[my life seems complete w/o a black knob. lol. BUT maybe we carve out the earliest 111 (tentative 52/53) had black knob? i dunno] ------ *and another thing! lol re my: "three examples do not have their wind screens, there maybe more, this seems worthy of reconsidering the 1st version details. we may find (inexplicably so far) that as-original some did not have wind screen... again: "three examples [of 1st version 111s] do not have their wind screen,... and *the last version of the 11 do not have wind screen [both used black knob as well] I'm on-board there is likely something to this and I DO want to see what comes of this development (more examples/suggestions). I give credit to fellow stovies, i post in hopes we dont forget it going fwd. thanks again, all. carry-on.
all, A few tidbits related to revisiting 1st ver. 111, in no particular order: >>Staffan 2020.. *stove HAS wind shield Optimus 111 embossed probably 1953/54-ish .................... instructions: Optimus 111 instructions ca 1953/54 (instruction manual No. 79) a few things: a. we have yet to better ID the earliest example (we're workin on that here). b. we can concur w/Staffan this is not a match to the earliest example. c. we concur w/his rationale, noting instructions, his (educated) guess that his 111 example is 1953/54. (not necessarily defining year range of a next version). KEY early changes. (c.56?) to note.. wind shield, the change to the [_____] burner bracket and soon after the later type hinge. OPEN QUESTION ANYBODY: his is a gloss hammerite finish WHAT COLOR WOULD YOU SAY STAFFAN's 111 IS? Help, please. I myself do not have a guess. i can in future review various hammerite colors offered currently in the US. (There are no wrong answers, all taken under advisement). This early gloss hammerite color is one of many (too many) orig. colors that follow . It will be a challenge to come up with naming the various orig. colors best we can (to differentiate). ========= aside, i suggest as correction? trying to be helpful here. wanting membership to collaboratively advance our understanding of 111 model development: Skauvill's "The first two versions of 111 had no winshield" <-- i question that. this seemingly based on Staffan No.79 *instructions? NOTE the Staffan stove with the No.79 instructions HAS a wind shield. (that and, i'm not aware we've ID'd/defined first two versions. Head scratcher: Skauvill stove with the No.82 111 instructions does NOT have wind shield . Is what it is, for now. *Reminder stove maker illustrations (and even some images) known to NOT be accurate/timely depictions of stoves. Myself and many a fellow stovie get bitten by this gotcha : (. cc: FYI @Skauvill @mr optimus [cc @Tony Press jus cuz lol. corrections? do you have color suggestion for Staffan's 111?]
I'm onboard that we can, now, improve 1st version info: >> my Jan 2023: "1st version of 111, tentative: 1952 -to- c. 1954" This is tenuous (a lower bar than tentative lol). To continue the convo, I suggest (after the input from others ) to maybe adopt: tenuous 1st version 1952, early hinge and early burner bracket. black control knob (carry over from 11) matt paint finish in black or dark green WITHOUT wind shield? again, tenuous but i DO think we can improve form where i was. ====== Next version maybe? 1953/54 version (maybe 53 -to- c.55?) adds wind shield, adds more colors for case & knobs (but not to exclude '52 case colors). still early hinges and burner bracket. carry-on. i catch up later, too much hobby time spent yesterday/today on this
@OMC Well, I am truely sorry for my earlyer coment ; "The first two versions of 111 had no winshield" as I understand perfectly you questioned. It came out as an answer to a guy just clamed " It was petty the windshield was missing" WEll, I do not have any documentation for my own claim, so please look away on it! I still cannot see any point that there was any windshield from the beginning, but for sure, the preowner of it, could buy it new, remove the windshield, and store it away for the next "70 years", so that his son could refind it after all this years, and let me buy it. I find it hard to believe, but acept all work there being done to find documentation for Optimus 111, and all other stoves! Thank you! Skauvill
@Skauvill, Thank you. we'll not take us too seriously, we're all attempting to advance understanding together here. ONE of my probs is i confuse things attempting to explain and apparently is case here too. sorry. My latest *thought/guess is the 1st version is *without windshield, i'm with you on that (but not "first two versions").. we see at least 3 w/o windshields match to 1st ver., yours being complete NOS. so i'm w/you too that we do NOT assume yours is missing, no, it seems likely it did not come w/windshield. also that the roarer wind shield being separated from stove is not common occurrence. and the credit is to you, Duane, Havard, Staffan, Lennart, kerophile, Tony and others as we stand on shoulders of those before us. *tenuous 1st version 1952, early hinge and early burner bracket. black control knob (carry over from 11) matt paint finish in black or dark green WITHOUT wind shield? ^^^ tenuous but IS suggestion that currently makes most sense to me. as always we see what emerges/develops going forward. carry-on ==== note: my current thought remains, your stove is as-original. but, devil's advocate: am i alone on, the No.82 instructions w/yours is unexpected (ZERO research on 111 instructions so far but a later ver. has No.79 )
