Bridge City Toolworks

[ian maybury]

I think George a lot of the old tool designs were classic examples of products that survived over an extended period by virtue of being a very good fit to all the requirements (not just technical, but also price and other 'soft' ones) of users over an extended period of time. Not only that, these were very demanding users operating in an environment where there was very little room to accommodate anything that didn't do the business.

What does happen is that with time requirements can change - for example most professionals use power tools these days.

The fact is though that the proven designs of old planes for example still stand up as very effective solutions for those wanting to hand work wood. Just about all that can (perhaps) be said is that there's scope for somewhat higher quality finishing and materials given the ability of today's gentleman punter to tolerate a higher price. Modern manufacturing and technical advances have to some extent made developments feasible too - but the fact is that the designs are still very closely based on the originals.

That it's often possible to realistically argue that a well set up oldie is still a very realistic alternative is a testament to the rightness of the original designs...

[george wilson]

Warren Mickey beat everyone else using an old Stanley.

[Mel Fulks]

I know one guy who owns a large thriving architectural shop who collects the BC stuff but doesn't use any of it. Most of his
users are Starrette ,Lufkin.

[george wilson]

People with money collect all kinds of things. I bought a Gibson Custom Shop 1954 Les Paul black solid body guitar in new condition. It didn't even have the paper peeled off the pick guard. A dentist had kept it in his office for decoration. I got it for considerably less than what they sell for new ($4,000.00?)

Probably the prettiest solid body guitar ever made,with the rectangular pole piece alnico 5 pickups. Everything gold plated.

[David Ragan]

'The workmanship is great, but design is a different matter.'

I guess the best design does more with less (is a more or less optimised matching of form to function) - and ends up looking beautiful at the same time. Words like integrity, rightness and fit come to mind.

No offence to anybody (least of all BCT who do some lovely stuff), but the product R&D experience suggests that it's in the general sense ultimately a tall order/an unrealistic proposition to think that it's possible to crank out optimised designs one after another. As in the case of unique 'one time only' tools offered by more than one maker these days. By definition some will hit the mark, while others won't. It's very easy to get into gee whiz gizmo territory.

Seen through an R&D management lens product innovation is much like betting on the horses. You bet finite time, money and other resources against commercial and technical risks in the hope of winning big in the market. Effective development processes seek to early on get the investigation required to reduce that risk done - and to weed out projects/products that are unlikely to succeed commercially early on in the game long before they make it to market. Normally before heavy investment has been committed. Human factors however frequently mess that one up.

It can get a little dangerous when there's what seems like a good idea about looking to bend user reality to fit it. It may represent a new and greatly improved paradigm, but it's on balance more likely a pipe dream. Business realities/the need to make a buck can drive pseudo innovation and even the invention of pseuco science to justify it too - we see it all the time in consumer products.

The reality tends to be that very occasionally the designer gets lucky and hits the nail on the head first time, but it's very often the case that it takes years of use and evolution to truly optimise stuff. At which point the design should stabilise as there's not a lot of room for improvement barring new technologies or different price point requirements.

The other side of that coin is that as buyers we equally may end up following a similar learning path - we don't necessarily recognise what's good and what isn't in advance. Bragging rights, personal attitudes (early vs perceived risk/change averse late adopters) clever marketing, must have thatedness and the like can distort the scenario too….

Man, what a synopsis of marketing, product design, and advertising psychology. A humbling experience for me to read all that.......that experience happens all the time to me reading on this forum. It is a good thing for my massive ego.

People with money collect all kinds of things. I bought a Gibson Custom Shop 1954 Les Paul black solid body guitar in new condition. It didn't even have the paper peeled off the pick guard. A dentist had kept it in his office for decoration. I got it for considerably less than what they sell for new ($4,000.00?)

Probably the prettiest solid body guitar ever made,with the rectangular pole piece alnico 5 pickups. Everything gold plated.

Yeah, I am considering selling some of my LN planes, and Pfeil chisels. Have too many, and never use what I have. Would like to have a nice spray set up. But, thats another thread.

[ian maybury]

Hi David. Guess spending more than a few years in the field clarifies the thought process.

Knowing the variables we deal with in developing and commercialising new products - and having a structured process by which to handle them is to a very significant degree helpful. It has the potential to at least help point to potential blind spots/tunnel vision issues in projects where those doing the work get sucked into focusing on their favourite areas/comfort zones, and ignoring others equally important. It basically improves the odds of success/ups the hit rate.

The unfortunate fact however is that even knowing the stuff it's hard to consistently get R&D right. Even the best organisations have scarily high rates of failure. It's really only when they run well put together projects in large enough numbers that the outcomes may start to track the statistical odds. (one off projects can fail for trivial reasons that bear no relationship to the big issues) Some individuals seem to have a definite knack in the area, but most businesses based on successful product developments got lucky - the stars lined up. (what they did of course makes perfect sense in retrospect)

As ususal (as in most things in life) it tends to be a case of getting on with it. Lots of thought/consideration of the issues helps, but there's equally always room for heart/creativity/enthusiasm to make the vital difference. It's possible to get bogged down in procedure and intellectualisation, but it's also possible for blind emotion to drive people into making huge mistakes. The big issue is that most of us literally are unable to look at situations in an impartial way - never mind hear what our heart is telling us. We out of fear and the resulting prejudice typically tend to block/refuse to engage in/selectively perceive/ignore large areas that actually are very important.

