IOTW CD 154

From Insulator Wiki (Wikilator)

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 12:58, 8 September 2008
Andrew Gibson (Talk | contribs)
(Original Create)
← Previous diff		 Revision as of 15:41, 8 September 2008
Andrew Gibson (Talk | contribs)
(Daily Update)
Next diff →
Line 35: Line 35:
| name = James Johnson | name = James Johnson
| date = Sat, 6 Sep 2008 | date = Sat, 6 Sep 2008
 +| comment =
Thanks Dwayne!!! Beeing a nubie i tend to lurk more then anything because i know verry little when it comes to details on specfic CD's. I have a genreal understanding and that's it. IOTW is one way for me to learn more details on a specfic CD sutch as this weeks so a big THANKS!! from me, i'm glad to see it's back. Now to the IOTW, i have a few of the fizzy 154's i also have 2 that are 1/2 fizzy and the other 1/2 hardly any bubbles at all. I will try to post some pic's.... Thanks Dwayne!!! Beeing a nubie i tend to lurk more then anything because i know verry little when it comes to details on specfic CD's. I have a genreal understanding and that's it. IOTW is one way for me to learn more details on a specfic CD sutch as this weeks so a big THANKS!! from me, i'm glad to see it's back. Now to the IOTW, i have a few of the fizzy 154's i also have 2 that are 1/2 fizzy and the other 1/2 hardly any bubbles at all. I will try to post some pic's....
}} }}
Line 43: Line 44:
| comment = | comment =
Here's a picture of a Opal 154 i have, That was dug at the dump. Here's a picture of a Opal 154 i have, That was dug at the dump.
-{{http://members.aol.com/milstkr2/EYECANDY/154HEMMILK.jpg}} There is a large piece of what looks like fire place ash, that's hard and stuck to the inner skirt and the pin hole.+[http://members.aol.com/milstkr2/EYECANDY/154HEMMILK.jpg] There is a large piece of what looks like fire place ash, that's hard and stuck to the inner skirt and the pin hole.
}} }}
Line 92: Line 93:
| comment = | comment =
Here are some more links on the Hemi & WT CD 154 IOTW: Here are some more links on the Hemi & WT CD 154 IOTW:
-Ian's excellent color page: [[http://glassian.org/Gallery/154.html]]+Ian's excellent color page: [http://glassian.org/Gallery/154.html]
 + 
Also wanted to note an interesting observation on the less common smooth base Hemingray-42's. These come in three base styles (Flat, Rounded and Beveled). A few years back I had the set of three, but have since traded them away, so I can't provide a picture, but they are clearly three very different molds. Also wanted to note an interesting observation on the less common smooth base Hemingray-42's. These come in three base styles (Flat, Rounded and Beveled). A few years back I had the set of three, but have since traded them away, so I can't provide a picture, but they are clearly three very different molds.
See: {{PicturePoster |id=201968449}} for some additional reference by Ken Roberts. See: {{PicturePoster |id=201968449}} for some additional reference by Ken Roberts.
 +
As for the Whitall Tatum No. 1's in purple --> I know there has been much discussion if these were made purple or if they turned in the sun. There is one report of an early collector actually seeing them being installed already purple. I believe they were intended to be clear and turned purple pretty quickly, either on the pole or in outdoor storage at the WT plant. An experiment by Randy Wesner somewhat backs up this theory as he was able to bake the insulator back to clear. See: As for the Whitall Tatum No. 1's in purple --> I know there has been much discussion if these were made purple or if they turned in the sun. There is one report of an early collector actually seeing them being installed already purple. I believe they were intended to be clear and turned purple pretty quickly, either on the pole or in outdoor storage at the WT plant. An experiment by Randy Wesner somewhat backs up this theory as he was able to bake the insulator back to clear. See:
-Start: {{PicturePoster |id=124111899}} Next: {{PicturePoster |id=124111980}} Last: {{PicturePoster |id=124111980}} and then put it back into the sun where it did start to turn back purple within 6 months.+* Start: {{PicturePoster |id=124111899}}
 +* Next: {{PicturePoster |id=124111980}}
 +* Last: {{PicturePoster |id=124111980}}
 +and then put it back into the sun where it did start to turn back purple within 6 months.
