The Forum at Handcuffs.Org

Hiatt Irish 8 questions

41 visible archived posts · 41 preserved total · topic ID 3802

The Amazing Michael 02 Nov 2010

Hello all, I have a few Hiatt questions. We all know that the standard non-adjustable Darby handcuffs were deemed the model 104.....so here is my question: Was the Irish 8 called the model 204? The reason I ask is because I just acquired a Hiatt Irish 8 that is stamped 204 on both the cuff and the key. Here are a few more quick questions about this cuff: The bow of the key (the head) is bigger and shaped different from the other Hiatt keys that I have......does this narrow down the time period that it was made? If so, can anyone tell me how old this one is and why the key is so different? Photos below:

Any relevant info on this cuff is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance for your help! =)

Cheers, Mike D~C/

Paul Davies 02 Nov 2010

The model number is 103.
It also appears to be a size 3.
I don't think the number 204 has any real significance.
My guess would be early 1900s

Hope that helps a bit.
Paul

Anonymous 02 Nov 2010

Could the 204 be the bobbys id number?

Anonymous 02 Nov 2010

Yes, most Police cuffs were numbered.

Steve Santini 02 Nov 2010

That the Irish 8 cuffs where both wrist holes are approx the same size tend to be the older models.

More modern models have one wrist hole bigger than the other.

S.S.

The Amazing Michael 02 Nov 2010

Thanks for the replies everyone.

Steve, I have noticed that about the wrist holes being uneven on Irish 8s before but didn't know that they could be dated by that. Pretty cool. Do you know what year they started making the locking side bigger?

Do any of you guys know about the unusual key bow? None of my Darbies (handcuffs or leg irons) ever had a key like this one.....was this an Irish 8 thing only or what?

Thanks.

Cheers, Mike D~C/

Steve Santini 02 Nov 2010

Hi Mike.

Many years ago I met a very old ex British cop who had been stationed at one point in Ireland and who told me that the odd wrist holes were so that 2 pairs of Irish 8's with one big and one small wrist hole could be linked together to make a double cuff to hold someone with bigger wrists while the smaller side could also be used the same way on someone with smaller wrists.

Seems kind of silly because you need 2 sets of cuffs for this (when you could accomplish the same thing with a pair of 115's) but it is one way you can use a "fixed size" cuff on people with varying wrist sizes.

I think they started making Irish 8's with odd size wrist holes in the 1930's but I could be wrong.

As for your key, I have seen 104 Darbies with the same sort of head on the key so no. it is not exclusive to Irish 8 cuffs.

Steve

Steve Santini 02 Nov 2010

It is possible that the Darby keys with this sort of head were not made by the original maker of the cuff but were instead made as replacement keys by some firm or locksmith of the day.

As a backup key or if the original was lost, etc.

Much like Safariland, ASP, and others offer special replacement keys that will fit cuffs they did not make.

I am inclined to think that this is what is up with your key and others like this because I have yet to see one with a head like this stamped Hiatt, Froggatt, etc.

S.S.

The Amazing Michael 02 Nov 2010

Thanks Steve.....I had no idea they would use double pairs like that. Pretty interesting fact. I guess you can learn something new every day on this forum! =)

Cheers, Mike D~C/

Anonymous 03 Nov 2010

#10

Would also work as a Come-along for two different sized wrists (on two different sized people)

LK 03 Nov 2010

#11

i feel the key was made by the employee who stamped them with the "P" it looks more personalized then your normal Hiatt keys that have the 4 layers below the head,i feel he was a senior employee assigned to make the figure 8's and took his work seriously,if u could identify when MR.P was employed that would give u a date, but how would u ever do that,probably impossible

LK D~D

Anonymous 03 Nov 2010

#12

That would suggest that there were less than 26 workers over the period they were produced.
I don't think you can assign a letter to one particular worker.

Dorson 03 Nov 2010

#13

I'm still curious about the forming equipment from the days when they forged those darby's but that could be a whole thread unto itself.

Edgeplay_Cgo 04 Nov 2010

#14

That would suggest that there were less than 26 workers over the period they were produced.
I don't think you can assign a letter to one particular worker.

It would be more likely it was an inspection mark.

