Black Frog

You stole it for $100. If I'm reading the serial number correct at 12203, that puts it before 1912 according to Postman's AIA.

You're thinking of the Vulcan brand, which has a similar logo, but is a cast anvil. Real A&H's are quality anvils. In fact maybe you should sell it to me.....

That's an Arm & Hammer anvil, real nice size too. A&H's can be of fantastic quality. Probably marked for some other hardware company, nice find!

Cast anvil usually have raised markings/logos on them from the casting process. Like Fisher's Eagle, the Columbian markings, or Vulcan's logo. Forged anvils have the stampings going into the metal of the anvil. Soderfors sometimes have both the raised logo from casting, and also weight stamping on the side and/or the crown logo.

Top one looks to be heavier than 241# from the numbers I can make out... I see a 2-1-1? which would be 253+, unless I'm not seeing the numbers correctly.

Just on another way-out-there crazy idea.... Looked up the game history of tic-tac-toe. Wiki says: ....The different names of the game are more recent. The first print reference to "Noughts and crosses", the British name, appeared in 1864. In his novel "Can You Forgive Her", 1864, Anthony Trollope refers to a clerk playing "tit-tat-toe" If it made it to print by that time of 1864, it had to be getting popular well before that. Just throwing another crazy idea out there....

Good grief, I'm laughing at this. .... Fantastic information! What is the vintage of the "Type O" anvil?

Cool- thanks for the info!

Nuge, what is the item in your last pic? What size is that? Any chance of seeing the whole thing?

I would love to have a stand like that! Very nice. Only thing I would add is welding a small plate to the leg on the floor for a pad for the post vice to land on. Saves the concrete from getting beat if you're pounding on the vise.

Looking at these beautiful things in this thread makes me feel just stupid.... Truly gorgeous stuff.

Oh I agree, use every tool you can to help out when estimating. I just didn't want someone reading this to assume it works all the time, and then be way off for size and/or pricing by the pound. Sometimes by 30% in that Trenton example.... 30% off of a 300# anvil gives you a 200# to 400# window. Quite a range there.

It may work for smaller (?) anvils. For a check, Matchless Antiques conveniently lists all dimensions in the Ebay auctions, as do some other listings for anvils. I looked back through several completed listings, and this equation worked for most (not all) anvils under 150# within +/- 15#. But several (not all) over 150# I grabbed were quite a bit off: 148# Hay-Budden 26-1/2" x 11", equation indicates this would be 181 pounds. 155# Trenton 29" x 11", equation says 209 pounds. 223# Peter Wright 29-1/2" x 12-1/4", equation says 251 pounds. 169# Peter Wright 26-1/2" x 11-3/4", equation says 201 pounds. 200# Fisher 28-1/2" x 11-7/8", equation says 228 pounds. 169# Hay Budden 26-1/2" x11-3/4", equation says 201 pounds. In my posession at the moment is a 212# PW, 29" x 12", equation says 238#. Just sayin'.... Maybe not the most reliable method for larger anvils.

Sounds like the same vintage as the one I pictured. Pre-ENGLAND stamp, and post-seam-line era. Hows the rebound? Any evidence of anything out of the ordinary? Yours is 191#, mine is 77#. Maybe cbl4823 will report back with the size and vintage of his X-rated PW....

Great! What vintage PW is it?

Wow, how cool! What a fantastic piece of history, thanks for sharing the pictures.

Size, weight?

I'd say Trenton, recessed base, weight stamp on the foot. ....

Was it an "X" stamp like the one pictured above?

I'm not seeing how this works.... Maybe your plus sign is supposed to be a multiplication sign?

Or the WRIGHT is double-stamped. Maybe hit twice without it being lined up perfectly on the first impression?

I doubt many people have ever checked the underside of their PW's for any stampings. Why would anyone have bothered? I've never seen Postman mention any underside markings before. Usually the undersides of anvils are caked with rust and crap, so it may take some cleaning to make them visible even if there were some stampings. I certainly didn't see this stamp until I started cleaning it.... I've never seen any marks before this, and I do look at the underside of the base to see the manufacturing methods and results.

Fantastic anvil at an awesome price! Can't ask for more than that.... :)

Good to know about factual Fisher information. All I could go on is the information I could find, can't wait for your book to be completed! This could very well be the case. But I enjoy trying to piece together history, and why things were made a certain way. Now I'd like to find any other PW's with this sort of stamp. If I can make it to Quad State, I'll be looking for sure.... ;)

Here's an outlandish theory, I fully admit, but fun to think about....... To me this would seem to be quite an overkill stamp for an inspector’s mark? Imagine inspecting anvils down the line, each needing an approval mark where imprinting a simple single letter/number/symbol would suffice. That stamp being that large and that deep required some serious effort, and had to be done quite hot I would think. This isn’t an early PW with the sharply shaped feet that are present with early models. There is no distinct dividing line or noticeable seam between the upper and lower parts of the anvil that were evident 1852-1860. Since there is no “ENGLAND” stamp, Postman would date this as a pre-1910 anvil. So let’s say this would fall between 1860 and 1910. I can’t make out if there was any circular “SOLID WROUGHT” stamp which might help dating the anvil further. I’ve read where Postman has indicated that prior to the U.S. Civil War, Mousehole Forge dominated the English export market. After the war Peter Wright was the major anvil brand sold until the late 1800s when several U.S. manufacturers starting making similar anvils. Postman also notes where some Fisher anvils were produced during the war with the Eagle logo removed, theorizing that the South did not want to purchase anvils with a logo associated with the Union. Having the eagle logo on there hurt their sales. Could we venture to guess that PW was making an effort to promote their sales during the U.S. Civil War period? England was officially neutral during the Civil War, but was making ships for the Confederacy. In an effort to increase their production and sales, would an English anvil maker mark shipments of anvils directly for the Confederacy? Could this X-stamp on the bottom of this anvil be indicative of this? Just throwin' ideas around....