Turley & Williams 'Safety Junior Portable' stove

Mmm, a setback.

The seal between the vapouriser/fuel valve assembly and the tank that the assembly screws into is lead, so that the vapouriser can be aligned to be at 90 degrees to the tank axis - assembly screwed tight, then tightened up to the alignment, crushing the lead washer. A fibre seal wouldn't offer that measure of adjustment and would split if torqued down as much as is possible with a lead washer/seal.

I mention that because I wonder if the bubbles are emerging from that seal (photos are a bit blurry) and not a pinhole in the tank?

If you're sure it's a pinhole, then given it's a steel tank (rust-prone if it's been neglected) the issue isn't so much about sealing the one pinhole (a soldered patch would be safe and secure if not pretty) but how many more pinholes might be about to break through if the original pinhole is due to a rusted interior to the tank and not an external puncture (unlikely).

Alas, the need for new seals for NRV and fuel tank cap isn't a priority until you're sure about the state of the tank.

There's a substance on the market called POR 15 (Google it), a rust treatment and sealer for steel automotive fuel tanks. It's not cheap (£20-something for a small tin) and I believe it wasn't designed for pressurised fuel tanks. I've not used it but other CCS members will have and are better qualified to comment on how it holds up in a stove (pressurised) fuel tank.

If the Turley & Williams were a paraffin stove I'd have no hesitation in trying out the POR 15. The extra volatility of petrol makes it something you really don't want to take chances with in respect of a fuel leak anywhere near a naked flame however.

Check out the tank whether it's rotten on the inside or just punctured, or indeed whether it's a leaky lead seal at the valve/vapouriser assembly joint and let us know. I'll hope for the best!

John

 

Hi John,

Caswell fuel tank sealer is a much better option for sealing a pressure stove. It leaves a much thicker film inside the fount/fuel tank and can withstand up to 3000 psi. Here's the link.

http://www.caswellplating.com/epoxy-gas-tank-sealer.html

Cheers,
Norman

 

All,

Thanks for the direction to this thread, Norman... very similar to my experiences with my own No2 MKI.

I have learned something very useful on this thread... that if I can remove the holders for the needles I may be able to replace the inner needles... excellent...

I had to completely repaint my stove. I colour matched original paint for the tank which is like an orange sort of finish... but the previous owner had caked everything in black hammerite... I was surprised and disappointed to see the negative comments on this thread earlier on. The stove in this thread is very well restored indeed. To be honest, when using original petrol stoves like this, it pays to be extra cautious.

Whilst I appreciate it is nice to retain an original patina, sometimes we have no option but to strip everything back and do a proper clean up and restore...

Here’s my stove. Completely restored and runs like a dream. Purchased from the son of a WW2 veteran who had owned the stove since the end of WW2.

Kind regards,

Pete

 

Hello Pete,

I have just noticed your post on this thread,

May I take a minute to congratulate you on your superb stove. Well done !

You have probably done your home work here on this superb forum and as advised by fellow members here, I really recommend using ASPEN 4 fuel when using my military stoves. It's very clean and doesn't coke up and leave a nasty black soot on every thing. I also feel that's it's safer than the volatile modern petrol. (But this may just be me) I must warn you though Aspen is dearer than standard petrol.

I hope your Military stove gives you many years of pleasure ! (A cuppa tastes soooo much better when boiled on a classic stove)

Cheers Mark

 

Hello Mark,

Yes a friend told me about ASPEN fuel a while back and it’s excellent stuff. Burns clean and prevents carbon build up. I won’t use anything else for the stove now. I am currently slowly restoring the double burner version of this (the very early No3 Stove)... again... I will only use ASPEN to run it...

Kind regards,

Pete

 

@presscall

1. I note that in this thread you said that the "...seal between the vapouriser/fuel valve assembly and the tank that the assembly screws into is lead".

I've just pulled down my Turley and Williams No. 3 and found these very brittle "rubber" washers:









Do you remember what thickness lead washer you used?



2. The pricker on mine is a bit different to yours.

I was thinking about running the stove without the internal pricker anyway, but do you know the size of the jet in case I decide to put a needle in the pricker?



Cheers

Tony

 

@Tony Press
I’ll need to get back to you on the jet size, but it surely won’t be anything less than 0.32mm.

