Right. Mine are running as they should and I wouldn't open them up simply for display purposes but it would be nice to know if they were set at the factory to a certain configuration. If wick replacement is necessary in the future I'd like to be able to get alignment back to factory settings. John and Heirphoto may well be correct that after fettling they were set to wherever they tightened to. I would suspect however that the majority of 71's in our Gallery and on eBay still have the original wicks so have to assume there may have not been a specific factory orientation. Maybe the factory workers tightened the burners to wherever they ended up too. They do end up in a case and alignment is not as important as it is with a 123 with it's fitted windshield. No one out in Stove Land has a BAHCO 71 either NOS or with a known history from time of purchase? Ray
all, Hi Ray, Re "BAHCO 71 either NOS or with a known history". I posted here because in addition to what's on CCS > I have many P71s and also > images of (complete EUC) that I bid on (i'm not here just "gleaning" from others, doc wtf). My comment above 1955-62 "BAHCO years are NOT as clear to me" that is where I am at on this fwiw (BAHCO years w/valves on L & R it seems). Sorry, I don't have pristine BAHCO example. You asked for NOS BAHCO examples, here ya go [ I added a few other items too]. I find complete EUC examples as also helpful: Right & Left examples Primus 71 Valve position on.. [Right 1938 - 1954, imo, I find] [Right 1954 preBAHCO NOS, Ken's btw ] Right 1955 NOS shorty Right 1956 EUC possibly unfired? [Right 1956 EUC complete (info/images I have) ] Left 1955 NOS Left 1962 unfired . <-- this contains image you posted Ray. It's noteworthy imo, that there's an abundance of 1962s w/valve on Left. thx omc A drift PS: all, Thank you Itchy finding factoid was not necessarily entirely incorrect (some took exception), given hindsight it was not the best word but was still ok by me (was my comment AND beside the point). That said i DO welcome comments, Tony's post re one word made a valid point re factoid, critical of my post. I say to that, ok, really that's fine, and we learn from a drift too.
@itchy QED! (quod erat demonstrandum). @Jeopardy I've one dissassembled... I'll check in an hour. Cheers Tony
Thanks OMC, It's interesting that Ken's '54 has the filler on the left but the '55 NOS has it on the right. Also interesting that the '55 short tank has the adjustable damper burner bell. I thought that was a '40s thing with the older style dome cap models. If I ever have to change the wick in my '53 I'll try to get it to look like Ken's with the filler on the left. At least the Primus logo would then be visible from the front. @Tony Press Looking forward to your findings on tapered threads. Ray
Hi Ray, Aw geez. this IS your post, your call. Sorry I can not re-do my above comments. > Your post, you refer to the "filler on the left" > on same stove my reference is Valve on Right [of tank lid]. Way above I described "Re position: If you consider a top down view and consider tank lid at 6 oclock..." ... that is "the view" for the R & L references that I made, R and L of the tank lid. Valve Left (at 9 oclock), lid (at 6 oclock), Valve Right (at 3 oclock or 3-5). I'm NOT saying anyone follow this, not at all. It is, a 1-time, how I happened to explain the different valve positions in your post. Note your comment/reference includes the front logo , mine does not account for front view, oops. I absolutely would prefer to follow your lead here as to how to describe R & L positioning but again can't re-do it. Sorry if I somehow miss stepped. It's something to be mindful of in future. thx omc
OMC, no worries. I'm simply looking at the stove directly into the case with the door open and the spindle pointing out straight towards me when I made references to right and left side. In clock terms my spindle is 6 o'clock. I didn't realize we had different view angle references. No matter how we reference things we can agree the spindle to filler orientation is all over the place for these Primus 71 stoves even for NOS examples. Thanks for your research and link posts. Ray
@OMC Post a photo of one of your stoves, I cannot find one. I must have too many stoves, I forgot I had an unfired 71E. But, I do not know the history, so cannot be certain that it has not been altered.
Sorry Ray n all, Ken, the BAD: On one hand recently, twice now after I mention stoves that I have, Doc accused me of not having stoves (he needs to cut the crap). 2nd time was above and here's link to 1st time , "then", I unboxed 550s that per Doc didn't exist and snapped a shot (CCS knows I have at least 10 550s). Ya think he would have learned and ALSO would be weary of kicking a sleeping dog. Stovies are smart your posts stand to show you 2 keep pestering. This feels to me a lot like past threads where you and he pile-on. Which i DO think should be left in the past. I can do that and hope you can too. IF... If this is just more crap tossed my way ... what are you doing? I know i have what i say, I don't lie and I'm better than this crap. In his case, he's calling me a liar, again. My take, like in the past I prefer NOT to join you and Doc on the low road but here we are again (not my doing). the GOOD: On the other hand , for ye of little faith... You asked and it's not too much effort to grab a couple stoves that are out right now anyway and grab a couple open boxes to offer you a glimpse. In future if some pics of the motherload are easy, maybe i'll offer that as well. This is an excellent topic, and you have done well with it (aside from the +1 and this bullshit drift). If you or Doc want to correct errors I have made and will make in future that is welcome. As I am all about stovie-content. What the ____ is this all about? thx omc Below find: P71s a 38, a 53 w/srv, a couple of my PTC 71s. In box of 3 is 71/Op80s from 60s.