@OMC I am very much agree on everything you write. Sure! Just one thing could confuse. Before in this tread I the same instruction as came with mine. No.82 was there copied with a No.83, the no.83 was instruction for a optimus blower. And this instruction no.83 was markt with 1953. On a second tought, there might be different serialnumber on different products from Optimus Thank's again! Skauvill
re 111 instr. We be open to No.82 precedes No.79, under advisement, TY (stranger things have happened). ----- re-visit very early examples, tenative sequence (thinking out loud): >> tenuous, 111 1952 the 1st version: front handl, no latch hole, early hinge, early burner bracket, early burner, no wind shield black (11) cntrl knob matt paint finish in black or dark green open-end spanner hikerduane's example btw did NOT have wind shield, see his comment Knight84 's Early Optimus 111 whitegas 's Early Optimus 111 with front carrying handle ======== >> Tweeners, I insert these c. 52 twins here? (52/early '53?) Both match the above, both with same 2 exceptions / changes (a & b) [credit anfeng ] a. handle on back. b. Ea w/same rare cntrl knob/key, ( is key being "as-orig" the best guess? +1. What else could make sense?) anfeng 's Special Early Optimus 111 twodogs ' Early Optimus 111 ========== >> hindsight here, early 53? Skauvill 's Early Optimus 111. Unused! NOS Later: handle on back, green cntrl knob. Earlier: matt paint dk grn, no wind shield. and parramethtrol 's IF a later wind shield was added to his? "Early model... which is plausible, if so, it also fits into early 53 sequence here parramethtrol 's Early Model 111 Later: handle on back, green cntrl knob. Earlier: matt paint dk grn, and again, IF, as-orig it did not have wind shield (vs later wind shield shown w/it) . btw also shown w/later combo spanner ======= >> 111 1953 -to- c.55 handle on back, no latch hole, early hinge, early burner bracket, early burner, side scoop wind shield (no.1031 seen in 56 catalog) green cntrl knob gloss paint finish [lt green?, open-end spanner Staffan 's Optimus 111 embossed probably 1953/54-ish. gloss hammerite ____ green? Havard K 's Early 111 - c.1956 gloss lt green pete sav 's EARLY OPTIMUS 111 repainted ====== note: again, side scoop wind shield no.1031 seen in 56 catalog... not definitive in itself (esp that it's not listed on the "111" page) but indicative those w/side scoop might possibly go into early 56? OR is there another factor that runs back up against that? (like, something i've already forgotten !?! lol) all for now
A re-do just to update / insert: Hävard's Early 111, pre 1956. Hävard's recently posted TWO early versions (i missed one). @Håvard Kvernelv @Skauvill and others have advanced our understanding of early version 111s. Now with FIVE *c.53 examples, thinking out loud I'll suggest the following re early versions: >> tenuous, 111 1952 the 1st version: *>> tenuous 111 c.53 or, as above, refer to as tweeners? or? >> tentative 111 late 53 -to- c.55 ====== Again re-visit very early examples, "tentative" sequence (W.I.P. still just thinking out loud) but these latest updates fit: >> tenuous, 111 1952 the 1st version: front handl, no latch hole, early hinge, early burner bracket, early burner, no wind shield black (11) cntrl knob matt paint finish in black or dark green open-end spanner hikerduane's example btw did NOT have wind shield, see his comment Knight84 's Early Optimus 111 whitegas 's Early Optimus 111 with front carrying handle ======== I insert these >> tenuous 111 c.53 c. 53 Twins! w/unique key (52/early '53?) Both match the above, both with same 2 exceptions / changes (a & b) [credit anfeng ] a. handle on back. b. Ea w/same rare cntrl knob/key, ( is key being "as-orig" the best guess? +1. What else could make sense?) anfeng 's Special Early Optimus 111 twodogs ' Early Optimus 111 hindsight i insert 3 more 111 c. 53's here vvv >> ea53? Skauvill 's Early Optimus 111. Unused! NOS Later: handle on back, green cntrl knob. Earlier: has matt paint dk grn and no wind shield. -that ^^^, and- parramethtrol 's (and Hävard's) IF parramethtrol 's originally did not have wind shield (and a much) later windshield was added?) ...which is plausible, if so, parramethtrol 's Early Model 111 and Hävard's Early 111, pre 1956 also fit into early 53 sequence here Later: handle on back, green cntrl knob. Earlier: matt paint dk grn and no windshield ======= >> tentative 111 late 53 -to- c.55 (handle on back, adds windshield, paint change to gloss paint) handle on back, no latch hole, early hinge, early burner bracket, early burner, side scoop wind shield (no.1031 seen in 56 catalog) green cntrl knob gloss paint finish [lt green?, open-end spanner Staffan 's Optimus 111 embossed probably 1953/54-ish. gloss hammerite ____ green? Hävard's Early 111 - c.1956 gloss lt green pete sav 's EARLY OPTIMUS 111 repainted 10,300 views
