OPTIMUS PATENT 00s -FEATURES

Discussion in 'Optimus No:00' started by kaw550red, Jan 11, 2009.

  1. kaw550red

    kaw550red RIP

    Offline
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2004
    Messages:
    2,350
    Hi Ross

    I wish I could get that genie back in the bottle. Do you never sleep?

    The evidence of my sold stoves should support my argument so there is something wrong with your eyes or my workmanship. Many of the legs on those stoves were made by me and I only have one jig which copies the Optimus bend. I can tell the difference between my legs and commercially made ones but I know where to look.

    My hard evidence extends over a long period. Whilst there are gaps it is pretty compelling

    1 Your early bun footed patent 00 legs coincide with the legs on my bun footed 00

    2 The legs of George's Upplands Vasby patent 00 coincides with the legs on my similar one and the legs on the bun footed ones

    3 The legs of an unused 30s 00 had the original leg shape

    4 All of the 50s and PTC 00s that I have or had had the original leg shape.

    6 All of the 00s which I think date back to the 80s or 90s have or have the original leg shape

    7 I have checked about 5 or 6 00s today and all have the same leg shape

    8 In the garage I have an early PTC MoD 210 and I am pretty certain that it has the original leg shape

    Obviously my comments apply to the top bend not the bottom.

    I cannot say that Optimus never made another shape but I have not come across it. Having said that probably a dozen will appear next week because that is what happens with collecting.

    The extended period of a single leg shape casts doubt on your documentary evidence but does not disprove it.

    The high incidence of the "wrong" legs on the early stoves is worrying but does not prove that they were original. They are about 80 years old and will have had several owners.

    I think that the original collared legs were hand fabricated from cut down domestic stove legs so they are relatively easy to fake

    Regards Bryan
     
  2. Bom Bom Bom Bom

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,946
    Hi Bryan, The pictures of my "Patent" 00 seem to show the pan supports as having no serrations - have a look at image no 7:

    Graham's Patent 00

    I'll check that this is not a trick of the photograph this evening.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 2, 2015
  3. kerophile

    kerophile United Kingdom SotM Winner Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2004
    Messages:
    11,639
    Location:
    Far North of Scotland
    Hi Bryan, Neither my bun-footed nor my Upplands Vasby stove legs have serrated tops.
    Regards,
    George.
     
  4. kaw550red

    kaw550red RIP

    Offline
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2004
    Messages:
    2,350
    Hi Ross

    LEGS

    My original remark about the Optimus legs was meant as an argument stopper. I had no idea that my opinion was remotely contentious. Rather than spend a lot of time writing to clear up misunderstandings or explain reasons it would be better if we discussed it when I visit you.

    I now have photographic evidence of the “Optimus” bends from the 1900s to 1962 with actual stoves from 1962 to C1990 to support my opinion. However whilst they prove that those bends existed in all decades of the Optimus “Primus” type stove manufacture they do not prove that Optimus did not use other bends.

    It would be helpful if you could find an Optimus stove showing the bend which appears on the parts list.

    If we cannot agree it would be better if we bypassed the problem and corrected any other mistakes in the proposed document

    DOCUMENT

    There is a fair amount of effort in developing the draft document into a proper working document. My stove collecting days are over so before expending a lot of effort into finishing it does it seem a helpful source of information for collectors as it seems pointless proceeding if it simply occupies space on your web site without benefit?

    There is information at the beginning and end which can be missed out once the document is polished into a usable document.

    DATING

    There is suggestive evidence for the starting date of the model however there must be some evidence of when the folding feet were introduced so if we cannot get any better evidence we can use them provisionally to put the stove into an era. Provided that we say the dating is provisional and why it has been set between the particular dates I see no harm in that. I would suggest that we use twenty years as the patent period unless we can find any evidence to the contrary. I will explain when I see you.

    I would like to see any Primus 1 pint paraffin stoves dated up to 1912 if I may.

    Completely unrelated I would like to have a look at your hard copy of Linqvists original stove.

