1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Coleman 520 (M1941) Made in 1942

Discussion in 'Military' started by Knight84, Sep 12, 2009.

  1. Knight84 Canada

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Messages:
    3,236
    Here is my Coleman made 520 (M1941) Made in 1942.
    Stamped U.S.
    1942
    Coleman
    It has a steel tank and a no priming cup. It also comes with a steel container. Mine came with a funnel but no wrench. There is no place to put the wrench and the funnel was never attached to the stove via a chain.

    1252726897-IMG_1829_opt.jpg
    1252726948-IMG_1890_opt.jpg

    Next to a later 520 (made in 1945) with brass tank and 3 legs among other things. I have found that the 4 legs are not more stable than 3. The 4 legs tend to rest on two of the four then wobble back and fourth. It is still stable though.
    1252726982-IMG_1838_opt.jpg

    Next to a Coleman made M1950 (Coleman model 536) made in 1952. The colour of the font/tank is very similar if not identical.
    1252727377-IMG_1851_opt.jpg


    1252727387-IMG_1534_opt.jpg 1252727396-IMG_1538_opt.jpg

    Here is a shot of the valve, generator, cleaning lever and cleaning needle. Note there are two screens in this photo. Where only one is used. One is made of brass and the other of steel. These earlier models uses more steel than later 520's
    1252727663-IMG_1615_opt.jpg

    You can see from this photo how the cleaning lever works and why it needs to be pointed down for the needle to be down. It is very similar to a crankshaft and valve in a car engine.
    1252727678-DSC_0007_opt.jpg

    From left to right. M1942 (Mountain stove), 520, and 530. Note the pack nut and washer behind the graphite packing are made of steel. Where the M1942 and 530 are both brass. The later 520's would use brass. The 530 does not share many of the same parts as the later 520's but the valve is the same.
    1252728316-DSC_0034_opt.jpg

    Here you can see the fuel and air tube along with the spring and wire. Note the one on the far right is a fully assembled one. The one wire is made of steel and belongs to the early 520. Later models would use brass. The spring always it appears to be made of brass.
    On the far right you can see the needle poking out of the hole in the bottom.
    1252728346-DSC_0020_opt.jpg

    When the control valve is closed and while it is being closed the needle moves down to clear the fuel line. It is only when the control valve is fully opened does the spring force the needle all the way up and clear of the hole. If the spring were to break or not be there then the fuel hole would be blocked. The stove can operate normal without the fuel tube needle though. It does not see to help improve the simmering ability or power output though.
    1252729795-DSC_0021_opt.jpg

    Gas tips (from left to right.) Early 520, later 520, 530, 1942 mountain stove, and M1950 (536) They are all interchangeable except the early 520. Note the M1942 has a 6 sided hexagon nut instead of a two sided like all the others.
    1252730166-DSC_0044_opt.jpg

    Generators. (from left to right) Early 520, later 520, M1942 Mountain stove, M1950 (536), and 530
    The 530 uses a smaller thread than the others and therefore not interchangeable along with the burner head.
    1252730179-IMG_1628_opt.jpg

    Needles and cleaning rods. 520, M1942, 530, and 536. Note the M1942 doesn't have a nut on its rod. :lol: The design of the M1942 didn't need it or allow for the nut.
    1252730191-IMG_1630_opt.jpg

    530, early 520 and later 520
    1252731112-DSC_0051_opt.jpg

    The 520 is a great stove. Truly made for war and capable of working under great conditions. It is everything the army wanted and needed.

    Where the 520 lost points if anywhere was weight. The early 520 by itself without fuel, tool* funnel and spare part(s) weighted in at 1013 grams. The steel container came in at 654g So together 1667grams (58.8 oz. or 3.67510 lbs) The aluminum container is 284grams which was a step in the right direction. (45.75oz or 2.85939 lbs)

    The later 520 weighs 1036grams. With tool, funnel and parts it comes in at 1126g.

