Long time coming

Discussion in 'Stove Forum' started by cottage hill bill, Oct 18, 2019.

  1. cottage hill bill

    cottage hill bill Subscriber

    Online
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    Messages:
    768
    My main collecting interest is British and Commonwealth militaria. That's what got me into GPAs in the first place so it's understandable I've wanted one of these for a long time. Finally found one. The base plate and windscreens were pretty badly rusted. Luckily in was mostly surface rust, not much pitting but so much of the original finish was gone that I had no choice but to repaint those three pieces. The collar was fairly rusty also, but the burn and light directions for the FA are only painted on this model, not stamped and I didn't want to loose that. The fount on these is like a Gold Bond, the paint is pretty much the only true identifier. If you repaint one of these it's just another 500 with no way to prove it's not a fake. I had wondered about when the stoves were painted, at the factory or after they were received by the Canadian government. The black stamp on the bottom answers that question. Notice the careful application of paint on the bottom.
    Canadian 500 1.jpg Canadian 500 2.jpg Canadian 500 3.jpg

    That gives me just about the full set of manageable, usable (by one man) stoves. Don't have a No.1 Hydra (hard to use for cooking for one). Do have No.2, No.3, No.6, No.7 and now the Canadian 500. Also have a /|\ marked brassie, which I have heard called a No.5 but I've also seen the big multi burner propane unit called a No.5. Probably should get a No.12 for completeness but the real collecting focus is 1850ish-1945. Any I'm leaving out? Oh yeah, a Soyer. Also hard to cook for one.
     
  2. Doc Mark

    Doc Mark Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2004
    Messages:
    16,834
    Howdy, @cottage hill bill ,

    That's a wonderful stove, Sir! I've never seen one before, and you've done a bang-up job with it!! Very well done, and thank you for sharing it. Your having done so, opened my eyes to an entirely new realm of stove collecting, about which I had zero knowledge before!! Amazing!! Thanks, again, and congratulations on your score!! Take care, and God Bless!

    Every Good Wish,
    Doc
     
  3. Barrett New Zealand

    Offline
    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2018
    Messages:
    294
    Location:
    Northern New Zealand
    Nicely done CHB.
    I like that you didn't clean up the manifold or its heat shield when painting the bits that needed protection, and a nice look of rejuvenation and protection with that fount whilst keeping it original.

    You and Alex have had a lot of hard seaching hours or (some luck) pay off finding a couple of CA 500 servicemen recently!

    PS
    Liking there's a bit of Coleman buzz running here lately....but... I know, I know, their common like me...lol
     
  4. SveaSizzler

    SveaSizzler United States Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2016
    Messages:
    674
    Location:
    Tucson, Arizona
    I heard the last of the British Army's Soyer Stoves went down on a supply ship in the Falklands War.
    How is Soyer pronounced? So-Yay or Sawyer?
    Are you also expert on mess tins? Tommy Adkins was issued a D-shaped mess tin that was issue gear from c. 1814 thru 1938, when the double nesting rectangular tins replaced it. Was the slang term "Dixie" applied to the earlier tins, too?

    Nice 500.
     
  5. cottage hill bill

    cottage hill bill Subscriber

    Online
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    Messages:
    768
    My understanding is that, in British army terminology, a dixie is a larger (approx.3 gallon) cooking pot.

    See this link 3 Gallon Dixie

    The dixie was a 3 function pot, large cook pot, fry pan (lid) and carrying container as the full, hot dixie with the lid clamped down could then be carried forward from the cook area to troops in the front line.

    As far as I know the mess kits, the D shaped infantry one, the circular cavalry one and the later rectangular one were all called mess kits. Now I'll have to see if my books on the List of Changes lists mess kits. I think the author only included weapons related entries.
     
  6. snwcmpr

    snwcmpr Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2011
    Messages:
    12,673
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Wow, a nice restoration, and keeping the important parts original.
    Well done.

    Ken in NC
     
  7. Duck

    Duck United States Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2018
    Messages:
    356
    Very nice stove sir.
     
  8. MrAlexxx

    MrAlexxx Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2015
    Messages:
    951
    :thumbup::thumbup: thumbs up! :)
    Yours looks great. Used mine last weekend and I'll tell you that the windscreen works well! I could never understand why they didn't put that on the civvy versions. No doubt like everything else the cost for sure.

    Alex
     
  9. SveaSizzler

    SveaSizzler United States Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2016
    Messages:
    674
    Location:
    Tucson, Arizona
    @cottage hill bill, Thanks for the link. Another mystery about the British Army unearthed. I was totally off, probably from some sarcastic reference, somewhere, I didn't pick up on. The US Army use similar sized Mermite cans, which were well insulated, but couldn't but cooked with.
    I'm wondering how the old mess tin compares to the Italian WWII Gamello which was also D-shaped.
    But we are way off the topic on the Canadian military Coleman.
    It also begs the question why the US Gov't commissioned the M-1941 and 520 from Coleman, instead of an off-the-shelf procurement of #500s?
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2019
  10. cottage hill bill

    cottage hill bill Subscriber

    Online
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    Messages:
    768
    The M1941 and 520 are the same stove, just military and Coleman names respectively. The 520 is smaller and lighter than the 500 and has the canister which doubles as a cooking vessel. It would be tough to get a 500 in a backpack, especially the M1928 we started the war with. It's very much the same as the WWI M1910 pack , which is not really a bag like most packs, but an envelope which is folded and buckled around the stuff you're carrying. It's a really stupid arrangement. All the small stoves were really intended as either stoves for vehicle crews (tanks, artillery tractors etc) where the stove would be stowed in the vehicle. I think the 520 was small enough it got appropriated by the PBI (poor bloody infantry) then caught on and began to be requisitioned by and issued to infantry units. I agree though the 500 would have made a good vehicle stove.
     
  11. SveaSizzler

    SveaSizzler United States Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2016
    Messages:
    674
    Location:
    Tucson, Arizona
    OK. What's the one with the 3 curving ''wings'' for a pot support? The 520 is taller and has 6 small arms that fold out.
    When I went thru Boot Camp in '73/'74 we were issued WWII 782 Gear. The haversack was strapped to the knapsack and became the Light Transport Pack, when you put a horse shoe of bedroll/shelter half/poles on, it became the Field Transport Pack. Not Light at all. The whole system was desgned to impart maximum discomfort on the infantryman and make him predisposed to show no mercy to the enemy. [Regular Infantry was issued the Alice Pack, by then] I guess training boots on obsolete gear built character.
     
  12. Duck

    Duck United States Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2018
    Messages:
    356
    M1950
     
  13. SveaSizzler

    SveaSizzler United States Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2016
    Messages:
    674
    Location:
    Tucson, Arizona
    I thought it was an earlier model. While I've acquired 2 425s, 2 413s and a 502, my Coleman knowledge is still scant. [Only a 425F works. The others are 'projects'.]