Tell me about Svea SRV's

Discussion in 'Fettling Forum' started by Ridge, Feb 25, 2014.

  1. OMC

    OMC United States Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    5,365
    Location:
    ILLINOIS, USA
    Spiritburner, I don’t have all-inclusive info but SVEA listed SRV parts in 60, Primus at least from 53-56. Optimus takes over and SRV parts are gone, coincidence? I would be guessing but a corporate decision that factors “all of the above” and maybe #1, imo. OSHA etc frowns on ANY modification or corner cutting with regard to SAFETY devices, every year they’re more strict (same in Uk right? or moreso?). I’d put that as #1. Litigation as good a factor as any. Added revenue and also EASIER, so more profitable (1 item, a cap, easier to manage, more profit).
     
  2. Spiritburner

    Spiritburner Admin SotM Winner Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    11,330
    Location:
    UK
    Later than 1960. Also in the '61 catalogue on CCS. Certainly by '69 the penta screw had come in - so likely every R version is Penta.
     
  3. BernieDawg Banned

    Offline
    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2008
    Messages:
    1,656
    Heya guys
    Just a quick note and then I gotta get back in the shop.
    Yes, I think you are probably completely right, Shagratork, in that I need to put up disclaimers on the other videos, too. I'm far too trusting and naive and... well, just plain stoopid when it comes to folks who want to do weird business stuff to me. Maybe you've noticed. ](*,)

    I wonder that, too, Ross, about the American cultures influences. I know I came across a legal brief concerning Clayton and Lambert from 1962 a loooooong time ago when I was doing other research. Someone might wish to do more research on this particular court decision, but my conjecture is that it was about the time when the SRV caps were transitioning to the discussed design. I could be wrong. Here is a link to one web brief:
    Link

    RE: Sparky's points. I've been on both sides and also in the jury box on liability suits. Anyone can sue for anything. But, whether they win can be influenced by the ability to show a good faith effort to properly state liability to the plaintiff before an incident. Also, a good faith effort to properly educate the plaintiff-to-be will help defend a suit. That's my purpose and intent in having disclaimers. But, no, doesn't help a whit in keeping someone from suing. And, it still costs a bundle to defend. I think the test would be if I demonstrated the proper techniques in a video. If plaintiff could be shown not to have followed those techniques, good for me. If my techniques could be shown to be flawed or in error, then not so good for me.
    Stating that it's up to the plaintiff-to-be to make their own decision and take responsibility for their work in advance, and, also, that I do not guarantee they can do the work, acts to remind plaintiff that they assume responsibility for their acts.I thought this is why the legal departments of all the big stove manufacturing companies and all the other goods manufactured, have these liability notices.

    But, yeah, I'm no lawyer and I think Ed's opinion would be excellent to hear. I could be full of muffins on all this. :lol:

    BUT... I don't think that the refurbishing of the SRV cap is what would get me in trouble. I think it's clumsy or greedy folks who would likely want me to pay for them wrecking their stoves. As I've mentioned before, the SRV will still fire before the tank pops even when screwed all the way down. Put it in the middle of it's range and there should be no problems.

    I thought of another thing as I was headed back out to the shop... the SRV is more complicated than changing a jet, both of which require a special tool. The SRV is less complicated than rebuilding a NRV, both of which require a special tool. If you are ok with pulling and rebuilding an NRV... then, IMO, the SRV should be a breeze. And, the failure of an NRV in a 111B would be far more dire IMO.

    Maybe that puts it in perspective?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 1, 2015
  4. OMC

    OMC United States Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2013
    Messages:
    5,365
    Location:
    ILLINOIS, USA
    All,
    Bernie, Is this an invite? ”sorry about the rant … Roast me”. Others oblidged w/compelling counterpoints.
    At the same time you FURTHER contribute helpful presentations that are 2nd to none. THANKING YOU for that makes total sense, seriously, thank you kind sir, I’m grateful for your efforts, again.
    I’m not the best one to banter about points but puttin it out here:
    > Imo much counterpoint arises from your opinions with lack of cautionary statements. Although a recognition of risk was completely absent in your 1st comment, imo, you’ve conceeded risks involved (not of exploding stoves) and for me and others, to include warnings is being responsible (as u did in your video, your reasons aside, a warning included). A later comment, imo was more counterpoint than sound advice, is also lacking caution re fire / burn risk: - is not rocket science, - is not something you should fear - will not cause exploding stoves, be smart, be careful. [don’t be scared, be fearless].