this is ^^^ WIP (work in progress) Pharael's latest *example IS part of this WIP, "revisit early examples" *Optimus 111 (circa 1954-1955) all, @Pharael, THANK YOU yours is an excellent example and reference . i confess i enthusiastically reviewed yours vs my timeline and was PLEASED Pharael sorted this accurately to an in-between version 1954-1955. THEN (next day, i somehow) was drawn to *my late update(s), read on. NOTE: your example IS a definitive exact version, yours & others should have a place in updated timeline. *my late update(s) [tenuous & tentative] : "re-visit very early examples, tenative sequence (thinking out loud):" "thinking out loud I'll suggest the following re early versions: >> tenuous, 111 1952 the 1st version: *>> tenuous 111 c.53 or, as above, refer to as tweeners? or? >> tentative 111 late 53 -to- c.55" quick note (examples that match yours) Staffan (in 2020) suggested 1953-54ish my suggestion: 111 late 53 -to- c.55 i could also accurately suggest? (inline w/yours): circa 1954 or c.54 -to-... that works. yours: Optimus 111 (circa 1954-1955) ------ so far so good. Where i left off (w/o revisiting) i could not hard stop in 1955. Continuing into 56 being possible plausible. ... now wait a minute!! Am i back to: "PLEASED Pharael sorted this accurately to an in-between version 1954-1955." lol Does "circa 1954-1955" imply /include circa 1955? If so, that works. Not clear "to me". If we have the timing /years correct (it works. corrections welcome), what about the best terminology... all, @Pharael , @Tony Press. OPEN QUESTION: What title would one suggest to best define c. 1954 and c.1955? (meaning open to pre-54 & after 55) in this case (meaning open to pre-54 [incl late 53] & after 55 [incl 56]) "c.54 /c.55" "c.54, c.55" or ??? 11.350 views
@OMC & @Tony Press My suggestion: ‘circa 1954 & 1955’ as for me, this then clarifies the inclusion of 1955. Pharael.
On terminology. 1. Circa, abbreviated to c. or ca. means “around”, “approximately”, or “roughly” when applied to a date. So, circa 1975, means “around the year 1975” or “a rough date for that event is 1975”. Circa is used when there is good evidence, but not precision. 2. For me, “1985-1987” written like that means “in the years 1985,1986 and 1987”. 3. “Circa 1985-1987” means “we think they were made around 1985, 1986 and 1987”. In this case: “As far as the current evidence shows we conclude they were made in the years 1985, 1986 and 1987 but those dates may stretch a bit into earlier or later years”. 4. Using /. / differs from + and - and should not be used instead of either/or in some contexts. “1985 and 1986” can be written as 1985 & 1986, or 1985 + 1986. Writing 85/86 to me means “1985 or 1986”. 5. Not specifically in the above conversation, but the use of “through” (sometimes very annoyingly written as “thru”), as in, “1985 through 1999” is a problem. This is a USA thing, and confusing to other English speakers. Does it mean from the end of 1985 to the end of 1999; or from the beginning of 1985 to the end of 1999; or the beginning of 1985 to start of 1999; etc? I recommend it not be used, and that more precise language used instead. 6. Lastly (not quite), *. In very modern usage, * is now used to signify that a word or sentence written before is being corrected with this new word or sentence signified by *. As in “*duck”, meaning the word above that ended in uck was incorrect and I meant to write duck. 7. As in 6 above, using symbols instead of plain language is becoming increasingly confusing, especially in trying to convey concise meaning. Cheers Tony
I'm trying to take all this in. Thank you both. For me these are important details. Fair to mention, Pharael title as-is: circa 1954 - 1955 [*me personally, i still think there's a better option] Tony approves as-is "3. “Circa 1985-1987” means “we think they were made around 1985, 1986 and 1987”. In this case: “As far as the current evidence shows we conclude they were made in the years 1985, 1986 and 1987 but those dates may stretch a bit into earlier or later years”. (not an apples-for-apples example but that ^^^ is approval, as-is). * i did not see it that way and checked with 2 more learned professionals. They agreed w/Tony as-is circa was implied to both years. So the score (so far lol) 3 smarter than I to my 1. argh ======== If it is / or - or & (1954/55 or 1954-55 or 1954 & 55) there is punctuation (divider) separating the 2 years regardless of interpretation (i grant you the dash ( - ) is interpreted as joining vs separation). Adding 1 letter "c." to the 2nd year is helpful and does no harm (imo). suggesting c.1954/c.1955 ------ Sorry to hear Tony's "Writing 85/86 to me means “1985 or 1986”." [that would not be good] BUT I agree with Cambridge and Merriam Webster "a forward slash is used to denote "or", "and or" (both)... c.1954/c.1955 meaning: circa 1954 and or circa 1955 Given that, taking all under advisement for timeline purposes and I intend to adopt as a title: c.1954/c.1955 ==== My 2nd something new learned: A wavy punctuation mark (~), known as a tilde, generally means "approximately" or "about" when placed before a number. Alrighty then! thanks again carry on
The tilde is used in science a lot. “Doing a quick count of birds on the plain, we estimated ~50 bustards, and ~30 jabirus”. Tony