}} }}
Line 106: Line 112:
1. This Hemingray 42 is priceless to me, because it's the insulator that got me started collecting around 1991, when I was 10 or 11 years old: 1. This Hemingray 42 is priceless to me, because it's the insulator that got me started collecting around 1991, when I was 10 or 11 years old:
-[[http://www.hemingray.info/database/images/embossings/154HEM070.jpg]]+[http://www.hemingray.info/database/images/embossings/154HEM070.jpg]
2. This one is also among my favorites, just embossed "MADE IN U.S.A." on both sides. (This is the RDP version. Has anyone seen or have the SDP version?): 2. This one is also among my favorites, just embossed "MADE IN U.S.A." on both sides. (This is the RDP version. Has anyone seen or have the SDP version?):
-[[http://www.hemingray.info/database/images/embossings/154NN020.jpg]]+[http://www.hemingray.info/database/images/embossings/154NN020.jpg]
3. The "fang drips" Hemingray 42 would have to be one of my favorites as well. Gotta love that Hemi blue! 3. The "fang drips" Hemingray 42 would have to be one of my favorites as well. Gotta love that Hemi blue!
-[[http://www.hemingray.info/database/images/embossings/154HEM090.jpg]]+[http://www.hemingray.info/database/images/embossings/154HEM090.jpg]
}} }}
Line 134: Line 140:
}} }}
-{{Comment =+{{Comment
| name = Jeff Edgerton | name = Jeff Edgerton
| date = Sun, 7 Sep 2008 | date = Sun, 7 Sep 2008
Line 145: Line 151:
piece. Does anyone own one? Can anyone post a picture of same? THANKS to all piece. Does anyone own one? Can anyone post a picture of same? THANKS to all
who can help, or who just read the posts! who can help, or who just read the posts!
 +}}
 +
 +{{Comment
 +| name = Billy Ewing
 +| date = Sun, 07 Sep 2008
 +| comment =
 +First I'd like to say thanks for bringing back the insulator of the week. I'm guilty of not posting replies, but each posting helped me learn something about insulators. My questions are about the MR Hemingray:
 +How many are know to be in collections?
 +Where were they found ( one was found in Kentucky)?
 +Have they ever been found in the wild?
 +Where do they rank as far as rarity goes
 +}}
 +
 +{{Comment
 +| name = Rick Jones
 +| date = Sun, 7 Sep 2008
 +| comment =
 +Thanks, Dwayne, for taking back the leadership of IOTW and getting it rolling again. To show my appreciation, I'm actually going to respond to this one because I can add something.
 +
 +I think it was 1973 or '74 and it involves one of my trips to the Hemingray dump in Muncie. My wife and I were walking what then were open fields of glass so thick you had to wear pretty substantial shoes. Sandals were out of the question. We were schlepping through the glass seeing all kinds of broken insulators and occasionally whole ones right on top of the ground. I was starting to get interested in cobalt insulators at that time, so I was focused on finding any kind of shard of cobalt or peacock insulator. There were actually times we would overlook whole aqua or clear insulators and just pass them by. We found carnival and amber whole ones sometimes and would keep those.
 +
 +This trip turned out to be very special, though. After rejecting about everything we seemed to find that day, we came across two CD 154 Hemi-42's that we certainly were NOT going to leave there on the ground. They were both milkglass.
 +
 +Needless to say, we were excited. No one had ever reported discovering the most common insulator in milkglass. I submitted photos to Crown Jewels and Crossarms magazines. I think both printed them. Later we ended up trading them for cobalts and threadless pieces. Seeing what Bill recently got for his CD 145 HG Co. in milkglass makes me wonder what those pieces might have been worth today. They were both in great shape---one VVNM and one NM.
 +}}
 +
 +{{Comment
 +| name = Bill Meier
 +| date = Sun, 07 Sep 2008
 +| comment =
 +{{PicturePoster |id=98747516}}
 +
 +gives the detail. I can say that a B was not initially engraved on the mold... Look at the left side of the. A B would have a vertical line... A G would have a very rounded shape. I see a very rounded shape...
 +
 +I have seen distorted letters like this many times, and I do believe it is in the mold, thus you will see multiple pieces that are identical, as Lee shows. I call it a flopped over G ... The upper edge of the G bends down and touches the cross bar. How does this happen?