The seal of valve to tank needs to allow for lining-up of the vapouriser in the correct 90-degrees to the tank axis position and I found a lead washer did that best by not being critical if it took nearly a full turn to get from ‘not sealing’ to the 90-degree position. I used 2mm lead sheet to cut the seal from, but 3mm would be fine too. 1mm’s probably a bit too thin but could maybe work.

With viton or fibre there’s less facility to accommodate that range of movement and the thickness of the seal becomes critical. Too thin, too thick and the vapouriser may come to ‘rest’ way out of position, so it’s back to trying a different thickness if you have it, or perhaps doubling up with one on top of another.

Quite likely the original seal on your was the optimum thickness selected by the manufacturer.

Fibre too is inclined to shrink in use (the way a roarer/silent burner often has to be tightened up a touch after first use of new washers) though probably less so in a less high heat application as on the T&W.

John

 

@presscall

Thanks. I was thinking of 2mm lead.

I suspect that the “rubber” washers that were on the stove assumed their unusual shape over the years. I think that originally they were 2mm thick.

The jet is definitely over 0.32mm.

Cheers

Tony

 

@presscall & @Pete Marshall

Looking at the paperwork in this excellent Turley and Williams No. 3 thread by @Pete Marshall, I see that that washer is listed as Part 23 “Washer synthetic”.

None the less, I think I’ll try lead as it will be more forgiving.

Cheers

Tony

 

@Tony Press

Hi Tony,

There is also crushable gasket material similar to what is used for exhaust systems and for oil pane drain plugs. Of course this is just an optional idea is the lead washer doesn't work out.

For me I will be using a lead washer to seal things up. The closest sheet lead I can find here in the US which is close to 2mm is 3/32" or 2.38mm which should work fine.

You are correct about the jet being more then .32 mm. I may run mine without the prickers because it wouldn't be hard to come up with an external pricker to clean any debris from the jet.

I don't know about yours but mine needs to be bead blasted to clean the case up for primer and repainting.

I do hope your pump is in better shape then mine is but I'm going to get this sorted out and if I can't I've got a master fettler close to where I live.

Cheers,
Norman

 

@teckguy_58

A 27 gauge hypodermic syringe works well as a pricker for the Turley and Williams No. 3 Jet, I just found out.

Cheers

Tony

 

@Tony Press

That is very good to know and thank you for sharing this information.

Cheers,
Norman

 

... only for the fact that the jet is ‘buried’ in the manifold in use, so unlike a Primus 210 or something of that sort, pricking the jet with an external pricker with the T&W fired up and in use with isn’t possible. Personally, I’d retain a jet pricker if I could. Pricking a jet with the stove shut down doesn’t make a lot of sense. It’d be of more benefit then to unscrew the jet and remove the debris blocking it. Fired up, the pressure in the tank might just blow the debris out through the tank rather than being pushed back in, but best of all is an auto-pricker to push the debris out, with the tank pressure assisting.

@Tony Press
Right-ho, one for the ‘useful stuff’ file. It amuses me that thanks to @Doug L and the Anglo-American co-operation the use of hypodermic needles in CCS fettling is now a stock technique!

Cheers.

John

 

@Tony Press and @presscall

Using a hypodermic needles as a new pricker is a very good idea.
All of the hypodermic needles I've seen here in the US are glued into a plastic housing. I'm assuming once the needle is removed from the plastic housing it wouldn't be difficult to sibraze a base so it can be held in place.

Cheers,
Norman

 

@presscall

Yes! When I bought some online to repair jets, a-la-presscall, I ended up with more than enough, so finding more uses for them is a good idea.

Cheers

Tony

 

@presscall & @teckguy_58

27 gauge syringe used as the pricker for the T&W No. 3:





Cheers

Tony

 

@Tony Press

Hi Tony,

It looks good.

Have you been able to try it out yet?

Show us some flame shots.

Cheers,
Norman

 

@teckguy_58

No... it’s a long, steady fettle, this one. Give me a month or so.

Cheers

Tony

 

@Tony Press
Great work Tony. Shaping up really well.

John

 

@presscall

Do you know what the thread is on the T&W fuel filler plug?

Tony