Steel plates

[Dave B]

I know we had a little discussion a few months ago about steel plates, but one came in the shop today that is a new one on me. The movement is marked E N Welsh. All the other steel plate movements I have encountered were Ingraham. While the Welsh movement bears obvious resemblences to the Ingrahams, it also has some significant differences.
I know that Ingraham eventually took over E N Welsh - or was it the other way around - no matter - the bottom line is, eventually they merged. So I am not terribly shocked at the similarities between the movements, but I am now wondering who was making what in Connecticut during that period. The thing that made me wonder this is it suddenly occurred to me that both companies were essentially tooled up for working brass. Working steel would have taken different punch press dies, with different clearances. The plates are both the same shape, and they share a common method of mounting the pallet pivot on a brass bridge, riveted to the front plate. Close inspection of the photographs reveals those two bridges to be the same shape, also.

So I am wondering if they were out-sourcing the plates to a third manufacturer, who was tooled up for punching steel? Can anyone shed any light on this?

The first photo is of an Ingraham eight day movement in a "Maine" clock. The second two photos are of teh Welsh movement that came in today. (I appologize for the uneven lighting in the latter pix. That is why I shot two; one with, and one without flash.

(I love digital cameras; in the old days, I would have worried about burning up too much film, and settled for one poor photoraph instead of two. )

[shutterbug]

I'd venture a guess. When the business changed hands, there was considerable inventory that came with the transaction. Rather than throw it away, it would be modified slightly and used. Eventually the inventory of parts would be diminished and the new company would be manufacturing their own designs.

[Dave B]

After I posted this query, I went back dug up, and re-read some of the older posts. Apparently, Gilbert was also using steel plates. At least one member stated he had encountered steel plates with a date stamp in the 1890's. I'd be interested to know if these plates were the same shapes. I don't doubt that when inventory was acquired it would have been utilized - but that doesn't explain the differing brand names on the plate, unless they were applied as part of the plate manufacturing process (which I certainly don't rule out), although I would think that any firm taking over another would want to obliterate the prior comapany's brand name.

[Steven Thornberry]

Of course, we have to remember that Welch and Ingraham never merged one way or the other. The Sessions bought out the failed Welch firm in 1903. In its last few years Welch had some disastrous fires from whose effects they never fully recovered. At one point in the late 1890's, Welch was using movements bought from Gilbert.

[Veritas]

Pequegnat also used steel plates coated with nickel.

[tom427cid]

Hi all,
A lot of the movements with steel plates that I have encountered have been Gilberts and have dates that coincide with WWI-makes sense,brass was needed for munitions ans all.
hope this helps.
tom

[Thyme]

Originally Posted by Steven Thornberry

Of course, we have to remember that Welch and Ingraham never merged one way or the other. The Sessions bought out the failed Welch firm in 1903. In its last few years Welch had some disastrous fires from whose effects they never fully recovered. At one point in the late 1890's, Welch was using movements bought from Gilbert.

I know of no connection between Welch and Ingraham. What Steven cited is accurate. Far more likely that they got plates from Gilbert (after one of several fires they had) and marked them as their product, to stay in business.

[Doug Osborne]

Waterbury also made steel plate movements. Theirs were better quality as they put round brass inserts used like bushings for the pivots. No problem with cut pivots like Ingraham.

[MShaw]

The problem was that the hole placement in the steel plates was not accurate and many of the pivot holes were not in the center of the brass "bushing". If you chose to remove the bushing rather than bushing it you had better have used a preacher and used a solid plug.

It seemed a strange approach as they could have used concentric bushings if they had spent some time making the plates accurate thus saving some kind of tooling and secondary operation to put the holes in the bushings.

Malkin Shaw
York, Pa.

[Dave B]

I don't know where I got the idea that Welsh and Ingraham were ever merged. Obviously, that is just wrong, and I stand corrected.

Interesting what Malkin says about the plate holes being off. If steel plates were outsourced, and that company simply made their plates the same for everyone, Waterbury's off-center bushings could make sense if they concluded the holes were close enough, provided they bushed them and re-drilled the bushings for proper depthing.

(Note to self: Before tackling any Waterbury movements, beg, borrow, steal, purchase, or make a preacher.)

I keep coming back to the concept of having to re-tool to manufacture steel instead of brass plates. That expense, it seems to me, would have signifigantly curtailed production, and possibly put many firms out of business alltogether. I am not a die sinker, but I have read a little about punch press die-making, and know that die clearances tend to be very material-specific; that is, different clearances are required for steel, brass, and aluminum. So I should think that dies designed for brass would not readily interchange with dies designed for pressing steel.