Hardly anytime since commenting on the oddity of an early Svea No.5 surfacing with no base maker's provenance than this beautifully well preserved No.11 comes along sharing the same peculiarity! So there is a real question here which clearly applies to examples of more than one model: why were some Svea stoves of roughly the same date of manufacture clearly marked on the base with 'Max Sievert', maker, and place of origin and others not? Is it pure coincidence that the couple of examples without the base provenance markings are both also without the Cyrillic tank side markings too? Firstly the characteristic Edwardian period combination of features: 'Nyberg's Patent Sundbybergs' pump rod cap (rather than 'Svea Made in Sweden') early pump rod configuration with fixed leather pad backstop/seal for cup holder. original early burner with very simple, basic, 'Svea, marking. But then, on the base, no 'Max Sievert' maker's provenance mark, only one single '5':
Excellent, @igh371. I like the fact that there are a few very old stoves turning up on CCS lately and new facts and questions emerging. The structure of the site (CCS) makes these kinds of investigations very useful and informative to others. Cheers Tony
@ArchMc replacement or removal and re-installation of the tank base is all but impossible due to the way that the seam is rolled during manufacture (as several CCS contributors have either found to their cost link, or only just been stopped from trying in the nick of time link!) It certainly would have been very obvious if this had ever been attempted!
Also good that igh pays attention to details and photographs them. Too many posts that don't photo document all the little details making them less useful for a comparison study. Even common models can have slight differences that might help to determine the vintage. Ebay is famous for stove photos that don't show us what we want to know. I looked at a Coleman lantern today on Ebay that didn't even show the fount. Thanks for sharing
