bruce johnson

Following up - I got two of these in yesterday. Here are my thoughts. They are pretty solid and I didn't have the issue with loose pivot bolts as mentioned previously. As-is blades were as expected - not quite sharp enough like most utility blades. A bit of time on a few different buffing wheel/compound combinations and they performed much better but...(read below). The adjustments were pretty straight forward. You set the thickness you'd like with the two independent set screws, Push the handle forward, insert the leather, and pull. Simple enough. As I mentioned above I like my splitters so the edge of the blade is at the top dead center of the roller or just a minute touch behind it. Too far in front and the leather rolls under the blade edge. Too far behind and the leather tends to right up the blade chop off. This is true of several types of splitters. There is some forward and back leeway with the blade to position it for different thickness setting. I got pretty good hold down ability of the splitter to hold blade position even with the blade extending pretty far forward. (as an aside, I got a regular utility knife blade to work also) Issues - 1. You can put a really fine edge on the snap off utility blade. Out of the box I thought the snap off blades were OK for narrower work, but on a belt width they drug a bunch. Buffed up and they did one belt, then the edge curled halfway through the second. The bimetal regular utility knife blades hold an edge much longer and are more durable, but narrower. The snapoff blades were good for several 1/2 inch and 3/4 straps. as were the regular utility blades 2. Even through the springs are pretty strong I had a problem or two crop up. On thicker firm veg tan I tried to push forward, put the leather in, let go and pull. A couple straps split unevenly because the spring allowed the roller to push away from the set position. A few the roller never pulled back under the leather and it just skidded through. I pulled up on the handle while I pulled a few more straps from that leather and it worked. Not ideal but sort of workable. Upside - these are inexpensive and relatively well made. My takeaway - These are going to eat up some blades so there is that future cost. These are actually pretty good for narrow straps (3/4 and under), latigo ties and saddle strings - no issues. A couple people have reported them to work well for leveling rawhide lace for braiding. Belts - these would not be my first, second, or third pick even if I was doing one every so often. I've got some $150 Amazon versions that are better in my hands than these and worth the difference. Even those still aren't a good Osborne but fit a price and performance point better for meatier work.

The price is right with these but they do have some issues in use. . I've got one coming in on a trade so Ill have one in my hands to try in a week or so. Pretty much the experience of a few guys who bought them was universal. With most splitters you want the edge of the blade to be top center of the roller or a hair behind. With this design the roller-blade edge relationship changes with the thickness. It can make for some uneven splits especially the thicker you go. The 3 person consensus was "OK/surprisingly - pretty good/worth it" for splitting lace and saddle strings. For belts from skirting or heavier leather - two thumbs down, one "it was OK for a couple belts but wouldn't want to do a bunch, please send me the next Osborne #86 you have ready".

The newer Osborne creasers bear no resemblance to the vintage originals. They went to a once size fits all head, grind out a groove that may or may not be consistently sized from one to the next, may or may not be in line with the shaft, leave the creasing edge sharp or with a bur. Creasers are not the only tools they have decided to change up.

The last quote I got for making a new adjusting handle by a machinist was $225. There are lots of considerations with the part and different setups to make the individual cuts and shaping.

If it is a round shank typical makers stamp I just use a maul. Mine have held well for several hundred strikes

I got one in a recent set. Not sure how the leverage factor is so I don't know how big a logo you could press in. It would not press a 3/16 machinist number punch into delrin, and realistically it doesn't take make of a hammer hit for that. It punched round holes OK and that is what I sold it for. Strap end and slot punches you'd have to turn down the shanks on most to fit the chuck. I think you crank on it too much and the vertical tube the head rides in looks to be the weak design link in my eyes.

All of these versions are pretty underpowered especially at low speeds, but if you have a price point and aren't doing all day battle they work OK.

Bob and Lee have sure helped me out a lot from the early days of my leatherwork up to trading tools. I've missed seeing them at the shows, hopefully at Sheridan this year.

This is an alternative from Weaver if they still sell it. . I've had three or four of the 4 ton Wonders through here, but this is what I kept and we use. The previous owner replaced the 12 ton hydraulic jack with an air over hydraulic jack. Doesn't take much air to run it. Ms Rundi gets a rhythm going and can click out stuff about as fast as the lever handle 4 ton with less effort.

To answer your last question, for storing and transporting inventory at shows. It has been a work in progress for me. I am usually packing 1000+ leather tools to a show, not counting stamps. I've got weight and volume. Started off with totes and lids, packed a dolly or relied on hotel luggage carts when we got there. That was OK, but I was always the last guy out of the show making a bunch of trips in and out. . Two years ago I got three Husky tool totes on wheels At Home Depot for the Prescott show. I still used the regular totes for the overflow. Before the Pendleton show last November I got one more and still had maybe 6 big regular totes for the lighter stuff. My son helped me at Pendleton and on the way home asked why I didn't have two more wheelies and ditch those totes. Sage advice. These totes hold a lot, telescoping handles to push them, sturdy enough to stand on or use as a seat, and are weatherproof. Here is a link - https://www.homedepot.com/p/Husky-37-in-Rolling-Tool-Box-Utility-Cart-Black-209261/203668066

i have had a few with that design. It is simple design but not very common. Normally the height is adjusted with a vertical thumbscrew. On yours the wing nut is loosened so the bolt/ roller can go up and down in that slot for different leather thicknesses. Also there is a slotted head on the end of the bolt so you can grip that end with a screwdriver while you tighten or loosen the wing nut.. The bolts are are machined down at the thread end of the bolt so the shoulder of the bolt binds on the fence, not the roller. The brass rollers are usually thinner walled than this. If I was to fix it here is what I'd do. Cut that broken wing nut off and have a machinist make you up a new long shouldered bolt, get some brass tube that will rotate on the shaft of the bolt. Add a washer and wing nut and you are in business. I have found working on these old tools it is generally faster, easier, and cheaper to make or get new parts made than to try to cobble up the last guy's screw up.