 +
 +I have seen some cases where a small chunk of the mold between the embossing has broken off. I also know that a number of molds, definitely the CD 154's were rengraved to restore the embossing. While we don't conclusively have an explanation for why the embossing got weak, it doesn't matter why for these examples. In "touching up" the embossing, you could easily slip with the chisel, as you are following the path of the old letter G and go a little too far and make the rounded top of the G meet the crossbar.
 +
 +This brings up something I have wondered about too... Most Hemingray's around this time period all had "stamped" embossing but the Hemi-42 clearly did not. The letters are different and larger. However they are generally consistent from mold to mold, and lined up neatly. How were these molds engraved? ... By hand? By machine? By some template? I don't know...
 +
 +Regarding weak embossing, where parts of a word (left side say) is weak, and the right side of a word strong, I believe that part of the mold (right side is this case) was rengraved to make the embossing "normal" again... I don't believe this sharp difference of the depth and clarity supports either the mold is worn nor the graphite build up theories. If either of those were the case, I don't know that the change in embossing height would be that dramatic. Regraving part of the mold does.
 +
 +I have also seem molds, including Hemi-42s where you can tell that some of the embossing was likely reengraved, as the reengraved embossing is larger, more bold and more sloppy that the initial engraving.
 +
 +Just the engraving topic alone is an interesting one. Also associated with the "how did the embossing get weak in the first place?"
 +
 +Bill
 +
 +P.S. I have seen people say that they see an "8" on a old CD 252 mold, renumbered from No 2 CABLE to No 62 CABLE .. the 6 looks like an 8. "looks like" is the key here... not "is engraved" ... I believe the same thing happened here as with this G... The top part of the 6 "flopped over" touching the loop of the 6. Why do I say it is not an 8 engraved in the mold? Well, an 8 has an indent in the middle of the left side, as well as the right side of course. Where the two "circles" of the 8 meet. You look at these No 82 pieces, and I do not see this indent on the left side, thus I conclude an 8 was not actually engraved in the mold... could also be a slip during engraving the right side.
 +}}
 +
 +{{Comment
 +| name = Bill Meier
 +| date = Sun, 07 Sep 2008
 +| comment =
 +I have the CD 154 NO NAME [020] as well... i.e. the one with round drip points...
 +
 +A 1946 Hemingray Catalog says about the Hemingray-42
 +
 +The old Hemingray Number 40, widely used from its introduction in 1910, was replaced in 1921 by the Hemingray No. 42.
 +
 +The No. 42 is a double-petticoat type, with a long, smooth leakage path on the inner petticoat. It sits close to the cross-arm, thus giving the pin protection against rain splash. Its threads are accurately formed for a tight grip on the pin. The wire groove is a modern square type shown in Spec. l-A-33 of the Association of American Railroads, and is accepted as standard for most telephone construction.
 +}}
 +
 +{{Comment
 +| name = Bill Meier
 +| date = Sun, 07 Sep 2008
 +| comment =
 +At 06:43 PM 09/07/2008, Rick Jones wrote:
 +>Seeing what Bill recently got for his CD 145 HG Co. in milkglass >makes me wonder what those pieces might have been worth today. They >were both in great shape---one VVNM and one NM.
 +
 +I can speak personally to this, as I have owned and studied both. All the Hemi-42's, CD 122, 128, 154, 168 and other shards of other CDs dug at the dump, are "sick" glass. Heavily etched and rough.
 +
 +The CD 145 in milk glass is flawless; surface smooth and glossy. As good as, or better than your white milkglass CD 164 MAYDWELL's.
 +
 +The white milk 145 is an "only one known" -- white milk 154's? I don't know an exact count.. a half dozen?
 +
 +The white milk CD 145 had many things going for it
 +
 +1) one of a kind in that color
 +2) smooth flawless glass, no etching
 +3) the 145 dates to the mid/end 1880's, the 154 to the mid 1930's -- "generally" older glass is more interesting and valuable
