Any ideas on this one?

Well, the handle shape (particularly the rib) and overall form look like "Blacklock", but it's missing the raised size number and the typical raised molder's marks on the bottom. The font of the 10 says Wagner to me, though a "1" and a "0" make for a very generic font.

So, I'll say Frankenpan, and a really nice one at that.
 
Not sure the underside rib is smashed enough to be Blacklock-like. I would tend to say Wagner until proven otherwise. Of course, that assumes Wagner made unmarked outside HR pieces, which I don't think ever had sizes on the top of the handle.
 
Thanks guys! It felt good in my hand when I picked it up and that's the main reason I bought it. I assumed just by seeing the 10 it'd be a really old Wagner. It was really coated from years of use without a single spot of rust on it. Not like crackly junk from campfire but just lots of layers. I was hoping I'd find more marks under the junk but no such luck. But hey I did find some very pretty mill marks! As usual I have to find the strange stuff.
 
Okay, so ID of this skillet has been driving me crazy. Lol. I think I may have figured it out though. I heavily leaning toward unmarked Vollrath.

At first I wasn't sure because the reinforcement rib doesn't extend the length of the handle, but I got my RB yesterday and noticed on some of the skillets pictured it doesn't either. Then I scoured the Internet for additional pictures of course. :mrgreen:

I took some more pictures of my skillet were you can see the rib extends longer than it looked in my first pictures. Some of the pictures in this set are of an unmarked Vollrath with what looks like a shorter rib. The additional ones are of my skillet. The form of it is very similar with the prominent lip around the edge.

https://www.icloud.com/photostream/#A359UlCqotzGa

This is a marked Vollrath eBay (ended) listing with a handle that looks similar to mine:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Vol...D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

Do you think it's possible the marking on the back was worn away? I know the handle is a bit wonky and maybe it's a stretch. It being a Vollrath would explain the number on the handle though. What do you think?
 
Markings do not typically wear off. They may be eroded by pitting, but that's about it. And pans with heat rings are the least likely to see any kind of wear on the bottoms to anything other than the heat ring itself. The pan in the auction listing does have the typical long Vollrath rib, it just has a darker coloration towards the handle end making it less obvious. I don't know for sure what your pan is, but Vollrath would not be on my list of possibles.
 
If they do have a number on the bottom, it appears to always be with that orientation.
 
Is that to say not all their pans had numbers on the bottom, maybe just on top of the handle?
There are pans for which the best guess is unmarked Vollrath and which have the number on the top of the handle. Usually #3s.
 
On page 241, second paragraph, of the RB it almost makes it sound like there were a lot of pieces made that were unmarked on the bottom. That only the lids were marked. It goes on to talk about how others were marked only with a number and usually underlined on the bottom turned sideways. I'd take a picture of the paragraph but I don't know if that violates copyright or something.

Also I meant worn off by pitting not necessarily rubbing. I should have said eroded I suppose. ;)

---------- Post added at 10:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:02 PM ----------

Yep, I have two of them

Would you mind posting a pic just out of curiosity? :)
 
The RB is saying the pans were not marked Vollrath, but the lids were. The pan bottoms were numbered, with the unusual orientation typical of Vollrath. "Unmarked" usually refers to the lack of a name, but not a lack of numbering. There are also Vollrath pans with both trademark and number on the bottom, as shown on subsequent pages.
 
Yes, I'd picked up on that convention, buts it's interesting to me that in the same paragraph they say "unmarked" and then they say some were "marked" with a number. Particularly if there are some totally unmarked pieces running around that are attributed to Vollrath. Instead of saying unmarked why not just say some were marked only with a number in the first part of the paragraph? I just love splitting hairs. Lol.
 
There don't appear to be any such pieces totally devoid of markings, as, again, "marked" vs. "unmarked", as a convention, refers to trademarks not size marks. There are those occasionally-seen unmarked (on the bottom) pieces, but there is still typically a size number, although located elsewhere besides the bottom.
 
Back
Top