Kaywoodie Stingers and Registration Numbers: An Obsession Reconsidered

Log in

SmokingPipes.com Updates

Watch for Updates Twice a Week

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mar 30, 2014
2,853
94
wv
Thanks guys. There isn't a number stamped on the pipe.

Stamping reads: KBB (in the clover) DRINKLESS KAYWOODIE

That's all other than the stinger. I'll try to post a shot of it when I'm home.

 
May 31, 2012
4,295
37
Docwatson, Thanks for clearing up Kaywoodie sandblasting techniques. I have wondered about their process but never found much information.
+1
Those of us discussing this topic seem to be fairly interested in KB&B/Kaywoodie sandblasted pipes. Does anyone know of a good existing thread on the subject of these pipes?
Not specifically about KB&B/Kaywoodie, but does mention them along with Yello-Bole and WDC,

and the thread is very very nerd-ish! :)
http://pipesmagazine.com/forums/topic/early-sandblasted-pipes-many-unknowns-yet-remain
:puffy:

 
Mar 30, 2014
2,853
94
wv
This thread inspired me to finish up my Drinkless. I took the stem to work last night and finished it. There isn't a shape number on the pipe. Does anyone have a rough idea of how old it is?

TcrSEof.jpg


eLX6q2t.jpg


pXU7F7P.jpg


zaDVb9Q.jpg


 
Mar 30, 2014
2,853
94
wv
Thanks! I had no idea it was that old until this thread got me wondering. It has nice grain but my junky iPhone camera doesn't pick it up very well.

 

buroak

Lifer
Jul 29, 2014
2,127
1,033
NW Missouri
danielplainview, The combination of the KBB clover on the shank and the "Synchrostem" screw-in fitment put this 1933, or possibly a bit earlier. If it had a "PAT. APP. FOR" stamp on the underside of the shank, we could date it to 1929-32. Otherwise I would call it a 1933. In any case, that is a good looking pipe.

 
May 31, 2012
4,295
37
misterlowercase, Thanks for the link. That is an excellent and very nerd-ish thread.

:D

No problem!

I'm a total "bakko anorak"!
I love threads like the one you've started because I always learn a lot,

as well as gain insight from the perspectives of more knowledgeable and experienced collectors.
Question:
I recently picked up a 1714 KBB Rocky Briar,

sandblast, push stem, clover stamp, reg us pat no. 298978
Any idea to dating?
Any info about what the patent was for?
:?:

 

buroak

Lifer
Jul 29, 2014
2,127
1,033
NW Missouri
misterlowercase, Thank you for the kind words.
I have seen smooth finish and sandblast KBB Rocky Briar pipes with that patent, so I do not think that patent was for the sandblast. I tried to search the patent, but turned up nothing.
My efforts to date these pipes have been similarly unfruitful. If I had to guess, I would put these pipes in the late-1920s to 1930s range. The four-digit code should allow us to rule out 1940s or later production.

 

xrundog

Lifer
Oct 23, 2014
1,298
9,211
Ames, IA
The Kaywoodie Forum has this to say about the KB&B 17 prefix:
17 KB&B Rocky Briar, sandblast finish, push tenon, black vulcanite stem (1920's)

 

buroak

Lifer
Jul 29, 2014
2,127
1,033
NW Missouri
xrundog, Thanks for clearing that up for us. The four digit code, though, does make me wonder if this pipe line was produced into the 1930s.

 
May 31, 2012
4,295
37
Thanks for that xrundog.
I can't find any patent info either, not even the applications or drawings for Kaywoodie.
I did find a snippet cut from the Patent Office Gazette stating that it had been in use since July 15, 1932:

wtS4wG5.jpg

And a newspaper ad from The Cornell daily Sun, April 22, 1933

The Rocky Briar was really an inexpensive everymans pipe it appears -

the one I got is pretty nice though and should clean up very well!
bw75RX7.jpg


 

buroak

Lifer
Jul 29, 2014
2,127
1,033
NW Missouri
Nicely done, misterlowercase. Thank you. I can see why these would be cheap pipes. The sandblasted Rocky Briars I have seen have flaws even blasting could not hide. I wonder if they were made from stummels deemed too poor to turn into Thorns. Do not get me wrong, old blasted briar should smoke very well, and the flaws I have seen remain merely cosmetic. I hope you can get yours cleaned up and back in action.