Anonymous 04 Nov 2010

#15

http://www.network54.com/Forum/261154/m ... aker+Marks

joe tanner 04 Nov 2010

#16

HI !! all.... i just have to put in my half cent wort here..... NO DISRESPECT INTENDED .... AMAZING MICHAEL -- by the way i read what & how you posted your comment, it sounds as if you really believe the two cuff THEORY as FACT & that down the road you would continue to tell people this THEORY - WITHOUT - mentioning the word - THEORY.... by doing so, this is how THEORY becomes so called FACT... NOT GOOD !!!! i believe MOST of what we thnk we know about restraints is BULL CRAP.... still it is nice to chat about it, but one should ALWAYS mention the WORD - THEORY - etc etc when they are speaking about the UNKNOWN - UNCERTAINTY..... one THEORY is simply the fact the the SMALLER side MAY have been made SMALLER (backside)simply because that was the side that was put on the wrist 1ST & kinda secured the person as the OTHER arm wrist was brought closer to be secured by the cuff... who knows .... none of us do ..... joe

Dorson 04 Nov 2010

#17

Gonna toss this out as fuel for thought...
Ergonomically speaking the dominate hand tends to be slightly larger, typically the right hand. That might be one reason. Another could be so they could pass a belt through and cinch it to the waist as you will need the extra space to do that.

Steve Santini 04 Nov 2010

#18

I think when a British cop who was stationed in Ireland and used Irish 8's tells you this is how he and others in his dept used the 8's it passes from "theory" into how it was actually done.

S.S.

Edgeplay_Cgo 04 Nov 2010

#19

The cop may have been correct in that that was the way they used them, but it does not necessarily connect to the reason Hiatts made them that way. The answer may be lost.

I've been tought a lot of crap by instructors and users who are very competent in what they do. Nevertheless, they still teach some crap.

Steve Santini 04 Nov 2010

#20

But...

When you have some of these cuffs being made with one obviously larger wrist side, and most people's wrist sizes are the same, it makes perfect sense what the cop told me.

While there may not be any "offical" Hiatt literature to back up why they made them this way, logic, combined with the verbal testimony of a guy who used them this way, and saw others do the same, goes a long way.

The early ones were made with both sides the same.

Later models were not.

Perhaps Hiatt realized that since the cuffs are not adjustable and people come with different wrist sizes they had better try and do something about it if they wanted to continue to make and sell the design.

Makes sense.

S.S.

Dorson 04 Nov 2010

#21

I disagree with what the old cop was saying as it fails the logic test. Either you misunderstood what he was saying or he was feeding a load of crap.

Ron Spitz 05 Nov 2010

#22

Here is another Hiatt Irish 8 on eBay. The key looks like the same as the one you have Mike.

Ron

http://cgi.ebay.com/19th-Century-Hiatt- ... 4aa6076258

Anonymous 05 Nov 2010

#23

If he were brilliant he would have been a brain surgeon or an investment banker. He wouldn't have been a cop. Much less a cop in Ireland! Lots of cops, forgive me, are just plain stupid. Not that they don't THINK that they know everything and love to tell you about it.

Steve Santini 05 Nov 2010

#24

Since so many people here LOVE to disagree or take issue with anything I post, let's hear YOUR ideas on why one side of the later made Irish 8's was bigger than on earlier made pairs.

So far, as usual, I have seen a lot of words but no other theories, proof, opinions, or anything of merit to add to this discussion.

Please go ahead.

S.S.

Anonymous 05 Nov 2010

#25

Steve, I agree with Joe. I don't know, and might not ever know. Which does not compel me to make stuff up.

Edgeplay_Cgo 05 Nov 2010

#26

I'm wondering if there's an ergonomic reason to have a large opening and a small opening. It's possible that, even in that less litigious time, it was done in response to complaints of injuries.

Just another theory.