 +4) 145's in general I think are more "collectable" then 154's
 +
 +All of those reasons is why the milk glass 145 commanded such a premium. I have seen white milk glass 154's sell in the $300-$3,000 range. The 145 sold for a little more ;-)
 +
 +Imagine my joy and surprise when I walked into the 1999 Eastern Regional during regular show hours. Sitting out on Kevin Lawless' table, with hundreds of other insulators, is a white milk Hemi-42 !!! Price? ... $275, but he gave it to us for $255 !! Kevin was not generally known for his "discount" pricing either. Had a chip on the wire ridge, and the typical "sick glass" look... but still... What a find for a Hemi collector!!! At a regional no less, from an old time knowledgeable dealer... Just out on the table for anyone to buy, not set aside for us or anything... This was under priced in my opinion ;-)
 +
 +How do I know these explicit details? My memory is pretty good, especially when getting great pieces like this, but we also keep detailed records of every piece we have purchased.
 +
 +Anyway, my knowledge and thoughts on 145 vs 154 white milk pieces... !!!
 +
 +Bill
 +
 +* {{PicturePoster |id=191168452}}
 +* {{PicturePoster |id=217626115}}
 +
 +P.S. Do I regret selling the white milk piece? Well, it's been three months now. Still no regrets. It is a great piece no doubt, but it didn't (to me) have the class and character of an Amber 8 or a Peacock 164; two of my favorite pieces, at any price. Not that those are cheap, but it's not why we like them!!
 +
 +P.S.S. another bit of follow up from that sales... yes, it included my "dream piece", the Amber 8... How could I sell that? Well, I knew it could be replaced, and within a month I had another one back on my shelf. Interesting that is was the same one that I had originally owned in 1990, over 15 years ago! I had upgraded mine along the way, and the buyer of our first piece sold it back to us.
 +}}
 +
 +{{Comment
 +| name = Richard Wentzel
 +| date = Sun, 7 Sep 2008
 +| comment =
 +Another fact worth mentioning about the earliest style Whitall Tatum Co. No. 1 is that the dome number (McDougald listing[001])
 +can be either a 1,2, 3 or 4. Additionally, there is an [020] style that also has the dome number, which you will not find listed currently.
 +}}
 +
 +{{Comment
 +| name = Jack Comer
 +| date = Mon, 8 Sep 2008
 +| comment =
 +I have wondered about this too. I don't believe the No 42s are stamped embossing. You don't see the up-and-down, off-line letter embossings associated with stamped embossed insulators. Also, the backwards 2 embossed No 42 cannot be stamped unless the stamp was made with the 2 in reverse of how it should be. Possible, but not likely. Another error that comes to mind is the one with the Es missing the middle bar. Once again, unless the stamp was manufactured that way, you could not miss the middle bar only of an E on a strongly embossed mold. I have theorized to myself that the No 42 molds were probably machine-engraved, but not fully automated. This would account for some human error that caused these interesting features.
 +
 +I have also seeN molds, including Hemi-42s where you can tell that some of the embossing was likely reengraved, as the reengraved embossing is larger, more bold and more sloppy that the initial engraving.
 +I have seen these too, and hand-touched re-engraving is the only explanation I can accept. This ties in to the mold-paste, filled engraving theory. Most assuredly, the molds got what I call "cruddied-up" with the residue left from this mold paste. Here's the way I picture it: This mold paste, a graphite mixture of some sort, had to be more or less consumable so as to not completely corrupt the glass. When the molten glass enters the mold, the majority of the mold lubricant burns up, leaving a carbon residue on the mold. I would be willing to wager that after thousands of pressings, these molds would have a hard carbon residue similar to what you see on old spark plugs or on top of the valves in an engine with a couple hundred thousand miles on it. That stuff is very hard and brittle, and would account for weak embossings and re-engraved molds. Speaking of embossings and engraving, what about the shop number 1 on the dome of some of the No 42s? Any thoughts as to why only one shop number appears on the HEMINGRAY-42?
}} }}
}} }}