    Now you compare those numbers with the M1942 mountain stove which weighs 576grams (20.31 oz or 1.26986 lbs) without tool spare or parts. Which one would you take. I am not saying one is better than the other. Just food for thought.
    I prefer the 520 because I trust the check valve more.

    Sorry for all the pictures and long post. I had all these stoves apart over the last few weeks and thought it was a great time to take some pictures.

    Cheers,
    Jeff
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 27, 2015
  2. Wim

    Wim Belgium Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    3,565
    Location:
    Dendermonde, Belgium
    Hi Jeff,

    thanks a lot for this posting (and others on the same theme ) as now we can clearly see what's inside our stoves without needing to vivisect them ;) . As you said, apart from their weight these are wonderfull stoves (and as I don't back-pack the weight is no problem 8) ) and very reliable (OK, so they don't simmer very well, but a simmer plate can help a lot!). Thanks again!

    Regards,

    Wim
     
  3. hydro451

    Offline
    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Messages:
    446
    Knight84,

    Thanks for the excellent tutorial. :clap: You have really done your homework. And your collection of Mil spec stoves and 530 is impressive. :clap: :clap: :mrgreen:

    I like that the M1950 has a lower center of gravity than the 520/530's as they shortened the pot supports and added those "lunar lander" feet. Nice and stable. I like that they eliminated the seperate cleaning lever too on the M1950 making it tad easier operate. Just pump , open , close then light and then full-out , no simmer, but heck who needs simmer in fox hole :)

    Thanks again for posting your excellent work :)

    Tom
     
  4. Matukat United States

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    Messages:
    4,609
    Bravo! Great contribution! My 520 has the same paint and 4 legs, like yours. Only got half of it's original aluminum canister. Mine did come with an extra generator in a tube which fits in a clip on one of the legs.
    Nice posting!
    Randy
     
  5. Knight84 Canada

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Messages:
    3,236
    Thank you gentlemen Wim, Tom and Randy! O:)

    It is my hope that my pictures will help someone with their stove or understand their stove.
    Stoves are truly fascinating. :)

    I am just taking some pictures of the M1950 and M1942 mountain stove then I will post those stoves. Then I will move on to the 527 and 523. :lol:

    The spare parts/tubes are an idea/requirement of the military I believe. Good reason too. Coleman I believe could have kept that idea going after the war.

    I forgot to add this patent Link

    I also forgot to mention that the cleaning lever stem is very difficult to remove and should be left alone. The 520 stole a lot of parts from the 242 lantern when it was made, but parts for the 242 are getting just as rare. The 202 lantern uses the same cleaning stem but the lever handle is a little shorter. It is best to leave it alone unless you have a spare.

    Best regards and thanks again.
    Jeff
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 1, 2015
  6. hydro451

    Offline
    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Messages:
    446
    Jeff,

    Noting the differences in some parts of the stoves, how would you compare the performance of each stove, ie the flame strength, etc

    Tom
     
  7. Knight84 Canada

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Messages:
    3,236
    Hi Tom,

    I am still trying to figure that out. The 530 seems to be the winner in heat output right now. Though Coleman rated all these burners at 5000 B.T.U. heat units per hour. They all use about the same generator as well. The pump stroke on the 530 is longer. Which may help. :-k

    I have yet had all of them going at the same time... there goes a gallon of Coleman fuel :lol:
    I will be sure to take a group photo of them all.

    Best regards,

    Jeff
     
  8. shagratork

    shagratork United Kingdom Moderator Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2005
    Messages:
    8,053
    Location:
    Durham City, England
    Brilliant set of photos showing the breakdown and differences between the stoves.

    Just by chance, I have a 520 and 530 stove to fettle!! :D :D
     
  9. Knight84 Canada

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Messages:
    3,236
    Thanks Trevor!

