#7 Wapak

[Eric J]

I'm trying to decided if I want to get this skillet or not. The first two pictures it looks red/orange but he said it was the lighting, I not sure if it was fire cleaned like someone said. How would I be able to tell that or not?

 

[Doug D.]

Fire damage is usually not that uniform in appearance; typically blotchy with areas of rosy red, dusty white, and sometimes a bluish caste. I know the non-Indian head Wapaks are usually a casting mess, but the bottom of this one, at least in the only photo showing the bottom, gives me pause.

 

[Eric J]

Should I ask for more pictures of the bottom?

 

[Doug D.]

If some in the same light as the last three are available, yes.

 

[Eric J]

If some in the same light as the last three are available, yes.

 

[Doug D.]

Much different. This pan was cast using a pattern made from a late 3rd series Erie skillet.

 

[SeanD]

From what I can tell, it looks fine.

 

[CraigA.]

I'm curious, Doug, what you see that my inexperienced eyes don't. Just trying to learn from the best.

 

[Doug D.]

Do you mean what did I see that gave me pause?

 

[CraigA.]

Yeah. I don't have the background (yet) to be able to spot something that's not quite right.

What did you see that identified this pan as an Erie pan?

 

[Doug D.]

The "smear" from 7 o'clock to about 9 o'clock just looked odd, even in the context of Wapak's subpar casting. The pock marks above the trademark, too. Wapak was notorious for using other makers' pans for patterns (they were not alone, even Wagner and Sidney did, too). They would fill in names, but not necessarily other markings, so here we have the Erie pattern number (703).

703 was one of a few pattern numbers seen on #7 Erie skillets. At the time, Griswold was using unique pattern numbers on each individual pattern, so Erie #7s are seen with 698, 701, 702 and 703. They later settled on 701 for all #7s and 703 was assigned to #2s. I say "late 3rd series" because the handle reinforcement ridge is blended rather than distinct, a change which occurred within the 3rd series.

See also:

Numbers & Letters - The Cast Iron Collector: Information for The Vintage Cookware Enthusiast

The Cast Iron Collector: Information for the Vintage Cookware Enthusiast. Learn how to identify, clean, restore, season and use collectible antique cast iron cookware.

www.castironcollector.com

Evolution of the Erie Skillet - The Cast Iron Collector: Information for The Vintage Cookware Enthusiast

The Cast Iron Collector: Information for the Vintage Cookware Enthusiast. Learn how to identify, clean, restore, season and use collectible antique cast iron cookware.

www.castironcollector.com

Here's a good one. Wapak used a Wagner skillet that Wagner used an Erie skillet to make theirs from
.

 

[SeanD]

Now this looks shady, lol......I wonder why they used others molds? Money savings I guess. I still cant believe that the Wapak #3 has no heat ring. They are all from the same mold Im thinking. All have a tapered logo too. Just curious.

 

[Doug D.]

They didn't use other's molds patterns, they used others' pans to make patterns from. Molds are made of sand, and are destroyed when the casting is broken out of them.

Wapak #3s were made using a Wagner #3, of which there were no heat ringed versions.

 

[Scott J.]

I'm still learning proper terminology.

 

[CraigA.]

Thanks Doug. Always so much more to learn and the CIC website is the place to learn it from.

That smear, in my eyes, was just an odd discoloration. I didn't view it as a casting flaw.

 

[Eric J]

Much different. This pan was cast using a pattern made from a late 3rd series Erie skillet.

he did say that if I look hard enouh i would see Erie but I couldn't, maybe once it gets restored, I'll be able to see it!

 

[Eric J]

So I decided to go ahead and purchase the Wapak skillet for 55.00, it look better in person and the cooking surface was buttery smooth!! Can't wait to see it restored!!