Revision as of 15:41, 8 September 2008

Contents

CD 154 - Insulator of the Week on Sat, 06 Sep 2008

Nickname

?

Related Patents

?

Details

Embossings: There are 16 North American primary listings for CD 154's, so let's break it down for this particular edition of IOTW to the two that have probably seen the most widespread usage: Hemingray & Whitall Tatum. Hemingray: Hemingray 42's were one of the most widely produced and utilized insulators in the history of insulator manufacturing. They were produced with smooth bases, round drip points and sharp drip points. There are dozens of embossing variations, including a variant with the addition of two large letters "MR" above the front embossing. The purpose of these two added letters remains a mystery.

The predominant colors found in Hemingray 42's are the clear, off-clear, ice blue and green tints, and especially the aqua and Hemingray blue shades. Medium to fairly deep shades of green are occasionally found. The deeper green shades are considered by some collectors to be somewhat underappreciated. Interesting aqua/blue, blue/green, lime green/ice blue and clear/blue two-tone mixes have been found. Hemingray experimented with "carnival" coatings on a limited number of 42's. There is also a listing of light green with white iridizing (anyone have more info on this one?). The most uncommon colors encountered are the rare white milkglass and stunning opalescent specimens. How many of each are known? Were they found in use, or found in the Hemingray dump? It is not common to find contaminants in Hemingray 42's, but milk and carbon bands/stringers are occasionally found, plus some with fizzy bubbles. One Hemingray 42 was found several years ago with a penny encased in the dome. A more recent discovery produced a Hemingray 42 with a penny deeply encased in the lower wire ridge. I believe at least two have been found with nails.

Whitall Tatum: Found only with smooth bases and over a dozen embossing variations. All are embossed as "No.1" It is interesting to note that one particular mold variation has a "2" embossed on the dome, while all others are void of dome numbers (shop or mold numbers).

The most common colors found are clear, straw and light to medium shades of aqua. Followed closely behind are the peach, pink and purple shades. Whitall Tatum did some limited experimentation with "carnival", iridizing and metallic coatings (can someone provide more info on these?). A small number of deep red amber units were also produced and are considered quite valuable to collectors. Contaminants are rarely found, most being an occasional milky inclusion.


Comments

We are lucky to have some Hemingray and Whitall Tatum historians within our hobby and hopefully they will share any additional knowledge they may have on the life and times of the Hemingray 42 and Whitall Tatum No. 1.

These brief comments on the Insulator of the Week are not intended to be complete and are presented to stimulate and encourage discussion and additional information from ICON. Now it's your turn to share info and/or post a photo of your favorite Hemingray and/or Whitall Tatum CD 154's!

Questions

None

Discussion

James Johnson commented on Sat, 6 Sep 2008

Thanks Dwayne!!! Beeing a nubie i tend to lurk more then anything because i know verry little when it comes to details on specfic CD's. I have a genreal understanding and that's it. IOTW is one way for me to learn more details on a specfic CD sutch as this weeks so a big THANKS!! from me, i'm glad to see it's back. Now to the IOTW, i have a few of the fizzy 154's i also have 2 that are 1/2 fizzy and the other 1/2 hardly any bubbles at all. I will try to post some pic's....

James Doty, CA commented on Sun, 7 Sep 2008

Here's a picture of a Opal 154 i have, That was dug at the dump. [1] There is a large piece of what looks like fire place ash, that's hard and stuck to the inner skirt and the pin hole.

Dan Gay commented on Sun, 7 Sep 2008

I have a CD-42 that may qualify for the listing light green with white iridizing [130] although it does look to me like possibly a two tone with iridizing. [clear / ice green with a light iridized coating]

PicturePoster #215685623 [Dan] Bill You have seen this one , what do you think ?

Glenn Drummond commented on Sun, 07 Sep 2008 10:32:01 -0500

I know of three opalescent - I have one, Bill has one, and Jim Doty has one. There may be more. I believe that the one Bill has came from the Jerry Turner collection. The one I have is much more opaque that the one that Jim posted a picture of yesterday. Sure would appreciate it if someone would come forward to confirm that there is truly a white milkglass 42 in existence. I have long suspected that the more opaque opalescent was confused for "white milkglass." All of the opalescent pieces that I know of, with the exception of some CD 128 E-14-B that were found in Florida, came from the dump. Please note that the dump that I am referring to was the Hemingray off-site dump, not the one being investigated at this time on the factory grounds.

A drip point variant that I truly enjoy is the one that has what I call "Dragon's Teeth Drip Points." The drip points are about 3/8-inch in length. It is especially difficult to find one with all the drip points intact.