    I will bring up hard copies of the Camping Club information

    I am not available this week but come up one night next week if this is convenient.

    This is the second time I have prepared this reply. I was previewing it before when I noticed an interesting photo at the left and clicked on it thereby deleting my previous reply. Silly me

    Regards Bryan
     
  5. Bom Bom Bom Bom

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,946
    Not sure if your question was specifically aimed at Ross, but as a user of this site I for one would welcome and appreciate any time and effort you expend in preparing an Optimus 00 model and features chronology.

    I strongly suspect I'm not alone in this and would request other interest parties voice their support for this exercise to assure you the effort would not be wasted.
     
  6. kaw550red

    kaw550red RIP

    Offline
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2004
    Messages:
    2,350
    Hi Graham

    Thanks, that is a help. I did not want to put a lot of effort into something that effectively collected dust.

    I get no kick out of seeing my name in the public domain as it usually precedes being attacked as often my opinions upset people

    Regards Bryan
     
  7. Spiritburner

    Spiritburner Admin Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    10,479
    Location:
    N.E. England

    No attacks percieved or real here I hope!

    The reason this post was moved into the reference section for the 00 is so it can be easily found & of use to those interested. Sure, we'll discuss it, make any agreed edits & add some pics & then delete all these replies which will be irrelevan once that edited & ploshed article is finalised. My plan is to have similar articles for all the popular & important models - one day! The idea is to write an illustrated history of a model using pics from the relevant gallery & catalogues etc.

    I will put my 70/71 guide up soon - it won't be complete as I never got past the 30's, but maybe you'll feel better seeing someone else sticking their head above the parapet. I can continue writing the thing while it's posted here & bring others on board with their contributions & arguments. We may achieve more & quicker this way than by waiting till one of us has a 'completed' piece of work to post that no-one can argue against.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 2, 2015
  8. kaw550red

    kaw550red RIP

    Offline
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2004
    Messages:
    2,350
    Hi Ross

    I have not mastered your new site yet so find the post by the bookmark on my computer so I have no idea where it is on the site.

    I currently cannot load photos because Apple updated the system just before Xmas and cocked the browser up. I have been checking daily for an update but have not found one yet.

    The resized downloads go into a stack on the dock. However I cannot find how to get them out and they seem to be locked in. I cannot even find out how to delete them. I tend to think like a corkscrew when dealing with computers. Instead of downloading into an inaccessible stack I dragged and dropped the download on to my desktop. However it came as a download not a photo. When I opened it the ruddy photo shot straight into the locked stack like a rabbit down a rabbit hole!

    Computers are as frustrating as stoves!

    Regards Bryan
     
  9. Spiritburner

    Spiritburner Admin Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    10,479
    Location:
    N.E. England

    I strongly recommend taking some time to master the index. I think you will find the set-up far more logical than the old site. The Stove Reference Gallery is a sub-section of the Stove Forum & is split down by country. Some countries are further sub-divided by make & model.

    In the case of the 00 it's Stove Reference Gallery > Sweden > Optimus > No:00

    If you want to stay in the Optimus or Sweden section use the 'breadcrumbs' rather than going back to the index & starting again.

    Can't advice with Macs but I'm sure we have users here posting ok who may be able to advice.
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2018
  10. Spiritburner

    Spiritburner Admin Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    10,479
    Location:
    N.E. England
    I've just reposted a better scan of this catalogue. It dates from the First World War - it is undated but if you check the comments at the link you will see why it is dates as WWI. The parts listing shows the external valve for the 'Travelling' 00 & no dimple in the spirit cup. My 00 with external NRV has no dimple. It also shows the legs & the collared legs for the 00 do not have the pronounced slope of the other's shown. The legs on mine have the pronounced slope. As the 00's of the next decade or so seem to have the less-sloped legs I think my early 00 predates this catalogue.

    From catalogues the earliest I can date the Travelling 00 is 1912. The external NRV was still around c1917/18 but had gone by 1921. The collared legs are still with us in 1921 as are the bun feet. I can't see any dimpled spirit-cups upto 1921.