Jon and Tony, thanks for your input. Jon's pics show another inconsistency between models. His Dome Cap filler example has the Primus no.71 Made in Sweden stamping counter clockwise from the filler. My examples have the Primus no.71 stamp clockwise from the filler and the Trade Mark PRI-MUS stamp counter clockwise from the filler. I have to stand by my last conclusion that there was no rhyme or reason or consistency at the Primus factory for putting the 71 together. Ray
@Tony Press thanks for the clarification of the thread. So it is down to how far it can be twisted into the fount. Or how far the fettler dares to force things. Regards John
@Jeopardy That was always my understanding. Unlike the SVEA 123 and 123R which were engineered to have the spindle lined up with the "1", the exact position of the Primus 71 is not so critical (at least that was what I thought). I always tighten mine by hand (not too tight), then use a special spanner to tighten it to seal the thread, being careful not to be brutish about it. In the reverse, I have had great difficulty at times removing the burner stem from Primus No.70 and 71s. Cheers Tony
I read the posts in this thread as it developed and tried to follow the logic of what was being said by the contributors. Obviously, some or many of the gallery stoves will have been taken apart and re-assembled. The owners of such stoves may have made sure that the vaporising tube was put back into the same alignment as before removal. Others will have just screwed it in until it seemed tight enough. To try and make sense of it I had to keep switching to the Primus 71 Gallery to see if I could see any consistency in the positioning of the valve assembly in relation to the filler cap. There are so many images of the 71 stove in its various incarnations over 40+ years that I could not make any conclusions. Having too much free time, I devised a system for myself to try and make all the information contained in the 71 Gallery more accessible. I made a simple diagram and added it to the images in the gallery. The diagram replicated the relative positions of the filler cap and valve assembly. I do not claim that the diagrams show the exact relative positions, but for my investigation they are near enough. I decided to present them here for you to draw your own conclusions. I have taken no notice of the differences in the stoves and they appear in rough chronological order and grouped by the type of filler cap. Can you draw any conclusions? The early Primus 71 stoves with the flat filler cap The Primus 71 with the domed filler cap
The Primus 71 stoves with a slotted SRV (Safety Release Valve) The later Primus 71 stoves with a raised SRV in the filler cap
Your painstaking comparisons have confirmed my own earlier conclusions, Trevor: none of this has any meaning whatsoever. I tried to figure out what the meaning was, supposing that I was missing something.... Maybe I still am. But this has been one of the most puzzling threads ever, to me.
Fretting over the position of the spindle, reminds me of Shirley Conran who said "Life's too short to stuff a mushroom". Using illustrations in catalogues as a guide is pointless. I am certain that the stoves were illustrated to show the reader all parts of the stove. Showing a stove in it's case, the spindle and filler cap would have been towards the front, purely to allow them to be visible. I am reminded of the photographs of cars in manufacturers brochures and advertisements; the logos on the steering wheels and hub caps are always aligned correctly. It doesn't mean that you are expected to park like that. Terry
@shagratork Far, far too much time on your hands.... . But thanks, anyway. Cheers Tony Edit: corrected the attribution!
Hi all, Ray, Trevor, Thank you and well done. Trevor your diagram is the top down view which i also used to describe positions (so, it works for me). You asked "can you draw any conclusions": I won't call it a conclusion but (after research) I maintain the "opinion": 1938 - 54, from Primus the valve was on the right (at 3 oclock or very near 3). Looking only at stoves that tell us the year and only within 1938 - 54 Of your examples (22 of 32) valves are at 3 oclock or near to 3. I had another look at images I have (not on CCS) Of my images (17 of 18) valves are at 3 oclock or near to 3. I also comment on 1962 being on the left (maybe 61 on left too?), your 1962 examples are 3 for 3. I've looked at many more 1962s as well supportive of valve on the left. No one is saying ok we are done here and that's that but presenting organized statistical info IS enlightening. [the 1955 - 60, valve seems both Right & Left and not yet clear to me ] thx again Trevor omc
I've read and reread this important thread carefully and I find Trevor's data fascinating and conclusive, and, thus, the only correct conclusion beyond doubt. I'll keep it a secret.
