Stanley No 965N -10IN - Printable Version

Stanley No 965N -10IN - Printable Version

+- Woodnet Forums (https://forums.woodnet.net)
+-- Thread: Stanley No 965N -10IN (/showthread.php?tid=7228835)

Stanley No 965N -10IN - dow - 02-25-2016

I picked this brace up a couple of weeks back, and just got around to cleaning it up to see what I ended up with. It seems to be in pretty good shape. Ratchet works in both directions, Some surface rust and a few paint drops to clean off. The ratchet switch (I'm sure there's a better term for that) has some slop in it when between the two ratchet settings, but stays where you put it. The knobs seem sound as well. Jaws had some rust on them, but they don't look to have any real wear on them. Should they have a spring on them?

Can anybody tell me any more about this brace?

Also, what's the best way to go about cleaning this up and making it look its best?

Re: Stanley No 965N -10IN - Admiral - 02-25-2016

Dow: go to Issac's Blackburn Tools link:

http://blackburntools.com/articles/rose-tools-catalog-archives/index.html

and open the Stanley 1958 Catalog, go to page 67, and there's your brace. I don't think it had a spring in the jaws, it was their economy model, but will work just fine.

Start boring!

Re: Stanley No 965N -10IN - dow - 02-25-2016

Thanks Rich!

Here's the direct link to the catalog in case anybody's feeling lazy: http://blackburntools.com/articles/rose-tools-catalog-archives/pdfs/stanley-1958-no-34.pdf

You're right, my jaws didn't come with a spring. Thankfully, though, if you'll look on page 64, you'll see that I can get a pair of Type I spring jaws for $0.90.

What?!?!? What do you mean those prices aren't good anymore?

Re: Stanley No 965N -10IN - rwe2156 - 02-25-2016

I would think there should be a spring.

Also, those jaws look pretty worn.

I would chuck up a bit and give it a go if there's a lot of slop you need a set of jaws.

Re: Stanley No 965N -10IN - dow - 02-25-2016

You may be right, they may be worn. This is my first go round with a bit and brace since I was in cub scouts (I think... That would have been around 1971 or so), but they seemed to work pretty good last night when I bored a test hole. The 965 and 965N didn't have the spring jaws. Like Rich said, it was their economy model.

I'll try for a better picture once I get them cleaned up a little better.

The bad thing about these old catalogs is that now I want a "better" brace, lol.

Re: Stanley No 965N -10IN - Bibliophile 13 - 02-25-2016

Yes, there should be a spring. It's absence is an inconvenience, and you can use it without the spring.

Doesn't look like it needs much cleaning. A bit of WD-40 (or whatever is your favorite rust-cleaner) on the rusty spots, followed by some steel wool, should get you right back in business.

Re: Stanley No 965N -10IN - GNP - 02-25-2016

Put me in the camp, that doesn't think it had a spring.