Unusual Lectrolite 12 in. Adjustable’

[mikeswrenches]

I’ve had this wrench for quite awhile and finally got around to cleaning it. I had noticed the three rivets(?) in the head but hadn’t investigated them much until now. It appears that this was a method of construction that had a patent pending. If you look closely at the pictures you can see the seam where the pieces come together.

I’m not sure I understand the thinking behind this method of construction, as it doesn’t look like it would save any labor or material. Maybe one of you guys has the patent, which would then explain what this "better idea" was all about.

Mike

[Bill Houghton]

I can't help with the patent issues nor with why they thought it would be better.

But I can sure imagine it coming apart at the most inopportune moment.

[gibsontool]

Unusual for sure.Seems strange that you can only see the rivets from one side. Like Bill said I can't see any reason for why is was built like that.

[lptools]

Hello, Mike. Nice wrench, not one that you see very often,  first one I have seen. I think a lot of these obscure wrenches/patents were put together way back when to give us food for thought today. Regards, Lou

[Northwoods]

Ease of manufacture.
Was forged, rather than milled.

[p_toad]

so, basically it looks like they forged two pieces, one with the "pins" and one with the holes and then used the pins as peened over rivets?   Strange critter.   Maybe that's why it's the only one in existence?  just joking.   

[coolford]

Well, there are at least two, as I have one in my crescent type collectionl.

[lptools]

Hello, coolford. I am shocked!! (that you only have one)

[mikeswrenches]

I took a couple more pictures, but I’m not sure they help much. I also cleaned out the inside to see if there is a "parting" line there that I couldn’t see on the outside. I did find it but it didn’t come through on the face. Probably due to age and rust and other crud.
I also found what looks like another rivet, by the arrow. As you can see, this one is a little bit below the surface.
The third picture shows a small gap that appears to be where the two pieces come together and I can see it on the inside, but nothing on the outside.

Collford, maybe you could post pictures of yours and see if it makes more sense than mine. Also, does it say "patent pending" or does yours have a number or a date?

Mike

[Northwoods]

So, would the rivet in picture 4 run through the parting line in picture 3? 
The more I see, the more confused I get.  I can sure see why they made the "rivets" visible on the back side.

[Lewill2]

Is the parting line for the jaw off to the side so the jaw face is one piece?

[mikeswrenches]

Is the parting line for the jaw off to the side so the jaw face is one piece?

Les, I think so. What it seems that it should be, is a plate that covers the whole of the face, including part of the jaw.
This would let you machine the channel for the moving jaw easily.
 What bothers me is that you can’t see where the separation would be on the outside of the jaw. I thought maybe the second set of pictures might be of some help, but now I’m not so sure.

As northwoods said, "I’m confused". I’m confused too and I can go look at it.  Maybe Stan will chime in and set us straight.

Mike

[coolford]

Mike---well, here is my wrench and it has confused me for years.  To me it makes no sense to make a wrench this way.  In the first picture I have outlined the fourth rivet in black in the lower left.  It is flush in mine, but fairly easily seen.  My wrench is also patent pending.  In the second picture I have marked in black where the joint is just in back of the jaw, thus the jaw is complete and not part of the attached part.  In the last picture the joint line runs up to the opening and then slightly to the right to join up with the line I marked in the second picture.  It appears that there was some light pining on the top to close the joint where it leaves the opening to go along the top (or just closed by the hammering).  My wrench has been used as a hammer and thus has survived in spite of the way it is made.

[mvwcnews]

{ snip }.  Maybe Stan will chime in and set us straight.

Mike

Stan has no clue, but a question -- Is there any indication the assembly could have included solder as part of the bonding process? If the joints were close enough fit, that might explain "hard to detect parting line."

[mikeswrenches]

Stan, I guess the solder would be possible, but I’m inclined to agree with coolford that years of use as a hammer and neglect and rust have filled in the parting line on the front.

I guess this is one of those "better ideas" that wasn’t.
 I would think it would have been hard to sell the mechanics of the time that buying a wrench that looked like it had been repaired was a smart way to spend their hard earned dollars.
In addition, the edge of the handle  where your hand goes is poorly finished. Lots of forging flash, at least on mine. I’m surprised it was never ground off. If not at the factory then at least by the guy that had to use it. 

Mike