Paul Davies 05 Nov 2010

#27

As I said earlier. It could double as a nipper or come-along and fit two different sized people. Irish 8 were made concurrently with the Nipper the difference being that the Irish 8 can be locked on as a nipper but the Nipper can not be used as cuffs. A sharp twist of either could break your wrist. Just another theory but how you use them is up to the individuals imagination at the time. I don't think the larger side is big enough to use as a hand to foot restraint.
Paul

Anonymous 05 Nov 2010

#28

Joe tanner said " by the way i read what & how you posted your comment, it sounds as if you really believe the two cuff THEORY as FACT & that down the road you would continue to tell people this THEORY - WITHOUT - mentioning the word - THEORY.... by doing so, this is how THEORY becomes so called FACT... NOT GOOD !!!! i believe MOST of what we thnk we know about restraints is BULL CRAP.... still it is nice to chat about it, but one should ALWAYS mention the WORD - THEORY - etc etc when they are speaking about the UNKNOWN - UNCERTAINTY..... ''

Best comment I have every read here!

Ian

LK 06 Nov 2010

#29

if not mistaken the larger size is always on the lock side,so if ur the " copper" and using them like a come-a-long you would have a little more room and not be as restricted as the perp,also the lock is closer and easier for u to maneuver

LK D~D

Ian McColl 06 Nov 2010

#30

In the early 1980's I wrote to Hiatt in regard to their odd sized figure eight of which i had purchased two. Their reply stated that they were made as come alongs and that the lock tube was to be used as the handle. I think this was just an excused for a poorly designed remake of the original Irish eight.
Ian McColl

Steve Santini 06 Nov 2010

#31

The Irish 8's made before Hiatt did the remake/reissue of the design?

The large single wrist side started showing up long before then.

S.S.

Jack.Tanis 06 Nov 2010

#32

Hello,

On 6 July 2000, Hiatt Chairman Geoffrey W. Cross e-mailed me the proceeding.

"The 'figure of 8' handcuffs were first produced at the beginning of the nineteenth century. They were the first handcuffs issued to the Metropolitan Police of London in about 1832.

"We believe that we were still producing them until the start of the Second World War. Unfortunately, our premises and records were destroyed by a German incendiary bomb in 1941 so that we are unable to provide you with any further information."

Michael, I have a pair of Figure Eight handcuffs the key of which also has a pointed protrusion on its handle, similar to your key.

Cheers,

Jack
http://www.editing.org.uk/tanis/collectibles.htm

Steve Santini 06 Nov 2010

#33

Plug 8's

It seems logical that the first "figure of 8" handcuffs issued to London police would have been plug 8's as the design pre dates the Irish 8.

S.S.

The Amazing Michael 06 Nov 2010

#34

I have seen this type of key many times with cuffs for sale on eBay but now that I think about it, I believe they have all been with Irish 8's. If memory serves, they were almost exclusively coming from UK sellers; there must be a stockpile of these cuffs with this type of key over there (incidentally, that is where my pair came from too).

Thanks for all the info guys.

Cheers, Mike D~C/

Elliot Cutler 14 Nov 2010

#35

Had a thought. I'm quite sure this group of actual experts could knock this idea out in one swat, but that's why we're here.

The Irish 8 goes back to about when the Plug Eights were still used. Looking at a young Houdini showing off the Solid State "8" Cuffs in "Handcuff Secrets" he always wears them and similar "8" cuffs with his arms crossed. That is, Right fist in front of Left arm and vice-versa.

I'm wondering if the holding the wrists crossed went with all the "8" cuffs until the two cuffs linked together became more common. Once the chain link cuffs were common, handcuffed hands were always facing forward. Placing Irish 8 cuffs on forward facing hands may have started then, and wouldn't that have been easier with one side of the cuff larger?

The question is: When did they start putting Irish 8 cuffs on people with their hands forward instead of crossed? And were these eqal sized or not? Could this be why the later Irish 8 cuffs are larger on one side? Plug cuffs I thought had been replaced by the easier to use Darby. But Darby type Eight cuffs were just as easy to work so these Darby Eights stayed around while others did not.

Our Website Master might tell us when the Darby Chain cuffs first officially came along (if he would please), or perhaps I'm the only one who doesn't know that day and date (maybe Froggatt-Friday 1802). From there, how long was it before Darby Eight type cuffs were placed on forward facing hands?

Where's the first picture or drawing of someone wearing Eight style cuffs with both hands forward instead of crossed? Is the cuff shown of equal size on both sides? Are the elbows out or in? Escape artists know that small plug eights are tough to wear with forward facing hands unless you can keep your elbows very close. Hancuffed suspects get pulled about by their elbows, Escape artists not so much.

