Printable View
I have began collecting some of the Chubb Battleship and Cruiser padlocks, and I am wondering what the 3 numbers on them - e.g. 980 - represent. Can anyone enlighten me?
I had thought it may be, in the above case, from September 1980, but would like to know for sure.
Thank you in advance...
Yes Phil, that's how I understand it; according to the rep (when they used to call back in the day) September was the yearly accounting period end. Read the code backwards...
Many thanks to you Brian...Quote:
Originally Posted by philipwatson
Hi Philip,
I am in the same boat in getting a definite deciphering of the meaning of the numbering on these padlocks.
I had started getting rid of excess Battleship & Cruiser padlocks and then another early Battleship became available and I couldn't resist getting it.
It is the earliest I have come across numbered - 949. Which I take as September 1949. It was interesting to see some small differences in manufacture.
With your collection of padlocks have you noticed and documented any differences that you have come across.
cheers. Ian
Quote:
Originally Posted by macs_07
Hello to you Ian,
And allow me to thank you for making me so envious of you owning a 1949 Battleship :)-:. I am searching for one numbered 359, the year of my birth, but with no success thus far.
In my 'collection', I only have 3 Battleships and 3 Cruisers, but your post caused me to finally put into text the cosmetic differnces in some from the others.
To all intents and purposes, the Battleships look the same, as do the Cruisers. But upon closer examination, there are
differences:
Batlleships
My first Battleship, marked CHUBB LONDON on the frontage, is numbered 169 on the rear, and has the CHUBB logo on the keyhole cover.
My second Battleship, marked CHUBB LONDON on the frontage, is numbered 769 on the rear, and also has the CHUBB logo on the keyhole cover.
My third Battleship, marked CHUBB LONDON on the frontage, is numbered 879 on the rear, and has no logo on the keyhole cover, or anywhere else on the lock.
Cruisers
My first Cruiser, marked CHUBB on the frontage, is numbered 990 on the frontage, with no other logos anywhere. (I am assuming that it is 990, as some idiot has drilled a 6mm hole directly where the first number should be. I couldn't see it for the keyhole cover when I purchased it, but didn't bother sending it back. Only cost me £12...)
My second Cruiser, marked CHUBB on the frontage, is numbered 980 on the frontage, with no other logo anywhere.
My third Cruiser, marked CHUBB on the frontage, is numbered 279 on the rear, with no other logos anywhere.
For me, this raises some interesting questions: why do the Battleships from 1961 and 1967 have the fish logo on the keyhole cover, whilst the 1978 one does not?
Why is the 1972 Cruiser numbered on the rear of the padlock, and in the same format as the Battleships, whilst the other two Cruisers are numbered on the frontages, and in a different format?
I struggle to find much information on Chubb paldocks. Perhaps you, or another member, have sources?
Regards to you from Scotland,
Philip
Hi Philip,
that is a good list, unfortunately I sold off at least four of each Cruiser and Battleship padlocks and then saw the real early 949 Battleship so these notes only cover the locks I still have on hand.
This lock and your post are what pushed the looking into differences.
CRUISER - 569 - 179 - 379 - undated
BATTLESHIPS - 569 - 579 - Both cutaways - 949 - 969 - 679 - 987
I have attached 2 pdf files to better show the differences.
It would be interesting to know when both were initially released onto the market.
I am still working on some information on the internals that I am getting from using a 4mm 90 degree scope which I will post later.
cheers from Australia
Ian
Excellent information Ian, and I look forward, with great interest, to the images from your endoscope (?)...
Nothing really found with the use of the scope.
But I have attached some scans of old chubb catalogues/brochures that may be of interest.
Many thanks Ian, and a Happy New Year to you and yours...Quote:
Originally Posted by macs_07
Philip
Hi - sorry for resurrecting a slightly old thread, but fascinating that you have a 1949 Battleship.
The patent was originally applied for in 1948 and not fully filed until 1949 and not approved until 1950 - so yours must be pretty much the first batch to be produced.
It looks like a very clean version as wel form the images in your pdf.
For interest the body was originally forged (according to the patent) and not cast - I'm not sure when they went to cast later in the manufacturing process.
Thanks for sharing very nice examples.
Chris
Quote:
Originally Posted by macs_07