Bill Meier commented on Sun, 07 Sep 2008

>I have a CD-154 that may qualify for the listing light green with >white iridizing [130]

I'm on the fence after seeing in in person with the irridizing... I have one where it is more pronounced. On mine, it's sort of like the top on the CD 239 Kimble... In the right light you can see it pretty clearly. I'd like to compare mine, and my other Ice Blue/Lime Green Two Tone with yours. I suspect yours is sort of between that and the Ice Green w/ White Iridizing. I have one of each.

My piece was picked by the seller from a downed pole. While walking along the RR, this one stood out amongst the other 154's and thus caught his eye and he went over and got it.

Richard Wentzel commented on Sun, 7 Sep 2008

Regarding the carnival Whitall Tatum Dwayne used as a reference photo in this weeks IOTW description, readers should be aware that this particular example is suspect. I wrote to Chris Tella after he posted and told him my thoughts. Even without seeing the insulator in person, it was clear that it came from the wrong mold series. A true carnival example can be found here: PicturePoster #225374072

Bob Berry commented on Sun, 7 Sep 2008

Here are some more links on the Hemi & WT CD 154 IOTW: Ian's excellent color page: [2]

Also wanted to note an interesting observation on the less common smooth base Hemingray-42's. These come in three base styles (Flat, Rounded and Beveled). A few years back I had the set of three, but have since traded them away, so I can't provide a picture, but they are clearly three very different molds. See: PicturePoster #201968449 for some additional reference by Ken Roberts.

As for the Whitall Tatum No. 1's in purple --> I know there has been much discussion if these were made purple or if they turned in the sun. There is one report of an early collector actually seeing them being installed already purple. I believe they were intended to be clear and turned purple pretty quickly, either on the pole or in outdoor storage at the WT plant. An experiment by Randy Wesner somewhat backs up this theory as he was able to bake the insulator back to clear. See:

and then put it back into the sun where it did start to turn back purple within 6 months.

Christian Willis commented on Sun, 7 Sep 2008

Okay, now for a few of my favorite Hemingray - 42's...

1. This Hemingray 42 is priceless to me, because it's the insulator that got me started collecting around 1991, when I was 10 or 11 years old: [3]

2. This one is also among my favorites, just embossed "MADE IN U.S.A." on both sides. (This is the RDP version. Has anyone seen or have the SDP version?): [4]

3. The "fang drips" Hemingray 42 would have to be one of my favorites as well. Gotta love that Hemi blue! [5]

Lee Brewer commented on Sun, 7 Sep 2008 17:19:52 -0400

Matt Kancle and I were out looking for glass along the B&O in 2004. We were walking in areas where the track was quite away from the pole line through the woods. Not too much showed up that day, but I remember picking up this Hemi 42 in Hemi blue just to look at it (I still like the color/shape of these pieces!). It looked as if the piece said HemingBRay. Of course I thought it was just some sort of fluke at first, but then more of them started appearing, from different collectors, over the years.

From Canada!

With fangs!

Jeff Edgerton commented on Sun, 7 Sep 2008

I'm out of "lurk mode", and will try to be a more permanent "player" rather than just reader, here on ICON. I would like to publicly THANK Duane Anthony for re-kindling his IOTW feature. It truly is a great idea ! And, on that note, this week's feature are CD154's. Brings to mind a question I would like to pose ICON land. Here goes............our price guide does in fact have a listing for a "lavender" CD154 W.T. Co. piece. Does anyone own one? Can anyone post a picture of same? THANKS to all who can help, or who just read the posts!

Billy Ewing commented on Sun, 07 Sep 2008

First I'd like to say thanks for bringing back the insulator of the week. I'm guilty of not posting replies, but each posting helped me learn something about insulators. My questions are about the MR Hemingray: How many are know to be in collections? Where were they found ( one was found in Kentucky)? Have they ever been found in the wild? Where do they rank as far as rarity goes

Rick Jones commented on Sun, 7 Sep 2008

Thanks, Dwayne, for taking back the leadership of IOTW and getting it rolling again. To show my appreciation, I'm actually going to respond to this one because I can add something.

I think it was 1973 or '74 and it involves one of my trips to the Hemingray dump in Muncie. My wife and I were walking what then were open fields of glass so thick you had to wear pretty substantial shoes. Sandals were out of the question. We were schlepping through the glass seeing all kinds of broken insulators and occasionally whole ones right on top of the ground. I was starting to get interested in cobalt insulators at that time, so I was focused on finding any kind of shard of cobalt or peacock insulator. There were actually times we would overlook whole aqua or clear insulators and just pass them by. We found carnival and amber whole ones sometimes and would keep those.