    Then I have a 00 info void up to 1929 & pre 1912
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2018
  11. kaw550red

    kaw550red RIP

    Offline
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2004
    Messages:
    2,350
    Hi Ross

    I had missed some replies because notifications have come when more than one response has been made and I have automatically gone to the last reply on the post.

    ATTACKS I am sorry but in trying to be brief I have created entirely the wrong impression. Attacks are my all embracing term for responses which include hostile as well as benign responses. Sorry for any confusion caused. I should have said responses.

    I used to produce complex legal and technical documents professionally and once you put your name to any document like that you put yourself up as a target. There is an element whose sole occupation seems to be finding fault with "expert's" work. It is a bit like your partner saying "You missed a bit" when you are decorating. They are just trying to be "helpful" but it would be more use if they were helpful before the work is finished.

    I have been looking through parts lists as well however mine seem to be later than yours. I am not certain if earlier price lists were produced before then but if there are unillustrated parts lists the 00 leg is part number 320.

    Another line of enquiry is when the short kinked leg was introduced for the 00. If that can be dated it shows when the folding footed stoves were introduced although not when they finished. Is there any evidence in the parts list for the existence of the kinked bottom long legs? If they appear in the parts lists it would at least mean that the "Primus" topped ones could be Optimus ones

    FIXED FOOTED 00 Please do not get too excited about the fixed footed 00. I cannot find any photos of it and wonder whether my memory has been influenced by the Primus 96 models which went through under the tank feet, fixed feet, folding feet sequence. I may have assumed that the 00 following the same sequence. If that version is included in the post it would have to be described as "suspected" rather than it be stated as existing.

    At present the earliest known Optimus 96 version was the fixed side footed stove so Optimus did not necessarily follow the same sequence. However in the Patent 00 versions they seem to have jumped straight from a basic design to a much more stable design and missed the intermediate feet out.

    My Lux stove made before 1915 has a dimpled sprit cup but it is impossible to say whether it is an Optimus replacement or whether Optimus used a Lux design.

    I will be in touch later about the visit. I will try and do some work on the document before I come to try to get it moving along.

    Regards Bryan
     
  12. Spiritburner

    Spiritburner Admin Subscriber

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    10,479
    Location:
    N.E. England
    That's cool Bryan! I don't think I can be likened to the less than helpful partner who should have been more helpful before the work is finished. You'd be suprised how little I get asked by people researching such matters - so, as in this case I don't get to contribute until it's in the wild.

    I've put my name to plenty of articles on the site. A few errors come to light over the years as more info becomes available but I've not been tarred & feathered yet.
     
  13. kaw550red

    kaw550red RIP

    Offline
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2004
    Messages:
    2,350
    UPDATE

    Following a visit to Ross’s on Monday night I thought that it might be of interest to bring you up to date.

    I apologise for the length of this post but the subject is complicated so explanations have to be complicated as well

    For the sake of brevity I am referring to the leg bends as being Optimus or non Optimus. At present my leanings are towards the Optimus bends as being correct but I am not finished yet so my opinion can change. However 00s are under discussion so any counter arguments should be supported by fact not photos of other models that show a bend that appears to be different. If you feel that you have factual evidence that contradicts my opinion I want a photo accompanied by three measurements. The height of the leg above the leg housing. The overall height of the leg. The width of the top of the leg. It is probable that these measurements should be the same if the same maker made legs with different bends on them. Up to now people have been sending me photos of legs that look different to the “Optimus” legs. Whether they look the same or different is an opinion. Measurements are factual

    LEGS

    I went with a very positive feeling and came away being positive that I was confused.

    I had documentary, photographic and physical evidence that Optimus consistently used the same bend during the 00 production. Unfortunately that does not mean that they only used one bend. The bend of the very early 00 legs coincides with the bend of the very last 00 legs with the angle of the sloping part matching. This is very suggestive. HOWEVER there are parts lists that show a less definite bend which may simply be representative or could have been made.

    The legs that show the “Optimus” shape are from the 1910s, 1920s, 1930s, 1950s 1970s and 1980s.

