Hello everyone, Here's a few pics of my Hurlock stove, dated 1944. I actually picked this up in a small town in Normandy a few weeks ago. Cost me 25 Euros. So I am quite pleased. It came complete with the correct container and tools/spares. It goes very well and boils water very fast. Very noisy mind you. It is very solid and built to last. It runs on parrafin/kerosene. It looks better than the photos show. Regards, Alan
Good stoves, I have two myself, they use Primus parts, easy to maintain, although the steel tank does get very hot to the touch. A good flame spread, ideal for bigger pans, simmer via the bleed valve is good, and the stove is easy on fuel. Nice one Alan 8)
A fellow near me has a brass one that could well be coming my way, but he is the type that can't be hurried - - he has a 111 too, that might also be on its way to me
When I get my old side car outfit back on the road the Hurlock will live in the chair and be my stove for the Elephant rally in the new year. Regards, Alan
What bike do you use to haul the chair with? Last combo I had was a Sunbeam S7 with a single seater, & before that a Panther 120 with D/A, that ran so hot I didn't need a stove!
I'll put an R80 into a Cossack/Ural frame. Works quite well. It will cruise at 70mph fully loaded which good enough for an outfit. The Ural engines can be fragile. My friend has a Panther, it uses more oil than petrol
Alan: I did not know that Hurlock had a steel tank. I just checked mine and sure enough I have one brass and one steel. I understand that these stoves are British Military. Anyone know the dates of maunfacture or issue? Which came first steel or brass? Was brass in short supply and caused the shift? My steel tank one is in better shape than the brass one so I may be using the brass one and keeping the other on the shelf. Was this stove produced in a civilian model? I could not find anything on site about this stove. Thanks for any info. Gordon
Gordan, I would think you have it right, the brass tank first, then as raw materials became harder to source, steel tanks came into play. I don't know production dates, but I'm sure that at least some British forces used off the shelf Primus stoves as well during the war. If I remember right, Freddie Chapman mentions Primus stoves when he was setting up an Arctic Warfare Cadre back in @1939/40. Others may know more, but I would guess that the Hurlock type (made by other companies as well to the design) was more a standard issue stove in WWII If you have not heard of F Spencer Chapman, do a google search on him, he wrote some wonderful books, I know Alan Wenker is familiar with the mans work, well worth reading; dam, they were a tougher breed back then
Hello Gordon, I can't tell you any war time production dates etc but my guess is that the brass tanks gave way to steel because of the premium put on copper during WWII. The majority of Britains copper came from the United States at that time and as it had to run the Atlantic and the German U-Boats a lot was lost so very quickly industries were given quotas as to how much they could have. I would conclude that a brass tank is most likely older than a steel one. Do you find the steel one heavier? By the way, do the Raiders still have training camp in Santa Rosa? Regards, Alan
Alan: I will have to weigh the two stoves in a few days it being Labor (3) Day weekend.. The brass one is home and the steel one is on display in the office. When the Los Robles complex was sold to and demolished by a huge shopping center I believe the Raiders moved there summer camp to Pleasanton, a bit south of Oakland. Gordon
Alan: Today I weighed both the brass and steel fount models. The steel one weighs between 1/2 and 3/4 ounce more than the brass model. It seems that other than a difference in fount weight everthing else would weigh the same. I guess the weight "sacrifice" was worth the brass, so to speak. Cheers. Gordon
Hi Gordon, Not much difference is it? Steel is a bit more robust too. Do you use the Hurlock often? When I first saw mine I was suprised to see how big it was. I was thinking it was the size of a M1942 or something similar. By the way, pity the Raiders left town. However, I expect today's modern Raiders are not like the guys from the 60's, 70's and early 80's. My hero is Ken Stabler. Go Raiders! Regards, Alan
On looking at the two canisters for the Hurlocks mentioned above I can't help but notice that they both have the word "TOP" stamped into the canister lid. I expect that brewing up under fire, not to mention preparing bangers and mash, could be a bit hectic. Though, priorties being what they are, I would expect that the typical "Limey" ( ) would put the war on hold when that time came. But, even under such adverse conditions, was it an insult to be told which end of the canister was "up", when it was so obvious? (OR) Was it that the Hurlock has no "off" valve and if the canister were stowed upside down, with the stove properly positioned inside, the pariffin would leak from the stove into the canister? I would hope the latter!! Gordon
