possible blacklock

[Bonnie Scott]

I found this, this morning at my favorite CI place here in town. It was grungy and the seller didn't care to much for it because it was priced at 15$. After only 8 hours in the lye tank in the hot sun it came out nice.
It sure looks like the arc lodge I just sold last week except this one isn't marked.

 

[John E]

Looks a lot like early Lodge. Something about the hanging hole seems a bit off to me for Lodge, but maybe it's just the picture.

 

[Bonnie Scott]

I see what you mean John, after comparing the pictures the arc handle hole seems to come to a sharper point than this one does. :icon_scratchchin: It does resemble the number 8 skillet shown on page 222 of the RB.

 

[RickC]

Bonnie, Are you sure your "favorite CI place" isn't my closet??

Found this last Sunday at the flea market. It was dirty when I left for work this morning, came home and it was nice and clean. Someone also ate the cookies and milk I left out. :glutton:

Doug, I'd like to report Bonnie for sneaking into people's homes and cleaning their iron. :tongue:

Edit: I actually did find this last Sunday.

 

[Bonnie Scott]

RickC, I hope you will post a picture after the real CI fairy cleans that pan. I am curious to see if yours has a tiny dimple in the center of the cooking surface like mine does. These pans sure look a lot different from the crude, rough, tiny spout pans that have sold recently on ebay for silly prices, advertised as blacklock.

 

[Doug D.]

The pour spouts on the skillet in the first post also seem a little odd for Lodge. Too big. I also think the temptation to invoke the phrase "possible Blacklock" need to be resisted, as its increasing use over the past year or so has caused everyone with a skillet with a raised number on the handle to anxiously hope for some glimmer of verification that what they have is one of the unicorns no one so far can claim for certain to have actually seen. Even though Blacklock's demise was right on the cusp of the industry transition to inset heat rings (which Wagner resisted almost altogether), if we are to go by the assumption presented in the RB, we would expect a Blacklock to also have an outside heat ring and a raised molder's mark letter.

 

[John E]

I see what you mean about the pour spouts Doug. I wouldn't say they're "too big". Maybe more like the radius of the pour spouts is too narrow? I've always thought of old obviously-Lodge pieces as having very large pour spouts relative to almost everything else. The one pictured above in this thread, the radius of spout is narrow and the arc is about 180 degrees, which makes it "pointy" for lack of a better word. Whereas old Lodge has a much larger circumference on the spout, but is a less extreme angle on the arc (say like 135 degrees), so it's a large spout but less "pointy".

I hope some of that makes some semblance of sense to someone other than me.

 

[Bonnie Scott]

I actually think it is an unmarked lodge made some time around the time of the arc logo. I was being a little sarcastic with the blacklock title but I guess sarcasm doesn't really translate well in type. It is a really fine cooking surface, very smooth. I wonder if the slight dimple in the middle is where the tool used to machine attached? I don't know about that stuff.

 

[Doug D.]

I just think the more the term "possible Blacklock" gets used (kind of like "pre-Griswold"), the more people who are only casually interested in the subject will call everything with a raised number a Blacklock. Then it will proliferate on eBay, and every other unmarked skillet will be "rare" or "Blacklock???" :headpop:

 

[Bonnie Scott]

I will never use that phrase again. It creates such a mess when your head explodes. :icon_rofl:

 

[BenjaminO]

I see what you mean about the pour spouts Doug. I wouldn't say they're "too big". Maybe more like the radius of the pour spouts is too narrow? I've always thought of old obviously-Lodge pieces as having very large pour spouts relative to almost everything else. The one pictured above in this thread, the radius of spout is narrow and the arc is about 180 degrees, which makes it "pointy" for lack of a better word. Whereas old Lodge has a much larger circumference on the spout, but is a less extreme angle on the arc (say like 135 degrees), so it's a large spout but less "pointy".

I hope some of that makes some semblance of sense to someone other than me.

I hear you loud and clear. I had that same thoughts when I saw the pour spouts. Additionally all the Lodge marked and unmarked pieces I've seen from that era have a small raised moulders mark at the 6 o'clock.
Do the experts think the unmarked pans that are identical to the arc logo pans were produced at the same time, or before/after the use of the arc logo?

 

[Bonnie Scott]

Here is a picture of the arc logo lodge #6 I sold last week. The spouts sure look the same size to me. I would also add that there was no makers mark at 6 o'clock. Those are some pretty big ears.

 

[RickC]

Please everyone... Tell me how rare this skillet is. I paid a whopping $10 for mine. I didn't see it when I walked in to the flea market (early), and saw it when walking out (later) as it sat next to a 1930's No.11 Wagner with a giant piece missing from it. Guy wanted "$10 for either one." I took the one without the 2" chunk missing from the side.. :tongue:

I looked at mine again Bonnie.. Still dirty. I'll try and get it cleaned up soon.

 

[Bonnie Scott]

It must not be all that rare if we both found one so cheap. Do you know anything about that dimple in the middle of the pan? Did it happen when they machined it? I do think that Lodge 6 I sold was kind of rare.

 

[RickC]

It must not be all that rare if we both found one so cheap. Do you know anything about that dimple in the middle of the pan? Did it happen when they machined it? I do think that Lodge 6 I sold was kind of rare.

Any dimples in the middle weren't due to where they attached anything. You can see my post here with an article from 1921. about houw they ground pans. My No.0 Griswold Duo-Chrome you can actually see a difference in the plating in four equal places around the edge of the skillet where presumable the grippers held the skillet during grinding. I can take some better photos if you'd like.

But from what I gather, and have read, skillets were gripped from around the back so as not to impede the grinding attachment. One of my favorite brands actually changed their pour spout design to make their skillets easier to grind.

 

[Bonnie Scott]

Thanks for posting this link RickC.

 

[Doug D.]

you can actually see a difference in the plating in four equal places around the edge of the skillet where presumable the grippers held the skillet during grinding.

The grinding took place before the plating, so that can't be what caused the difference. Chromed pieces, however, do typically exhibit discoloration in the plating at the points where whatever created the anode connection. My Griswold #0 also has the same discolored spots.

Sometimes the polish grinding would, depending I suppose on the wear on the grinder head or maybe the inattention of the operator, leave that kind of depression at the center.