    > I may adhere to your following comment or not but as the author would you? “back up your claims with science and actual verifiable testing/research”.
    1. …hard to imagine …workers … measuring … the correct release pressure. That flies in the face of …efficient factories… And…,is a comical image...
    You stated it’s false that “the SRV is adjustable”… you have a point to make I’m sure but that can not be it? The SRV does not need to be adjusted (not aware of an argument there) BUT the SRV is adjustable as others have repeated.
    1. Comment Your entitled to your opinion, do you have testing / research to back up there were no manufacturer testing of caps? Your pressure tests and opinion that they don’t need to be tested do not prove caps were not tested. IMO, in fairness, you could conceed caps MAY have been tested (not adjusted). This point was offered up again in light of your current comment. Such a testing station WOULD be that comical appearance (to you). A failing cap WOULD possibly be “out of adjustment”. HOWEVER a quick attempt to “fix”, to your point, may be to inspect, reassemble to factory spec, no “adjustment” required and retest.
    peace
     
  5. Spiritburner

    Spiritburner Admin SotM Winner Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    11,330
    Location:
    UK
    Definitely. It's candle flame v fireball.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 2, 2015
  6. shagratork

    shagratork United Kingdom Moderator, R.I.P. Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2005
    Messages:
    9,636
    Location:
    Durham, N.E. England
    BernieDawg and Ross, I am with you on the 111B NRV.

    I saw the results first hand years ago on my first visit to Sykeside.
    You were there as well Ross. David Shouksmith fired up a 111B for the first time. I think he had got the stove from Henry.
    It lit well but then the NRV failed and there was an instant fireball. I have never seen so many people move so quickly.
    There used to be a photo of it here on CCS. I looked for it but I think it is one of the missing Photobucket images.
     
  7. David Shouksmith

    David Shouksmith Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Messages:
    7,164
    I well remember that incident which was at Sykeside in November 2005.

    I did get the stove from Henry for the princely sum of £10. It was the first time I'd tried a 111 of any sort and the first time I'd used Coleman fuel (actually panel wipe) in anything. A group of people gathered and several showed me how to light the stove. It lit OK and burned well for a couple of minutes then raw fuel started to issue from the pumptube and ignited in the bottom of the case. Most people ran away but someone - no idea who - turned the stove off and (I think) put a wet cloth over it. The flames went out with no fuss, no drama AND NO FIREBALL - instant or otherwise.

    Ian subsequently refurbished the stove for me and found the NRV pip and spring to be serviceable, so possibly a bit of crud from the tank was preventing a good seal or the NRV washer was at fault. Whatever, I don't think I've used the stove since, other than participating in a few world record 111 light-ups. Without wishing to start any form of controversy, I'm very wary of using Coleman-type fuels in kerosene-technology stoves. That's my opinion, yours may be different and, quite frankly, I'm not interested in hearing it so save your fingers; opinions are like ar$eholes - everybody's got one.

    Finally, I'd be much obliged if my total silence on the SRV issue was not taken to mean I had any particular views on the issue at all. And for the record, I have never, do not now, nor ever will attempt to fettle an SRV. Kindly do not read anything into that statement - put simply, none of the SRVs on my stoves have ever malfunctioned in the past, I've no need to use any liquid fuelled camping stove now and I don't anticipate doing so in the future. If I ever did I'd be using a classic, kero-fuelled brassie... :thumbup:
     
  8. Spiritburner

    Spiritburner Admin SotM Winner Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    11,330
    Location:
    UK
    You're so paraffin.com! :)
     
  9. Odd

    Offline
    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2013
    Messages:
    730
    Location:
    Östhammar, Sweden
    Was that a genuine 111B or was it a 111 (or 111T) with a Gasoline nipple? I'm curious...