    The stoves that have the “non Optimus” shape are concentrated in the 1910s to about 1930 with most of them being on bun footed stoves however it is not clear whether all of the bends are identical on the non Optimus legs in this concentration. Photos that have been taken above or below the bend flatten the bend so can give a wrong impression of the shape.

    Whilst the shape of the “Optimus” bends was very suggestive I thought that measurements should confirm the leg origin. Silly me.

    The genuine collared legs have been “plated” by dipping them in molten solder. The solder does not harden to an even thickness so there are often bumps on it which would not occur with normal plating. Any collared legs with proper plating on them are suspect.

    On Ross’s very early bun footed external NRV stove the collared legs projected 129 mm above the leg housing and were 155 mm high overall. The top measured 52 mm.

    On Ross’s early bun footed internal NRV stove the kinked legs projected 133 mm above the leg housing and were 160 mm high overall. The top measured 56 mm. The height differences may be accounted for because the leg housing on the early stove projects higher above the edge of the tank than on the later one. The early stoves of this version were fitted with collared legs and it is not known whether their measurements matched the external NRV valved stoves or matched the kinked legs of this version

    On Ross’s early folding footed Stockholm stove the kinked legs projected 123 mm above the leg housing and were 148 mm high overall. The top measured 52 mm

    On Ross’s late folding footed Stockholm stove the kinked legs projected 120 mm above the leg housing and were 147 mm high overall. The top measured 50 mm

    The discrepancy in measurements from machine made components is worrying as I would have expected them to be identical

    Ross I am afraid that I am going to have to have another look at your stoves as I am pretty certain that the legs on your late folding footed patent stove were not made by Optimus or Primus. I have no idea who made them but they have manufacturing marks on them that I have never noticed before on any make of stove.

    The rising tube height of the two bun footed stoves was identical to each other as was the rising tubes of the folding footed stoves.

    ECONOMICS

    “If it is not broken do not fix it”. The legs’ function is solely to support pans. The original leg worked. Why incur the expense of changing a machine’s settings to create a different bend which would not function any better? Why change to a bend that used more materials than the previous one? Why then revert back to the original bend? It does not make economic sense and serves no practical purpose.

    Three things tend to generate changes in goods. The change makes the item look better. The change makes the item work better. The change reduces production cost reducing the price of the item or increasing the firm’s profit. The apparent change of the bends does not fulfill any of these objectives

    PROBLEMS

    The major problem is that in any era stove parts from different makers are often interchangeable so it would be possible to get a stove with a genuine tank and all other parts from different stove makers

    RISING TUBES

    The bun footed stove rising tubes take a 22 mm spanner and are 37 mm high. The height was measured without dismantling the burner assembly but is believed to be right.

    Ross’s bun footed external NRV stove is very early as the rising tube is fabricated like a 96 vapourising tube. The tube and nut have been soldered together with a very fine joint which would be very easy to miss. All of the other rising tubes had been machined out of solid brass.

    The folding footed stove rising tubes take a 17 mm spanner and are 23 mm high. This rising tube was used until the model was dropped.

    RESERVE LIDS AND PARKING

    The bun footed stoves have circular reserve lids with a projecting flange around the top and park on a parking boss on top of the tank.

    The early folding footed stoves have a hexagon headed reserve lid and park on a parking boss on the tank top.

    The later folding footed stoves have a circular reserve lid with vertical knurling. These were used until the model was dropped. They park on the pump knob. Ross found the circular reserve lid on a 1930 parts list and I think that the pump knob has likely to have been changed at the same time.

    SPIRIT CUPS

    The earliest stoves had plain spirit cups. Later stoves had dimpled spirit cups. Optimus bought Lux stoves in 1914. Lux stoves had dimpled spirit cups so it looks as if the dimpled spirit cups may have been introduced in 1914 or 1915

    TANK LID

    Ross found the tapered air screw in a 1929 parts list which shows that the original tank lid had been dropped by then.

