This one has me completely puzzled, can't find any info on it here, other searches on the www also drew a blank. Maybe someone recognizes the type of burner etc. to put a manufacturers name and time frame on it. The engraving is a bit hard to read and there is no other info to be found on the stove. No marking on the bottom at all. Maybe something will be visible after a good clean (hopefully without destroying the patina!) Obviously, the flame spreader is missing. This can be solved by making something that fits. Also, note the rectangular holes for the pot holders. The pump is detachable, but gentle force so far did not move things. Pump cup needs replacing. Never seen this type of detachable burner! The burner bell has been cast and machined I think, there is what looks like a factory repair (hard solder, to cover a casting error?) before machining the bell. After the necessary tlc & etc., I'll post photo's in the reference gallery. Thanks for looking! Best regards, Wim
Pump body came out. Maybe someone recognizes some details, like the cup holder attached with a brass screw viz. steel nut, also the pressure release valve looks typical. Maybe a company making blow torches trying their hand at a stove? The body of the NRV is cracked but looks standard so will easily be replaced by a stove one. The seat for the pip forms integral part with the pump body. Anyone having any suggestions at all? Best regards, Wim
Hi Enrique @shueilung.2008 , Thanks! It is not a half pint, I guess it is a 1&3/4pint, maybe 2pint stove. Best regards, Wim
@Wim New one on me, but what a fine thing! The straight-sided cone of the burner bell is distinctive, as is the rest of the stove. Rectangular-section strip pot rest support legs by the look of the mounting lugs. A separate, removable pump too, and piggy-backed on top of the tank rather than the side wall in Juwel fashion. Beautiful. John
@presscall Hi John, almost every detail on this stove is rather unusual, someone really took the trouble to design & build something not "like the others". I am rather happy to have found this stove at a reasonable price. It will be one of the "I'll never sell this one" brigade! (not that I sell many stoves....) Now only to convince The Boss this one deserves to reside in the house, not the shed! All the best, Wim
Wim, I'm stumped w/no guess as to age or origin but it's very interesting. Hasag and others effected by post WW2 reconstruction may be an angle. My own thought of "maybe German?" is really lame because if it looks old and other than Swedish my next thought tends to be German, no basis beyond that . The design may have been influenced to be made w/ minimal materials and cost. What country was the seller located may spark a clue? +1 w/you on the burner being unique, looks like a compression connection. Use of the pump / filler tube and that vent screw are atypical. The tank is also not "a copy", I'd like to see the bottom and a better look at the seam and feet / mounting lugs at some point. If not asking too much. The tank stamping looks nice, the bottom tank seam may be telling as well. Most "other" stove makers closely copy the Swedish offerings (& Swedes copy each other). I'm most impressed w/ a maker like this and designs that depart from their peers. In this case the burner & the whole shape of tank certainly including the top of the tank (more air space?). It maybe also had unique pot support if we ever come to know of it. thx omc
I spend some time this afternoon trying to fix this stove. I had already given it a good clean (hot water and soap, and a soft scrubbing pad) and dried it in the oven. The seal on the pump tube / filler cap (of an unknown substance) was replaced by an O-ring (Liddl! They seem to resist fuel pretty well), a new pump cup was also fitted. Now, one of many things I learned on this forum is a lipstick burner does NOT function properly without a piece of rolled brass mesh in it. This lipstick look alike did not have such thing, so I fitted one and bottomed it up with a similar roll of very fine stainless steel mesh, partly to prevent the brass mesh to drop out. The original flame plate is missing. There is no way of fixing it so it is expected for these to get lost. I used a cast one from a 96 model. I got the best result with the plate upside down. More experimenting has to be done with something that fits better. Not that I got a good result, even after triple priming the stove had a problem with vapourising. I think the jet is to large, but it does not look to be worn (in fact, I don't think this stove has seen much action!). The jet looks like one for a lantern, but the Pmax ones don't fit. The more I look at it, the more I am convinced this stove was made by a company making blow torches or lanterns that tried to venture on the stove market. When I took these photo's there was more bleu and less yellow in the flames to be seen, but you'll agree the result is not good. It is a cold and windy day, so I had to put up some wind beaters. As the stove & fuel were at freezing point the triple pre heat was really needed. I myself had to look for shelter indoors from time to time to 1. defrost my fingers, 2. watch my pea soup simmering and 3. keep the home fire burning.... The Missus likes to come home to a warm house with hot food on the table..... I know, I'm spoiling her!!! Best regards, Wim
Of course, I see from the seller’s photos that it’s a removable jet. Though running rich it maintained vapourisation and didn’t result in a fireball? What would you judge the jet size to be Wim? I could do the hypo needle fix on it if required, but it’d be useful to know what the jet size is at present and what to aim for. John
Hi John @presscall , it sounded as if the stove really had trouble to function (more or less) normal, no full fireballs but close. Purring sound followed by hissing (and big yellow ones) and purring again (followed by etc....). I tried playing a bit with fount pressure but that didn't help. A standard Primus cleaning pricker entered sans problemo, it felt as if there was room to spare. Judging by the size of the burner I think a smaller jet (0,23 or there abouts) would be better. It is very kind and generous of you to offer your skills, I think I'll accept your offer! So far, I don't think this is a very good design, and it would not have lasted long amidst the other, successful stove makes.Probably the reason why this is, so far, the only known example! Had they used a standard type of burner, or thought this one out a bit better, it could have been a different story all together. But, who never dares, never wins! Still, it would be nice to know the "mysterious" maker! All the best, Wim PS., The Missus liked the pea soup!
vapourisation tube have inside "any extra material"? if not - try put there some brass net - like in meths stove maybe transport heat to liquid is to pour.
I'm thinking the kero is not vaporizing enough per your description, maybe over sized opening on the lipstick or can add a windshield that fits closely to the burner to help some. Duane
@Wim Just an idea: Try a larger flame plate? It looks small to me - not enough thermal feedback? The burner is basically the same as on the Vesuvius, and the flame plate on that one leaves a much smaller gap between the plate and the bell.
That would be consistent with a Primus 100 - larger stove than a 96, but with the same sized jet orifice (for long running times). Janders makes a good point about the flame plate and it would be worth making a brass one with ‘legs’ that you could bend to adjust the plate height above the burner. If it comes to it, I’ll gladly re-size the jet. Cost you a beer at Newark. John
Hi @gieorgijewski , that was what I was also thinking, so I first put some fine brass mesh in the tube, followed by fine stainless steel mesh. Hi @hikerduane , I did the test in my outdoor kitchen (under a roof) and put wooden "walls" around it to keep the wind out. A windshield as you suggest close to the burner would concentrate the heat from the pre heat alcohol more on the burner so it is worth trying. Hi @janders , getting the flames closer to the bell would indeed be better. I'll concoct a copper plate to do some testing (I don't have brass strong enough) and see what happens. In my humble opinion, the problem with this burner is there is simply not enough heat transfer to the vapourizer. Somehow things were not designed properly. Anyhow, it is a nice challenge to get this one perform! Hi @presscall , I'll gladly throw in a glass as well John! All the best, Wim
Just a wild shot in the dark here. Could this be part of a type of furnace where the burner is inserted deep into the combustion area? That would assure the vaporizer is kept hot enough.
@goldwinger11 I don't think so. If you look at the 2nd picture from the top, the stove is fitted with legsupports. Square legs, but legs nevertheless.