There's never any guarantees - in either direction….

[Kent A Bathurst]

Yeah, I am considering selling some of my LN planes... Have too many, and never use what I have...

David - not to throw around sharp elbows or anything, but - who loves ya? First peek heads up via PM/email maybe?




PS - the rest of youse guys - don't come whining to me if I get dibs..........I don't wanna hear it.

[David Ragan]

Hi David. Guess spending more than a few years in the field clarifies the thought process.

There's never any guarantees - in either direction….

Yes, it is fascinating how the toy makers have to gear up for the upcoming Christmas season-by June, all the production lines are rolling, and prob by August, the trucks will be rolling out to distribute toys for kids who don't even realize they want these particular toys yet.

A particularly interesting area, is when I'm in meetings (not often, fortunately) and the process of 'groupthink' occurs---irrational processes that gain momentum, just because everyone wants to agree, or something like that(?).

David - not to throw around sharp elbows or anything, but - who loves ya? First peek heads up via PM/email maybe?


PS - the rest of youse guys - don't come whining to me if I get dibs..........I don't wanna hear it.

Yesterday, I went to classifieds and see that the LN in good condition is about 80% of retail-

Plus, as I have alluded to earlier, all these items are signed by the man himself. The provenance includes a picture with yours truly and Tom LN signing all these things-up @ Peachstate Lumber several years ago.

Probably on the block will the the 7 1/2, the no 9 miter, the tongue/groove plane, and maybe a low angle one. Depends.

Promise to never ask me exactly why I have both a 7 1/2 and 8 jointer

[Mike Brady]

Occasionally I will see Bridge City tools at estate sales; all boxed with their serially numbered certificates, and nary a one ever used for anything constructive......So much potential, relegated to the role of men's jewelry.

[Bill McDermott]

I have the CT-15 Multi-Square. It is a fantastic tool. Small, but packs a punch. Really, it does many things and does them all very well. It was a gift from my Mom and Dad. I think high end, well designed tools like this are great for special gifts. In any case, I use that square all the time. It includes: a bevel gauge, two different pitch dovetail markers - with wrap around square (super handy) and a straight wrap around. The cam lever lock works well. I put John's tool designs in the place where art and function intersect.

[Jim Matthews]

My question here is...I'm thinking about selling some of my LN stuff I have never used.....how would having Tom LN signature on the items effect the value?

It can't hurt. Tom's also really gracious about it.
Having the original box seems to matter.

What few LN tools I still own are pretty ugly by collector's standards.
(Fingerprints, sharpened blades that no longer have milling marks, evidence that someone has looked at them, etc.)

I have read that machinist's rules from McMaster Carr, etc are better suited to us. Is this true, with all the wood movement, etc?

Just make sure you use the same rule when fitting things together, throughout the project.
I like a dressmaker's rule, myself - they're clearly marked, flexible and inexpensive.

I also like large wooden yardsticks, the kind that were given as advertising promos.
They make transferring marks easy, can be clamped together to use as 'pinch sticks' to measure large openings and are difficult to lose.

My shop is a wreck - losing things under shavings is a common problem.

Hard to use a yardstick, and I've tried.

[Jim Matthews]

For me, while I find all of their stuff to be well-designed and beautifully machined, only a few of their pieces are actually appealing to me, and a number of their more recent designs are just too far out there to appeal to my sense of aesthetics for workshop tools, no matter how brilliant the engineering or performance.

That’s fine of course, in matters of taste there can be no argument, only differences of opinion and taste.

That said, there are a lot of days when I really wish that instead of getting a CNC machine, I had gotten a Jointmaker Pro — I’d probably spend more time doing woodworking than posting about CNC machine setup, usage and trying to document everything about CNC so as to be able to understand it — some days I’m tempted to just give up on that too and haul out a credit card and buy Cubify Invent, CamBam or MeshCAM and G-Wizard and a copy of the CNC Cookbook and be done w/ it.

The Jointmaker pro is a nifty piece of kit.

If you're making small boxes, there's nothing like it.
Balancing larger boards on top of the sliding trunions
is another matter entirely.

[Jim Matthews]

It is funny that you seldom,IF EVER see second hand BC tools on Ebay that have actually been used. Are their owners buying them as an investment,keeping them for some years,and trying to sell them at a profit? I don't know,since I never check the prices of BC tools to begin with. It does seem like they are shelf queens.

Yup. Nobody remembers the Beanie Baby craze, the crash in value of Hummels figurines,
or the fleecing of all Thomas Kincaid's credulous rubes either.

I find the product line to be an exercise in conspicuous cynicism.

Contrast that to the young companies actively making tools that
are intended for work.

[Rob Luter]

People with money collect all kinds of things. I bought a Gibson Custom Shop 1954 Les Paul black solid body guitar in new condition. It didn't even have the paper peeled off the pick guard. A dentist had kept it in his office for decoration. I got it for considerably less than what they sell for new ($4,000.00?)

Probably the prettiest solid body guitar ever made,with the rectangular pole piece alnico 5 pickups. Everything gold plated.

OK, I'm jealous. I've been looking for a '54 Custom reissue with the staple neck pickup. If you ever grow tired of it keep me in mind.

[george wilson]

Sent you a PM,Rob.