The Forum at Handcuffs.Org

Hiatts 1960's Handcuffs...

14 visible archived posts · 14 preserved total · topic ID 1099

Curious 29 Jan 2006

Since it was mentioned on the board about the Haitts 1960 Model Handcuffs.. I am curious to know how many variations of this model handcuff exist..

I've seen the Short & Long Bow versions.. I believe that the short bow only have 10/11 teeth and the long bow has 16/17 counting the last possible notch or tooth.

Also I've seen the Variation with Exposed Rivets at the swinging portion and on the cuff body as well as a version that is Completely Smooth with no exposed Rivets but only on the Short Bow Version?? Does the Smooth Version exist in the Long Bow??

Any question.. What is the HEAVIER VERSION?? Awaiting some interesting replies??? Thank you

Joseph Fox 30 Jan 2006

There is also a rare SOLID-KEY model...

Don't know whether it was ever commercially-available, but it is illustrated both in one of the Alex Nichols books, and also in a David DeVal Escape Manuscript I have.

I believe Chris Gower owns this model?

Jack Tanis 30 Jan 2006

Hello,

There are four versions altogether, including the rare solid key version. All may be seen on this page of Michael Busch's site.

Cheers,

Jack

Ian McColl 30 Jan 2006

I have seen a black finish pair with OIL REGULARLY stamped on the face of the cuff.

Ian

Jack Tanis 30 Jan 2006

Dear Ian,

This was stamped on the earlier first (hollow key) version handcuffs. One is shown on the same Web page above from Michael Busch's collection. His has a chrome, not a black, finish. I am unaware of any difference material enough to constitute another version. Also, the hollow, round key was made in two lengths, an about typical length and a quite long one. I have not a clue why.

Cheers,

Jack

Curious 31 Jan 2006

I appreciate the responses so far.. But after looking at the pictures again and again. It appears that more then 4 Versions Exist that are noted on the Busch Website.. #1. You have the solid key version #2. Version One polished #3.Version one Chrome #4. Version One Chrome Oil Regularly #5. Version 2 and #6. Version 3 LONG BOW with exposed rivets on the body and swinging portion.

So, again I ask.. Looking at all the variations of Versions 1 & 2 they appear to be the SHORT BOW.. Did the LONG BOW Exist in those Chromed OR Polished First Versions or oil regularly? So can anyone point to any other versions that exist..

I personally have one of the Extra Long Hollow Bit keys and 3 of the shorter ones as well in my collection.

A note to Jack.... I clicked on the link to your website from that one and it didn't work?? Is your website still existing??

Thanks

Paul Reardon 31 Jan 2006

Hello All,

You can get to Jack's website from my links page here-

http://community-2.webtv.net/SuPaul/Rea ... page8.html

I try to keep the links up-to-date. If anyone knows of a collector's site I am missing or if a link doesn't work please let me know about it.

Best, Paul

Jack Tanis 31 Jan 2006

Dear Paul,

Thanks. Here is another URL. This site has no adverts on it. http://www.editing.org.uk/tanis/collectibles.htm. Michael hasn't updated his site in a long time, and my URL changed after his last update.

Dear Curious,

I don't regard incidental or cosmetic differences to constitute distinct versions. The difference, at least to me, must be or at least approach being substantive. That OIL REGULARLY or PAT. PEND. is stamped on what really is the first version (hollow key -- forget the solid key version) makes for one version, not for three versions.

Otherwise, the picture gets too obscured. When every tree is scrutinised redundantly, the forest never emerges. For instance, with an over-active imagination, one can designate at least half a dozen Bean chain nipper versions of US origin, whereas there is but one. Still, to each, his own; interpret it as you will.

Cheers,

Jack

Chris Gower 31 Jan 2006

An interesting question and one that is not easy to answer. Basically I agreee with Alex Nichols Books. Most of the 1960 patterns take the standard key with three exceptions:
1) Solid key model marked Hiatt 1960 MK2. Only three of these are known (the one in my collection, the one in Michael Busch's collection and one in the Police Museum at Ripon).
2) Double weight model which takes a large barrel key. Only two of these are known (one in my collection and one belonging to Richard Hopkins).
3) Barrel key model - key is similar diameter to the standard 1960 pattern but has a bitted end. Only two known (one in the Hiatt collection and one that I traded about 25 years ago).

Before deciding on 'normal' variations, I need feedback. When my collection was put in The Guinness Book of Records between 1998 and 2002 it was clear that no duplicate items were included. So how do we decide?? When I bought the collection of Dave Lloyd back in 1986 he had over 20 'different' 1960 patterns and included large swivels, small swivels, different finishes, raised rivets and markings such as oil regularly and Pat.Pend.

Let me know whether you would like photos of 12 or 30 variations.

Chris Gower

Jack Tanis 31 Jan 2006

#10

Dear Chris,

You use the term variation correctly. Variations alone, such as swivel links and finishes, do not constitute full-fledged versions. As you know, for decades plating was an offered option, for which there was a charge, on Hiatt handcuffs. It is more instructive to distinguish between plated and bright as a variation than it is to designate each as a different version. My contention is a true version must have an intentional and substantial, not a trivial or co-incidental, difference.

The reason I incorporation the concepts of intentional and co-incidental is to rule out one-off articles from being regarded as true versions. They belong in a class by themselves, e.g., accidents and prototypes.

Persons tend to be guided in their thinking by their underlying motives, as you tacitly indicate Mr Lloyd certainly was. His goal clearly was quantitative, which hardly is educational and which fails to impart a cohesive perspective. The "family tree" approach, which is qualitative, succeeds, though. There is a model, comprising one or more versions, each of which may have any number of variations. This essentially vertical rather than horizontal, or linear, approach, works best, conveying the required perspective.

That a given variation may be exceptionally rare and correspondingly valuable does not detract from or negate the greater utility of this approach to classification. Rather, it maintains the perspective, which facilitates understanding, which in turn is the desired purpose.

Cheers,

Jack

Anonymousini 31 Jan 2006

#11

English please!

Roger Wilco 31 Jan 2006

#12

10-4!

Joe Lauher 31 Jan 2006

#13

Chris

Actually I would like photos of all 20. I am only slightly kidding, because one day next month or next year I want to do a second edition of the British Handcuffs book. And I hope that one can be more complete.

Joe

P.S. I still need your mailing address.

Joe Lauher 31 Jan 2006

#14