Dating the Stanley #62

[HomerLee]

I picked up a Stanley #62 last week and am very curious about the date these planes were made. Patrick Leach in his "Blood & Gore" lists the manufacturing date as 1905 - 1942. When I cleaned the eccentric lever, which according to Leach is unique to this model, I found clearly stamped into it "PAT 2-20-94" which would indicate Stanley had patented this part some eleven years before they began making the #62. Anyone know anything about this?

[Joe Bailey]

I picked up a Stanley #62 last week and am very curious about the date these planes were made. Patrick Leach in his "Blood & Gore" lists the manufacturing date as 1905 - 1942. When I cleaned the eccentric lever, which according to Leach is unique to this model, I found clearly stamped into it "PAT 2-20-94" which would indicate Stanley had patented this part some eleven years before they began making the #62. Anyone know anything about this?

The design of the eccentric lever, for which the patent was procured, was used earlier on block planes which pre-date the No 62
The patent is HERE

[jppierson]

While the brain trust is being queried, I also picked up a 62 last weekend. Mine is one of the 8 out of 10 with a chipped sole at the back of the mouth. I haven't tried it out yet, but how big a deal is this? I'm in the process of repair a badly broken tote. Patrick states that 1 of 8 has a repaired sole. It seems to me this would be a difficult repair given the thinness of the mouth. What would be the best type of repair? Sorry for the highjack.

[Laid-Back]

While the brain trust is being queried, I also picked up a 62 last weekend.  Mine is one of the 8 out of 10 with a chipped sole at the back of the mouth.  I haven't tried it out yet, but how big a deal is this? I'm in the process of repair a badly broken tote.   Patrick states that 1 of 8 has a repaired sole.  It seems to me this would be a difficult repair given the thinness of the mouth.  What would be the best type of repair?  Sorry for the highjack.

I've got  one with a chip in the same area close to 3/16 wide missing and I can't tell that it makes any difference in use.

I did spend a few minutes flattening as it did leave a small bur when chipped

[HomerLee]

The design of the eccentric lever, for which the patent was procured, was used earlier on block planes which pre-date the No 62

The patent is HERE

Thanks for your reply, Joe!

This opens up another question regarding how patents work. The eccentric lever looks nothing like the eccentric lever in the drawings for the patent. Perhaps the patent covered the idea of using an eccentric lever to adjust the mouth and not the particular shape of the lever? If that is the case then I can see how the original patent would have applied to the lever used on the 62. Or perhaps Stanley just took the liberty of claiming it did.

[Arlin Eastman]

I picked up a Stanley #62 last week and am very curious about the date these planes were made. Patrick Leach in his "Blood & Gore" lists the manufacturing date as 1905 - 1942. When I cleaned the eccentric lever, which according to Leach is unique to this model, I found clearly stamped into it "PAT 2-20-94" which would indicate Stanley had patented this part some eleven years before they began making the #62. Anyone know anything about this?

Homer

It seems your DATE maybe older then you.  Is she in good shape and can you live with her forever.

Sorry I could not help the humor of it.

[tshiker]

The chip on the back of the mouth won't hurt anything but the price. They chipped because it tapers down to a very thin wedge and if the blade is not set correctly will catch on the edge of the work piece. Like stated above, make sure it doesn't scratch the wood. I have one that's a shelf queen that's almost perfect sans tote which is unique to this plane, and a newly released Stanley that's twice the weight of the original.

[Admiral]

My normal advice is dinner and a movie, then see how the conversation goes from there.......

[hbmcc]

Homer

It seems your DATE maybe older then you.  Is she in good shape and can you live with her forever.

Sorry I could not help the humor of it.

You stole the remark from me. I knew I couldn't slide in this late. 

[Bill_Houghton]

This opens up another question regarding how patents work. The eccentric lever looks nothing like the eccentric lever in the drawings for the patent. Perhaps the patent covered the idea of using an eccentric lever to adjust the mouth and not the particular shape of the lever? If that is the case then I can see how the original patent would have applied to the lever used on the 62. Or perhaps Stanley just took the liberty of claiming it did.

Leaving aside plant patents, the common patent types are utility - how it works - and design - more or less, how it looks.  The patent in question was probably a utility patent, on the idea of the eccentric lever to adjust the mouth.  The shape could presumably be any shape.

Contrast this, for instance, to Lee Valley's set screw that limits the travel of the mouth to prevent the movable shoe from hitting the cutting iron - completely different engineering solution to making an adjustable mouth.