I have been using an old Primus 210 out in the garden this weekend, and thought I would check out its date of manufacture (cos I can) code Z so 1936, which is on a par with a couple of Op 00 Patent's I have and a pot-bellied Op 45. It got m thinking (dangerous, I know). One of the things I really admire about pressure stoves is that they still perform well, despite the fact that they were designed over 100 years ago, with little significant change in the interim. There may have been some changes but, to me at least, it has been no more than tinkering. Some changes (the O ring in place of a pump leather) seem not to have been for the best. As for me, I live in a 1930's house but with insulation, plastic framed windows and central heating; drive a 20 year old car (an "improvement?" on the 50 something year old Austins I used to drive; and ride road bicycles (steel framed of course). I can see that in the short term at least, more modern houses, cars and bikes may be more efficient, but may not last so well. Does anyone have a view about changes of great significance in pressure stove design over the years? Is there a golden (or maybe brass) age for them? Looking forward to your views Dean
Ancient or modern might also be; built to last beyond a lifetime or planned obsolescence ... A saw or an axe has one moving part, and may last for generations... I have a 2-man crosscut saw I used exclusively, and for many years when I was young. I’m thinking I gave $15 for it about 1980,,, the fella I bought it from was the retiring Post Master in Mariba, Kentucky. He’d had it and used it for 60 years... His stepfather had had it for more years than the elder man could remember. It is still in very good and usable condition,,, can’t begin to list all the chainsaws and replacement chains I’ve bought since hanging up the 2-man cross cut. Fad and fancy control many purchases today I reckon,,, seems only collectors want old stoves,,, never mind that the old stoves can be infinitely repaired, and are for the most part completely dependable... The “Next New Thing” is always preferable... Windows, cars, doors, bicycles, make the list as long as you like,,, it’s out of style and out of date before it’s unboxed...
I have 2 trucks, a '68 Chevy C/10 Pickup and a '71 GMC Jimmy [like a Blazer]. They may be old, but I can still work on them. I have had to upgrade electronics components like the Distributors [Points to HEI] and Alternator [to an internal voltage regulator (Circa 1976)], but the engine is uncomputerized and carbureted. I just ran thru 400,000 miles on the '68, and had to put on new shocks, fix some clutch linkage problems, rebuild the rear brakes, R+R the hood hinges and latch, and replace the spark plugs and re-tune the carb for emissions. Now it runs like a top and feels like a new truck. I wouldn't want a new vehicle, too much plastic and complicated circuitry.
Well, thank you all for your contributions. Perhaps use of the word ancient was a mistake. I was meaning it in the context of pressure stoves rather than the context of civilisation; i.e. a stove from the early days of stove development. I think @Haggis might have got close to my thought with his comparison of a 2 man crosscut saw to a chainsaw while @SveaSizzler has illustrated that pre-computer technology for his trucks is preferable to him than parts that cannot be easily diagnosed and repaired. I suppose what I meant was to ask whether the initial stove design was so perfect as to not require improvement; were the alterations made simply cost cutting for production or were there some that made positive improvements to something that needed improving; or were they altered as a form of built in obsolescence - buy a new one, it's packed with the latest safety features! Equally, were any "upgrades" in fact "downgrades"?
In my opinion the ‘initial’ design was near enough perfect, from what I can see is that the development & evolution was a move to make the designs more compact, lightweight ,packable & portable. From the tin boxed stoves (210 etc) to the Optimus 8/99/11 type to the more modern MSR /Optimus/ Primus types for sale now & the military Hurlock type to the Peak1 type. Essentially the major components have remained virtually the same, but now consist of an external tank/pump and burner unit with some compromises such as the more modern pumps being plastic rather than metal & connecting fuel line connectors being non user replaceable with long term durability/maintenance/ repair being the potential problem
For any manufacturer the goal is not to sell on of its product but to sell many. In the old days selling a good item that lasted was the best way. There was always a market as the population was growing and a new idea that worked better than the old ways was readily adapted. Also manufacturing techniques of the day were not as controlled as today so there was a need to build in over engineering to make sure of limited failures. Many millions of these stoves were made but only a few thousand are still around. The rest broke or were discarded and lost. Take a car battery as a good example. How many times did you here of an old battery lasting decades and that the new ones are useless? The idea has always been to make a battery last 5 years. To do that in the 30s and 40s 20% of your batteries had to be that much better and they lasted way past the use by date. You never here about the other 80% Today to get that 5 years the best batteries might last 5 and a half years to get that same reliability for the other 80%.
There is a recent movement in having manufacturers make items that are more easily repaired by the end user, or a repair shop, without having to destroy the container.
Yes many things that you can get parts for for $20 and a 3 week wait or you can buy a replacement today at $21 (sometimes its $19) Just because things can be repaired doesnt always mean its the practical answer.
Well as an ethical point I may not mind spending more to repair something rather than throw it away. It is not all economics. I spent a lot to repair my Dieselkocher. It was not cost friendly.
I don't doubt that many of my generation remember their grandfather's tools. My granddad bought high quality yard and shop tools in the 1930s and they were in great shape and use 40 years later. As for ancient vs. modern-- ancient, of course!
I like both modern and ancient stoves. A difference I thought of is the ability to burn a wide range of fuels without altering the stove or even changing a jet. Obviously there were multifuel stoves before, and modern multifuels won't be ideal for all fuels, but will do well enough. A recent one that surprised me was comparing the power to weight ratio of my 30 year old Stihl to it's modern equivalent.............and finding they were the same!
This is just one of the reasons I love my Trangia alcohol sets. An ancient design that has stood the test of time in modern use and is still in mass production - actually mostly sold out according to their webshop during the pandemic. The biggest spare part to worry about is the o-ring, which isn't actually required as I just pour leftover fuel back into the fuel bottle anyway. Such an elegant solution - no built-in obsolescence at all, which is pretty unique in a new stove system these days. No pressure parts to worry about, which I realise disqualifies it for this thread but I felt I had to mention it as a popular modern stove with an ancient design based on old fashioned values of selling things that last and last. For those who find it a bit slow, then the winter attachment helps get that first firing going quick smart! The efficiency also helps partially make up for the relative lack of burner power. But a little patience is rewarded (what's the rush - isn't the aim to slow down and relax out there?) - getting a brew going first thing when I arrive somewhere also means that by the time I have done everything else that needs doing, I am never waiting for the kettle to boil. Loosening up the simmer ring also helps usability a lot. Otherwise, the silence, simplicity and reliability are second to none. I also love knowing exactly how much fuel I have and not having to carry around heavy fuel containers. The fuel is also a lot lighter than most people think it is - I've lost count of the number of people I have come across who thought a litre of alcohol weighed 1kg! Obviously not the solution to all problems - if I was a hard core snow melter operating under military time constraints I may well have a different view of course - but it's a worthy mention in this thread for those who value things that last... despite not actually being a pressure stove!
As far as stoves go, I get much more joy out of using an old stove than a new one. New stoves lack the soul and character of old stoves. Yes, new stoves are easier to use most of the time, but I don’t care about convenience when it comes to stoves.