    DATING

    The earliest that the model could have been made is 1905. Ross has found it listed in a 1912 brochure so it definitely existed then.

    The duration of the patent should have given the duration of the “Patent” stove however we do not know the length of the patent and I now believe that there were two consecutive patents which applied to the stove.

    However I had an unused stove which I attributed to the 1930s because of the burner marking and the patent had expired by then so it seems that the patent version could extend from as early as 1905 up to the 1930s. I do not know what markings were used on 1940s burners however it is unlikely that many of those would be in this country because of WW2 and subsequent import restrictions.

    Both Ross and I tried to use the parts lists to date the introduction of the various versions of the patent 00s but were thwarted by Optimus’s evil sense of humour. A part number does not identify a particular version of a part. The part numbers merely identify a component and can cover more than one size of the component. The number for the stove legs covers both the tall and later short versions of the legs.

    HELP WANTED

    Has anyone seen a 00 stove with fixed feet around the tank perimeter?

    Has anyone seen a small circular Optimus reserve lid with diamond knurling? Primus did one but it has Primus on the top.

    The information collected will be condensed to make the finished document as short as possible. At present I am having to justify my views which lengthens the document

    Regards Bryan
     
  14. Bom Bom Bom Bom

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,946
    Hi Bryan,

    LEGS (Again!)

    Just a thought on legs.

    You mention Optimus bought Lux stoves in 1914 which seems to coincide with your view that that the leg disparity seems to occur from the 1910s decade through to the 1930s.

    I'm not familiar with Lux stoves, but what was their pan support leg profile?

    Is it possible that as manufacturing volume exploded, rather than manufacture additional tooling for leg bending to increase volume, Optimus took a pragmatic approach and reused tooling aquired as part of Lux stoves? This would then account for the fact that "traditional" and "non traditional" Optimus leg profiles seem to appear at the same time?

    This is obviously a bit of a wild guess, but could potentially explain the situation.

    Anyone got a Lux stove?

    I'm also happy to send you one of my legs (bun footed Optimus 00 with the collared "disputed" shaped pan support variety, rather than flesh and blood :lol: ) for you to measure if that would assist? This would ensure the measurement method is consistent with how you've measured the others. Just let me know.
     
  15. kaw550red

    kaw550red RIP

    Offline
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2004
    Messages:
    2,350
    Hi Graham

    I think that you have cracked it.

    The leg bends could be Lux bends.

    1233176498-Lux__Primus___Optimus_leg_bends_opt.jpg

    The bends are Lux 9 on the left. Primus 210 in the centre. Optimus 00 on the right

    The photo was taken with the camera exactly at right angles to the bends so the photo should truly represent the bends on the stoves.

    Optimus got the warehouse, tooling and the rights to make 14 Lux models. As far as I know they never used any Lux designs but using their tooling to make legs or other components would make sense.

    Ross please compare the Lux 9 bend with the "non Optimus'' bend on the patent 00s. That should verify whether the assumption is correct.

    Graham I like your wild guesses. Keep it up.

    I would be very grateful if you could send me a collared leg with the Lux? bend on it so that I could check the measurements on it.In theory they should agree with the measurements of the Optimus bend legs or be a close match.

    Now that I have got the downloads to behave themselves I will put a sketch on the site showing the measurements that have been taken. This combined with the bends should identify whether legs are correct or not (I HOPE)

    Regards Bryan
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 26, 2015
  16. Bom Bom Bom Bom

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,946
    Hi Bryan, I should be able to get a leg in the post to you tomorrow.
     
  17. kaw550red

    kaw550red RIP

    Offline
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2004
    Messages:
    2,350
    Hi Graham

    Thanks I will get it back to you as soon as possible.

    I was very concerned that people were taking photos and their own stoves at their face value. About the only parts of a stove that you can assume are genuine are the tank and feet and I have even been fooled by someone who fitted genuine looking feet to a tank

    1233237967-Modified_legs_opt.jpg

    The only way that I could tell that the feet were later additions was because they would not take a standard sized leg. A previous owner had put the legs in a lathe and removed 0.2 mm from the end diameter so they would fit in the wrong leg housings. The altered part was concealed by the leg housings so could only be seen when the legs were removed.

