in the early 1950's. I don't see how this has anything to do with the idea that stock numbers weren;t being put on wrenches during wartime.