And very interesting is the fact that in middle 1930s the classic 0,1,4,5 models were not in the catalog anymore, completely replaced by the star models, as we can see here: https://classiccampstoves.com/threads/1930s-svea-brochure.13440/ The transition canceled the basic models, but the star designation remained when was normal to have, like others, only internal NRV stoves. Anyway the models 15 and 16 with standard burners and external NRV (the early sostitutive models of 1 and 5 that were equipped with the tubular 804/805 burners) were the only that lasted till middle 1930s from the early years pre WWI. 15 and 16 were still offered to those that wanted the external NRV feature and probably were more expensive than the star models. So 15 and 16 from being budget models became “luxury” models in 1930 Nicola
Although the 'star' models were a cheaper option than predecessors, can we regard them as a transitional model rather than a purely budget offering? With perhaps the intention from the outset to just drop the star once the external-NRV models (other than the No.15 and No.16) had left dealers' shelves worldwide? An optional plated finish on a budget model seems out of place, but is logical on a line of stoves intended to become the standard offering. The 1920s and 1930s illustrations showing a pressed steel top ring adds to the confusion. We assume these were cheaper to produce than the cast versions, perhaps there was not much between them, or perhaps stocks of cast versions were used up on an ad-hoc basis over the following years. Or possibly the example on Stainislaw's stove isn't original...
@Blackdog as I said above the 0,1,4,5 classic models were all replaced by the star models, they were not in the catalog anymore in middle 1930s, so the star models were the main offer and not a budget version. That was a transitional naming problem… So Svea 1 star was the equivalent of Primus 1, Radius 1 and Optimus 1, same or better quality (considering that Svea stoves were the best in the world ). Not sure when, probably post WW2 or a little earlier the offer was revised again, classic 0,1,4,5 numbers were reintroduced back in the catalogs. Nicola
I've got there at last Nicola! I think the reason I'm being somewhat slow is the filler cap and Bakelite seeming like an attempt to slash costs, and the cast top ring which seems out of sequence. Hopefully more evidence will come to light in future to explain some of these mysteries! As of course were Svecia. Oh, and Lux were also strongest, handiest and most efficient! Descriptions laws have made the world a dull place!
@Blackdog always the 1924 Italian catalog shows the first style of pressed steel trivets. We have a black hole of docs from 1924 to 1934, in fact in none of the catalogs available we see models like 25,26 and some others. This is the earliest type of stamped steel trivet: It can be found also on “bubble font” stoves like this Svea 12 and it’s always found on middle-late 1920s models like 25,26 indeed… Cast iron trivets were still delivered. Nicola
@Blackdog bakelite in the 1920s was really used and innovative, so I see that knob like a “fashion” feature for that period, probably more comfortable than the brass knob. The filler/key combination maybe was an attempt of optimization… later the separated elements were reintroduced for these models. Nicola
Yes, that all makes sense, a lot of new ideas being tried out in the face of tough competition. Is the second style of pressed steel the one shown here, now with extra radial spokes? I have a couple of these, but not an example of the earliest type (although I have one or two stoves which need one).
After the earliest stamped trivet that I posted above with Svea Max Sievert texts, arrives this with extra radial elements (in fact the early ones are a little weak after a lot of use) and Max Sievert is removed: Then another update, that can be found mainly on shield logo Sveas, this one where “Made in Sweden” is added: Nicola
Thanks @Nicola Francesco Elia, if that's been sequenced that clearly before, I've missed it! That was my understanding, thank you for confirming. I agree about the fragile nature of that second version, it seems the steel was very thin. I have come across several which were badly cracked or thinned to almost nothing by corrosion.
@Blackdog You’re welcome! Well this sequence is what emerged by the many Svea stoves I have, in another thread I made a sequence of the cast iron ones… always thanks to my stoves observation. I confirm that the first type is often found fully eaten by rust and heat, very light and fragile. Nicola