This trip turned out to be very special, though. After rejecting about everything we seemed to find that day, we came across two CD 154 Hemi-42's that we certainly were NOT going to leave there on the ground. They were both milkglass.

Needless to say, we were excited. No one had ever reported discovering the most common insulator in milkglass. I submitted photos to Crown Jewels and Crossarms magazines. I think both printed them. Later we ended up trading them for cobalts and threadless pieces. Seeing what Bill recently got for his CD 145 HG Co. in milkglass makes me wonder what those pieces might have been worth today. They were both in great shape---one VVNM and one NM.

Bill Meier commented on Sun, 07 Sep 2008

PicturePoster #98747516

gives the detail. I can say that a B was not initially engraved on the mold... Look at the left side of the. A B would have a vertical line... A G would have a very rounded shape. I see a very rounded shape...

I have seen distorted letters like this many times, and I do believe it is in the mold, thus you will see multiple pieces that are identical, as Lee shows. I call it a flopped over G ... The upper edge of the G bends down and touches the cross bar. How does this happen?

I have seen some cases where a small chunk of the mold between the embossing has broken off. I also know that a number of molds, definitely the CD 154's were rengraved to restore the embossing. While we don't conclusively have an explanation for why the embossing got weak, it doesn't matter why for these examples. In "touching up" the embossing, you could easily slip with the chisel, as you are following the path of the old letter G and go a little too far and make the rounded top of the G meet the crossbar.

This brings up something I have wondered about too... Most Hemingray's around this time period all had "stamped" embossing but the Hemi-42 clearly did not. The letters are different and larger. However they are generally consistent from mold to mold, and lined up neatly. How were these molds engraved? ... By hand? By machine? By some template? I don't know...

Regarding weak embossing, where parts of a word (left side say) is weak, and the right side of a word strong, I believe that part of the mold (right side is this case) was rengraved to make the embossing "normal" again... I don't believe this sharp difference of the depth and clarity supports either the mold is worn nor the graphite build up theories. If either of those were the case, I don't know that the change in embossing height would be that dramatic. Regraving part of the mold does.

I have also seem molds, including Hemi-42s where you can tell that some of the embossing was likely reengraved, as the reengraved embossing is larger, more bold and more sloppy that the initial engraving.

Just the engraving topic alone is an interesting one. Also associated with the "how did the embossing get weak in the first place?"

Bill

P.S. I have seen people say that they see an "8" on a old CD 252 mold, renumbered from No 2 CABLE to No 62 CABLE .. the 6 looks like an 8. "looks like" is the key here... not "is engraved" ... I believe the same thing happened here as with this G... The top part of the 6 "flopped over" touching the loop of the 6. Why do I say it is not an 8 engraved in the mold? Well, an 8 has an indent in the middle of the left side, as well as the right side of course. Where the two "circles" of the 8 meet. You look at these No 82 pieces, and I do not see this indent on the left side, thus I conclude an 8 was not actually engraved in the mold... could also be a slip during engraving the right side.

Bill Meier commented on Sun, 07 Sep 2008

I have the CD 154 NO NAME [020] as well... i.e. the one with round drip points...

A 1946 Hemingray Catalog says about the Hemingray-42

The old Hemingray Number 40, widely used from its introduction in 1910, was replaced in 1921 by the Hemingray No. 42.

The No. 42 is a double-petticoat type, with a long, smooth leakage path on the inner petticoat. It sits close to the cross-arm, thus giving the pin protection against rain splash. Its threads are accurately formed for a tight grip on the pin. The wire groove is a modern square type shown in Spec. l-A-33 of the Association of American Railroads, and is accepted as standard for most telephone construction.

Bill Meier commented on Sun, 07 Sep 2008

At 06:43 PM 09/07/2008, Rick Jones wrote: >Seeing what Bill recently got for his CD 145 HG Co. in milkglass >makes me wonder what those pieces might have been worth today. They >were both in great shape---one VVNM and one NM.

I can speak personally to this, as I have owned and studied both. All the Hemi-42's, CD 122, 128, 154, 168 and other shards of other CDs dug at the dump, are "sick" glass. Heavily etched and rough.