 

xrundog

Lifer
Oct 23, 2014
1,298
9,211
Ames, IA
xrundog, Thanks for clearing that up for us. The four digit code, though, does make me wonder if this pipe line was produced into the 1930s.
Well, 17 is an early prefix. I'm not totally versed on the tortured history of KB&B and their various lines in the 1920s. They had 4 digit and 2 digit stamps. Early Thorns had two digit stamps. I think two digits were on the early Kaywoodies which then fairly quickly went to 4 digits. And then back to two in the 30s.

 
Mar 30, 2014
2,853
94
wv
Wow this thread is still kicking and screaming. I never knew there was such a following for Kaywoodies on the forum. I've never really shown any of mine on here before. I've posted some of my Grabows, and literally heard crickets.

 

buroak

Lifer
Jul 29, 2014
2,127
1,033
NW Missouri
xrundog, The four-digit stamps were an aberration that lasted only, what, ten years?
danielplainview, I am surprised (pleasantly so), too. I think there are several spin-off topics ready to burst out of this thread.

 

lifeon2

Part of the Furniture Now
Jan 19, 2012
625
12
denver co
For those interested in the kaywoodies check out http://kaywoodie.myfreeforum.org/ it actually covers the whole sm frank line but mainly kaywoodies

 
May 31, 2012
4,295
37
If our obsession is not baseless, then it is at least problematic in terms of the buying behavior it produces. For example, I have seen Kaywoodie pipes with Registration Numbers on their stingers go for three times the price of an otherwise completely equal Kaywoodie with an unmarked stinger. That kind of price difference might make sense if we could be sure that the pipe bearing the stamped stinger were really older than the pipe with the unmarked stinger. There, though, is the rub - we cannot be at all sure that marked stingers indicate an older pipe.
One example from my own collection should help open my case for tempering our obsession with Reg. No. stampings. Specifically, I have two Kaywoodie Super Grain pipes in the same shape. The first has a four-digit finish/shape number that dates it to 1939 or earlier. That pipe's stinger has no markings whatsoever. They do not appear to have been polished away; rather they appear to have never been stamped in the first place. The second has a two-digit shape number and dates to the post-1939 period. This pipe, however, does have the Reg. No. stamped on its stinger. In this case, then, the older pipe is not the one with the marked stinger.
Another example will, I hope, reinforce my argument. In my collection I also have a Kaywoodie Centennial whose stinger bears the Reg. No. stamp. I believe it to be an early production example of its line, but it still cannot predate 1946-1947. Other, older Kaywoodie pipes certainly lack the Reg. No. stamp found on my post-war Centennial.
So, what explains the chronologically uneven existence of Reg. No. stamps on Kaywoodie stingers? I do not know. I can speculate that some stingers were produced while the patent was in force but that the stingers were not actually fitted to pipes until a later date. I imagine bins of same-size stingers where marked and unmarked specimens co-mingled until being randomly plucked by a craftsman assembling a pipe. In other cases, such as that of my Centennial, an uncommon shape calling for an uncommon stinger size may have received an older stinger than would have a pipe of a more popular shape. I really do not know why marked stingers are less helpful to dating a Kaywoodie than many, myself included, have imagined. I know only that Reg. No. markings are at best an imperfect cue for dating a Kaywoodie. Perhaps we should stop paying premium prices for a stamp that does not really mean that much.
Circling back to the original topic, being somewhat new to Kaywoodie collecting, the Reg No. was one parameter I used to try and determine date or era, so thanks for bringing this up and clarifying that it's not always a rock-solid shorthand indicator.
Interesting stuff.

:puffy:

 

sablebrush52

The Bard Of Barlings
Jun 15, 2013
21,004
50,333
Southern Oregon
jrs457.wixsite.com
Circling back to the original topic, being somewhat new to Kaywoodie collecting, the Reg No. was one parameter I used to try and determine date or era, so thanks for bringing this up and clarifying that it's not always a rock-solid shorthand indicator.
When I collected Kaywoodies, the stinger was never my means for dating. We like to assume that stems are original, but it is not a valid assumption to make. I used a collection of other stampings, such as the "Patent App For", the KBB in a clover, AGED BRUYERE or GRECIAN BRIAR, etc. At least I had a decent idea regarding when the bowl was made.
The same holds true for my other fascinations, particularly Barling. I have two that have factory stem replacements. They're Barling stems, just from a later era.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.