    Only one of these stoves is genuine

    1233238201-96Specialsweb_opt.jpg

    None of these stoves are genuine

    1233238292-00Specials_opt.jpg

    It is very easy to make a stove look genuine so treat all with suspicion

    Regards Bryan
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 27, 2015
  18. Bom Bom Bom Bom

    Offline
    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,946
    OK, here's where I make a fool of myself :lol: In the first stove picture I think the front left is the genuine article?
     
  19. kaw550red

    kaw550red RIP

    Offline
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2004
    Messages:
    2,350
    Hi Graham

    Not at all. You are correct the front left stove is a genuine Optimus 96. All others are my specials with higher performing burners. The 96 rising tubes are all specials made by me.

    The 210 rising tube is a standard Primus 51/54 rising tube shortened so that the stove can take a 2 pint burner without increasing the leg height. The 00s have all standard parts except the legs. The complete burner assembly is off an Optimus 45/48 or a Svea 105/106.

    The heat output of a 2 pint burner is identical to a 1 pint burner but the flame spread is much better so more of your pan bottom gets heated instead of a small area in the middle

    It is very easy to fake a stove so beware

    Regards Bryan
     
  20. kaw550red

    kaw550red RIP

    Offline
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2004
    Messages:
    2,350
    Hi Graham

    I have TWICE lost my reply so this is the third time that I have written this. I was checking that the thumbnail expanded properly and closed the expanded photo and my ruddy reply disappeared. You may have heard me swearing. Ruddy computers are almost as bad as stoves.

    Your leg arrived safely today.

    The bend on the leg is almost identical to the bend on the Lux 9 leg that I have. The top measurement is the same and the angles are the same. The only difference is that the original bend was made around a 6 mm diameter pin and your bend is made around an 8 mm diameter pin. The real clincher is the height measurements. Ross's collared leg and your leg are 155 mm high overall. Ross's leg is 129 mm high above the leg housing whilst yours is 126 mm high. The collar is moveable until it is soldered and one or both of the collars could have been put in the wrong position when they were soldered. The top of your leg is 60 mm wide whilst the top of Ross's varied between 50 mm and 56 mm. I do not think that these variations are significant as it is the height that is important.

    Initially I thought that the finish on your leg was different to the "Optimus" ones however when I looked closely I noticed an irregularity in the surface finish near the top bend. Both types of legs have been tinned by dipping in hot solder although the Lux type leg has the better finish.

    Your leg has been definitely made to fit a 00 stove. Now we definitely know that both types of legs were used on the stove. Unfortunately we do not know whether both types were used at the same time or whether one type was used exclusively at any time.

    There seems to be some confusion as to what I mean by the measurements so I have drawn a drawing showing what I mean. On top of that drawing I have put a later 00 leg at the top with your leg at the bottom

    1233413463-LEG_MEASUREMENTS_opt.jpg

    Provided that a leg bend coincides together with the measurements being the same you can verify that your legs are identical to other people's legs or rather their stove legs. It is probable that there may be slight variations in these measurements caused by poor measurement but they should be within 2 mm of each other

    CURRENT POSITION

    We now know that Optimus used two bends on their patent 00 stoves. The Lux bends should not be on any stoves made before 1914.

    The parts lists show collared legs being in use until 1921

    Dimpled spirit cups were on Lux stoves and are unlikely to be on a 00 made before 1914. The parts lists first show a dimpled spirit cup in 1921

    The parts lists first show the tapered sealed airscrew in 1929 so the rubber sealed airscrew must have been dropped by then.

    The parts lists first show the small circular reserve lid in 1930 so the hexagonal reserve lid was probably used on the folding footed patent stoves up until then. It is probable that the pump knob reserve lid parking was introduced at the same time

    I will get your leg back to you on Monday. Many thanks for its use.

    I am definitely not checking on the photo expanding this time

    Regards Bryan
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 27, 2015