I had a person leave a message off the group about pushing a punch by hand. Here is a clip I shot a few years ago of one in process and not fully stropped yet. One hand on the phone shooting the video and one hand on the punch. punch_video.MOV

It depends on the maker. Dan Byler's punches are always sharp straight out of the box. Weavers usually are but some aren't as sharp as others. CS Osborne has never sent truly sharp punches in my experience. They required sharpening by the end user to their preference back then and still do today. It is just how they do it. Not saying one is better than the other after they are sharpened , just my experience with new ones. I don't have enough experience with Jeremiah Watt's end punches to say. Personally my own punches are lower beveled and sharp enough to cut with hand pressure (like the old wood handles end punches were designed. to). I can use a light stroke on a correct punching surface and get easy clean results. Some people I sell to want a steeper more chiseled angle that wont be as fine an edge but can stand up to harder leather or long use to be passable without stropping very much.

Thanks! Have heard about the etched marking but hadn't seen one yet. Appreciate the picture. I have a set of new ones a customer is sending for me to sharpen the tubes and number stamp the top and side of the frame. I know what I'm getting now.

Gotcha, I haven't run into that much thread showing to meet the anvil. Just another curiosity question here. Is the frame marked on the other side or have the Osborne maker and size number been ground off. I haven't had that weren't marked on this side that I remember.

I was more comparing the threads on a 100 year plus old Newark marked single tube punch vs the Harrisons. Still when I clean one up and sharpen or replace the punch tubes I run a tap through the frame to clean the threads. I screw my punch tubes in to bottom out the tube threads so they wont twist while I am punching also.

It is a toss up really. Not a lot of difference in use between the original Randall Keystone, Dan's newer version of it, and the Osborne #84 now and old versions. Osborne did change out a few things on the repop of theirs. The handle thread is on smaller stock and the bolt spacing on the blade hole is different than the original 84..

I've used and handled the above two linked versions plus the CS Osborne #84 new and old versions plus a lot of others.. I'll limit these comments to the handled splitters referred to here. For casual use and if you don't mind possibly sharpening more often, the Tandy one will do the job. For the $200 difference and If you are wanting a work horse, the Campbell-Randall Keystone or the CSO #84 will be a better choice both in mechanics and blade life.

If this is an old frame - The old frames were tapped with a shallower tap and the new threads on the replacement tubes are the correct pitch but too high. Chase the threads in the frame with a new tap of the same size and you will be good without doing anything else. realize they used three sizes of taps - 00-7 used the same, #8 had it's own size, and #9 and #10 had a different one. I chase the threads in every single tube punch I do so down the line the new replacement tubes will fit.

I had the milled steel wheel and it fed heavy veg tan well.

One supplier I dealt with said rolling it tight grain side in compresses it and can wrinkle the grain. The flesh side is looser and not as prone to wrinkling. I store it that way too.

Since Joseph Dixon is no longer in business. It will be hard to get original parts. As far as blades, they are pretty simple and a good bladesmith should be able to make one. Rollers - any machine shop can make those. The Dixons are OK, not sure how easy they'd be to skive with. They are just not that common in the US although I've got one or two sitting here to be refurbished but don't come across maybe one a year usually.

Eleven years and a couple hundred splitters later and I've evolved in thinking from my post above. The tutorial page on my website has one on splitters that kind of sums it up - https://brucejohnsonleather.com/tutorials/ In a nutshell. I dont like the pliers grip Spittler pattern splitters as much as I used. A good one is good, a poor one is a lapskiver only in my hands. I was lucky early on and had some good ones. Not so as time went on. If the spring is weak or the pliers have a bit of wear they wont hold the position when released as well. I am way more of a fan of the Osborne #86 than I used to be. Simple design and if you follow the principles - good splitter. I may be in the minority but I don't like the Osborne #86A. The consistency from one to the next is variable. One might allow you to split to 1 oz. the next one might max out with a 1/16" gap between roller and blade. The bolt and nut arrangement on the adjuster can come loose when the nut twists off - LocTite is your friend. OK, I don't like the #86A as much as others, enough said. Still like the Chase and Krebs patterns a lot, and a good #84 will work for most needs.;

Some places will list them as splash rivets. FWIW the hand setters do a pretty good job of splitting and clinches the splits if you just have a few to do and don't want to buy dies for a press riveter.

That Harrison mark as already pointed out is post 1906 or so. The 1/16 markings say later than that, and the flat side on the wood handle says near the end of the wood handle version as as well. Im not sure exactly when but have been told some were made into the 1950s or 60s, or at least sold at that time. The earlier versions had both sides of the handles rounded over and the bars were marked in 1/8ths. Double bar gibs can mean two things. 1).The bars were made in different widths (and thicknesses for that matter). The Latta pattern draw gauges has two bar gibs and were narrower. Some of the other versions came with a narrower bar and had two gibs to fill space. Maybe a manufacturing way to use some excess narrow bars. 2). sometimes that back gib behind the bar is tapered end to end. The broaching on the handle slot is not exactly 90 degrees and a tapering gib will square it up. If you switch that gib end for end or put a flat one in you see the bar really go out of square. Sometimes there will be a little matching mark on the gib and frame to pair them up, sometimes not.