    (I know the NRV [and SRV] are the same in all of them, but I'm slowly building myself a B out of parts...)
     
  10. David Shouksmith

    David Shouksmith Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Messages:
    7,164
    Genuine 111B - I've still got it and recall seeing it recently although I can't think quite where... :-k
     
  11. shagratork

    shagratork United Kingdom Moderator, R.I.P. Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2005
    Messages:
    9,636
    Location:
    Durham, N.E. England
    Yes it was a genuine 111B.

    In my post I said there was a fireball - David said the was no fireball.
    As definitions go, David is perfectly correct - but there were enough flames for most people to jump back out of harms way. As David said, someone was level-headed enough to fairly quickly turn off the stove and soon after a wet cloth was put over the stove and flames.

    I also have a 111B. I bought it by accident - it was advertised as a 111 and the eBay photo was not clear and showed only the case. As with David's 111B, I have used it in the world record attempts at Newark in the past, but not for anything else. I simply don't trust the NRV on the 111B - it was designed for paraffin. It it fails for any reason with paraffin, then fuel will come out of the pump tube. Inconvenient, but no big deal. If the same happens with Coleman Fuel, then it is easily possible for the leaking fuel to ignite as happened at Sykeside.
     
  12. Odd

    Offline
    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2013
    Messages:
    730
    Location:
    Östhammar, Sweden
    Interesting comments. As I said I'm (slowly!) building a 111B from various collected parts:

    Doc Mark traded me a nicely cleaned and checked out 111B burner, for a set of brand new T25 DuoSSAL pots.
    A long time ago the Kingdom of Sweden generously sold me a sorry excuse for a (non operational) kero-111 - during the Great Embezzlement.
    New washers, pips, pump leathers, springs etc etc are all currently on their way here from as far as Turkey, the UK and the US. Plus FOGAS in Sweden of course...

    In the end it will become an Aspen fired user stove in the boot of my Triumph TR8. Glass bead blasted and repainted tin box: DayGlo orange outside and white/'chrome' inside. With parts from at least three different decades of 111 manufacture... I haven't decided yet if I'm going to use a polished brass or a nickeled tank, but I will be using the military version SRV+filler lid, early sixties control key and possibly a stainless heat shield.

    So it was interesting to read about your little mishap...hope I'll be luckier. [-o<
     
  13. Doc Mark

    Doc Mark SotM Winner Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2004
    Messages:
    19,157
    Location:
    So. California Mountains
    Morning, All,

    I well remember seeing the photos of David's "mishap", and also had a bit of good, clean fun, at his expense, when I captioned the photo, "Here's David, doing the Dance of the Seven Veils"!! (or, something similar to that!) ;) ;) :whistle: :whistle: :lol: :lol:

    I have to come down on the other side of this issue, mainly because I've used 111B, and 22B stoves for many years, without a single problem. Yes, I did have some NRV pips in need of replacement, but in both cases, I noted the gently rising pump rod, after having pumped pressure into the tanks, and realized that it was not safe to fire up those stoves! About the only time I actually SAW fuel come out where it was not supposed to, was from a 111T. Not only did the pump rod rise, and fairly quickly, but some fuel began to bubble out of the pump tube. On that stove, it was burning at the time, so I quickly turned it off, and had no problem with the excess fuel catching fire. It's lucky, I was, in that case!!

    But, I learned to be very careful using my 111B and 22B stoves after that, and still make sure to check and replace all pips and gaskets, if they are in need of such service. Since the kero-111 stoves really weren't popular in the US at that time, I think you'll find that the majority of Americans who have used Optimus 111 stoves, used the B, and with excellent results. Just my two pence, but after many years of safe using those B stoves, I believe them to be perfectly safe when burning Coleman Fuel. Just use common sense, do regular maintenance, and all should be just right!!

    By the way, Odd, many thanks for the trade!! I'm glad you are happy with the burner, and I am very please to finally have a Trangia Duossal pot set for my 25. Now I have a 27 and a 25 with Duossal pots, and hey, it doesn't get any better than that!! Thanks, again! Take care, have fun, and God Bless!

    Every Good Wish,
    Doc