Would the lucky owners of Irish 8 cuffs please try out wearing these cuffs of differing sizes and designs, with wrists crossed or forward and report on differences in comfort? It would be instructive to find if the later Eights, with the larger cuff on the lock side, could be practically worn forward and the equal sized ones only with crossed wrists.

Just a thought. Hope it stirs some thinking. Let me know

E

cuffman69 14 Nov 2010

#36

Hi,

For what its worth Ill put forward my theory on why some Irish 8s have different size cuffs. Therell almost certainly be some holes in this so feel free to shoot away.
If you look carefully at Amazing Michaels first picture at the top of this thread Im convinced that the hinged half is made from the same jig or form used to make cap locks and the other half if a single Darby cuff and that the two separate items come together to form an Irish 8.
Im fortunate enough to have many cap locks as well as Irish 8s and irrespective of what wrist size the cap locks are, they are all noticeably higher than they are wide which gives the distinctive larger size. Depending on what size Darby cuff gets married to it could account for the miss matched sizes.
Its also worth remembering that during much of the time these cuffs were in use there would be much less regard paid to prisoners rights and if a person had their skin pinched or suffered wrist injury by over tight cuffs, there wouldnt be a string of lawyers waiting in the wings to bring a personal injury claim.

What ever the reason I'm sure cost and ease of production rather than ergonomics and ease of use is the main factor behind it.

Regards to you all,

Mark (RMP)

Bruce Thomson 14 Nov 2010

#37

My Irish 8s aren't marked Hiatt so I can't say about this. They are larger on the one side though, so I assume it is something about the basic design?
Mine Irish 8s don't look as nice as Michael's.

lauher 15 Nov 2010

#38

This is a interesting thread. I have quite a few Irish 8s and here are some of my thoughts.

Elliot asks, "when (did) the Darby Chain cuffs first officially come along?"

My guess. Plug 8s were the dominant cuff in the early 19th century. Darby cuffs became common perhaps in about the 1820s or 30s. The Irish 8s were introduced in the 1850s or 1860s. And the name is appropriate. Irish 8s were the cuff of Ireland.

I have bought several pairs from Irish dealers, both from the Republic of Ireland and from Northern Ireland. Many look like they were made by Hiatt, but not marked. My guess this was political. An Irish constable did not want to carry a cuff marked by an English firm. I have Irish 8s made by several different firms, perhaps the most interesting are the ones marked "Ireland, Dublin." This Ireland is not the country, but the firm "John Ireland of Dublin" that sold police equipment. I think their cuffs were Hiatts.

Why do they have a bigger than normal key and did Hiatt make the keys?
My guess is they have a bigger key because the bigger key made them easier to open. They key hole would be a bit more difficult hidden and the cuffs a bit more difficult to open than would the more flexible Darby cuffs. My guess is that the government purchase specs in Ireland asked for the bigger key.

I don't know if Hiatt made the keys, but there certainly examples with the Hiatt name. I have no reason to believe that any one other than Hiatt made them. I think a lot of them are unmarked simply because the cuffs are unmarked.

Ebay item: 230550437681 current asking £90.00

Ebay item: 320613081688 sold for $353

Why is the cuff at the lock larger?
I don't know the answer to this one either, but I like the theory that they were often used as grips or come alongs. Grips were very common in England, but I can't remember buying one from Ireland. I think the used the Irish 8s as a grip. It was sort of like the Pratt combination. You could simply use it as a grip or as a handcuff.

Joe

Unresolved image reference ↗

Plungerman 19 Nov 2010

#39

I think Mark has spotted it.

In comparing things that came from the same factory and assembly area I think you have to chalk up any difference or similarity to what they had on hand and how they were used to doing things.

E

John Bushey 20 Nov 2010

#40

Hey,
I've got to throw my theory out here. Ease of application to prisoner! You open it, and then place the small end around one wrist, holding it shut,
and then becasue the other lock-tube side is slightly larger, it makes it easier to slip the other prisoner's wrist into the opening, and snap
it shut. Just an idea. It would be far easier than trying to put both wrist on at the same time. John

Ian McColl 20 Nov 2010

#41

Hi John, you have the best theory so far but I think the size issue in just in the design, angle or the dangle and so forth.
However the 1970's hiatt remakes were far larger on the locking side than any difference of the early models.
Ian