The CD 145 in milk glass is flawless; surface smooth and glossy. As good as, or better than your white milkglass CD 164 MAYDWELL's.

The white milk 145 is an "only one known" -- white milk 154's? I don't know an exact count.. a half dozen?

The white milk CD 145 had many things going for it

1) one of a kind in that color 2) smooth flawless glass, no etching 3) the 145 dates to the mid/end 1880's, the 154 to the mid 1930's -- "generally" older glass is more interesting and valuable 4) 145's in general I think are more "collectable" then 154's

All of those reasons is why the milk glass 145 commanded such a premium. I have seen white milk glass 154's sell in the $300-$3,000 range. The 145 sold for a little more ;-)

Imagine my joy and surprise when I walked into the 1999 Eastern Regional during regular show hours. Sitting out on Kevin Lawless' table, with hundreds of other insulators, is a white milk Hemi-42 !!! Price? ... $275, but he gave it to us for $255 !! Kevin was not generally known for his "discount" pricing either. Had a chip on the wire ridge, and the typical "sick glass" look... but still... What a find for a Hemi collector!!! At a regional no less, from an old time knowledgeable dealer... Just out on the table for anyone to buy, not set aside for us or anything... This was under priced in my opinion ;-)

How do I know these explicit details? My memory is pretty good, especially when getting great pieces like this, but we also keep detailed records of every piece we have purchased.

Anyway, my knowledge and thoughts on 145 vs 154 white milk pieces... !!!

Bill

P.S. Do I regret selling the white milk piece? Well, it's been three months now. Still no regrets. It is a great piece no doubt, but it didn't (to me) have the class and character of an Amber 8 or a Peacock 164; two of my favorite pieces, at any price. Not that those are cheap, but it's not why we like them!!

P.S.S. another bit of follow up from that sales... yes, it included my "dream piece", the Amber 8... How could I sell that? Well, I knew it could be replaced, and within a month I had another one back on my shelf. Interesting that is was the same one that I had originally owned in 1990, over 15 years ago! I had upgraded mine along the way, and the buyer of our first piece sold it back to us.

Richard Wentzel commented on Sun, 7 Sep 2008

Another fact worth mentioning about the earliest style Whitall Tatum Co. No. 1 is that the dome number (McDougald listing[001]) can be either a 1,2, 3 or 4. Additionally, there is an [020] style that also has the dome number, which you will not find listed currently.

Jack Comer commented on Mon, 8 Sep 2008

I have wondered about this too. I don't believe the No 42s are stamped embossing. You don't see the up-and-down, off-line letter embossings associated with stamped embossed insulators. Also, the backwards 2 embossed No 42 cannot be stamped unless the stamp was made with the 2 in reverse of how it should be. Possible, but not likely. Another error that comes to mind is the one with the Es missing the middle bar. Once again, unless the stamp was manufactured that way, you could not miss the middle bar only of an E on a strongly embossed mold. I have theorized to myself that the No 42 molds were probably machine-engraved, but not fully automated. This would account for some human error that caused these interesting features.

I have also seeN molds, including Hemi-42s where you can tell that some of the embossing was likely reengraved, as the reengraved embossing is larger, more bold and more sloppy that the initial engraving. I have seen these too, and hand-touched re-engraving is the only explanation I can accept. This ties in to the mold-paste, filled engraving theory. Most assuredly, the molds got what I call "cruddied-up" with the residue left from this mold paste. Here's the way I picture it: This mold paste, a graphite mixture of some sort, had to be more or less consumable so as to not completely corrupt the glass. When the molten glass enters the mold, the majority of the mold lubricant burns up, leaving a carbon residue on the mold. I would be willing to wager that after thousands of pressings, these molds would have a hard carbon residue similar to what you see on old spark plugs or on top of the valves in an engine with a couple hundred thousand miles on it. That stuff is very hard and brittle, and would account for weak embossings and re-engraved molds. Speaking of embossings and engraving, what about the shop number 1 on the dome of some of the No 42s? Any thoughts as to why only one shop number appears on the HEMINGRAY-42?

Retrieved from "https://www.insulators.info/wiki/IOTW_CD_154"
Personal tools

Served by www.insulators.info at April 18, 2024 11:16:16 PM in 0.26 secs.