    These are fun stoves to fettle. Getting the burner out of the font is a little tricky sometimes but well worth it when you see the air tube all clogged up. :)

    Cheers,
    Jeff
     
  10. Knight84 Canada

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Messages:
    3,236
    Sorry Randy. I missed what you said there about having only half of the canister.

    You stove only came with half of a canister originally. You have the clip on the one post that hold the canister on. Your stove is very if not exactly like the patent pictures. neato!!! :)

    Cheers,
    Jeff
     
  11. Matukat United States

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    Messages:
    4,609
    Wow Jeff,
    You really have these stoves documented. Thank you for letting me know about the half canister! I was going to go back to the shop and see if maybe the other half was still there, lost in the back room!!!!
    Best,
    Randy
     
  12. Knight84 Canada

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Messages:
    3,236
    Your very welcome!

    I am trying to learn more about these stoves. I am no expert not by a long shot. Still a lot I don't know.

    From what I can tell though the military was demanding more out of the 520. They wanted a priming cup and more parts storage. Along with a funnel, tool, and 2 part canister.

    Like they do with cars they seemed to change the model along the way. Making two different models; one for the military and one for Civilian Defense maybe?.

    Best Regards
    Jeff
     
  13. Knight84 Canada

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Messages:
    3,236
    Here are some shots of the burner heads of the different military stoves.

    The burner head from a Coleman 520 stove. Unlike the M-1950 and M-1942-Mod burner head the 520 head is made out of all brass. The 520 has a windshield spot welded onto the burner plate.

    1254181751-IMG_2095_opt.jpg 1254181762-IMG_2098_opt.jpg

    In the second picture the early 520 funnel next to the 520 burner head. The funnel is very similar to the burner head. Most likely made by the same press/machine that made the head.

    From left to right in both pictures. M-1942-Mod, M-1950, Coleman 520, Coleman 527, Coleman 530.
    1254182359-IMG_2105_opt.jpg 1254182366-IMG_2106_opt.jpg


    Cheers,
    Jeff
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 27, 2015
  14. hydro451

    Offline
    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Messages:
    446
    Hi All,

    Jeff, does the outer part of the burner cage on your M1950 rotate around the inner part ? On mine they do. This will close off the holes 3 holes in the cage or allow for partial closing too. Do you know why this feature is present ? I have tried running the stove with holes closed and it won't run proper. I have also tried in several other configurations of the holes, with holes partially closed , etc and it seems to only run proper with the holes all the way open . Have you ever experimemted with this feature ? Anybody out there have any thoughts as to why the variable hole size feature ?

    Tom
     
  15. Bom Bom Bom Bom

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,946
    Hi Tom,

    Whilst I've not played with this I've always assumed it was for fine tuning when using with different fuels. As you don't change the nipple/jet when you swap between fuels, what you can do is alter the fuel/air mix by adjusting the holes in he burner basket.

    The main fuel usually used is white gas, but other members have happily run the M1950 on kero as well.

    Just an assumption and happy to be educated by someone with a more definitive answer.

    Cheers, Graham.
     
  16. Knight84 Canada

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Messages:
    3,236
    Hello guys,

    Mine both don't move. The nut on bottom is brazed to the bottom of the burner bell. It seems the brass liner is riveted down. :-k

    I know what Graham is talking about. An interesting idea. Didn't the Primus 71 have a burner like that?

    In the case of the M-1950 I don't think it had/has this feature. That said it could have been a prototype maybe. Since the stove doesn't work I would guess yours "broken" :-k
    Sorry I don't have a definitive answer. ](*,)

    Best regards,

    Jeff
     
  17. fyrwokr

    fyrwokr United States Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2011
    Messages:
    169
    Location:
    Bitterroot Valley Montana
    Great information, Thanks !!
     
  18. adelcoro

    adelcoro Canada Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Messages:
    51
    Thanks for posting Jeff found this on the weekend it's never been fired
    1942 usa

    image.jpeg
     

Share This Page