New to Forum

@ColinG @MYN

Many thanks for your kind words but I would class myself as an enthusiastic amateur with an open mind, a wish to learn and an ability to read, digest and follow instructions.

Over the years I have learned and had much guidance from numerous members of this forum and also from the Be Back Later Forum.

You notice my videos pertain only to paraffin/kerosene lamps as I am new to naphtha/petroleum lamps and am still learning and seeking advice. Until I am confident I know what I am doing I wouldn't post a video and even then wold be happy to be corrected or advised of an alternative or better method or practice.

Regards Jeremy

 

@Mackburner Just re-digesting this thread and still a little confused as to all this flange/groove/baseplate analysis.

I've posted the same pic again, so as to get a bit of clarity:

So am I correct in saying the tank on the right was produced between 1950 and late 1954 unstamped, though some very late examples appear to be stamped?? At this time (late 1954), the tank on the left came into play with associated manufacturer and place stampings, but not dated until Oct 1956>?

This was made up until sometime in 1957, when they reverted to the design on the right again, with no Tilley or England stamps, but dated and - as I understand it - an inferior baseplate design?? All quite convoluted stuff. ..


Cheers ,

Stuart.

 

Almost. The current wisdom is :-

The right hand lantern shape was used from the 1920s up to about 1961. Up to 1954 it has no stamping on the side and is not date stamped in the base. Two short gaps 1946 to 1950 with the pork Pie tank and 1954 to 1957 when the left hand tank shape was used but then they reverted to the right hand shape but now it is stamped on the side and date marked. There is another big difference which is not visible but the stamped and dated right hand type has the base plate inverted and will dish down if over pumped.


When the Pork Pie was used for the lantern the older right hand type shape was still being used for the R1 radiator.


It does seem that a very few of these right hand shape types were marked with the logo in 1954 but not date stamped. They will all have the earlier saucer or cup shaped base plate. So this just means that Tilley started adding the logo Etc a few months before changing the tank type. I suspect that will make them pretty rare and perhaps more importantly our understanding of the current wisdom needs thought.



::Neil::

 

@Mackburner Would it be safe to assume, any of the earlier type Guardsman tank undated, but with the 'TILLEY (OWL) ENGLAND' stamp - must be by a process of elimination a late 1954 offering....??

 

Possibly yes but to be sure you would need to examine the way the base plate is inserted which means looking at the base seam from the inside. A missing date stamp is absent evidence and that is an unsafe assumption. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. In other words it is negative evidence. Sometimes those date stamps are very faint and it is always possible that it was poorly struck or just plain missed on a later tank. It is however a good indicator and would make an internal inspection essential. ::Neil::

 

@Mackburner I'll try to get a pic of the inside of mine and post it up. I've no idea what to look for, so would need your opinion on it. For the record, it does have 'Made in England' stamped on the base.

 

It is the way the base plates are fixed. I am not great at graphics but I think this will show you.



I suspect that base plate stamp "Made in England" is significant. We know they started to stamp the logo in 1954 and date stamping in 1956. So a base plate stamp without a date does suggest a 1954 tank in your case. The attitude of the base plae will confirm that. ::Neil::

 

It makes you wonder why Tilley changed the way they did it. To my non-engineer eyes, I can't see how it was any cheaper to do it with the baseplate inverted. Of course, the real cost was to introduce a fatal flaw into the design - a cost that was paid by countless Tilley users over the years...

 

Is there any possibilities that the inverted baseplate could ease mass production assembly? Or to facilitate melted solder to flow outward from the inside?

 

Yes I've often pondered this in the past 12 months or so - makes no sense at all as I see it?!!

 

The only thing I can think is that it would be easier to centre the baseplate on a former or a dolly and then slip the fount on the top. Also, if the baseplate is pushed in the pre-1957 way, it would tend to snag as it goes in, particularly if the edges of the baseplate aren't smooth and sanded, but these are minimal problems, if they were the reasons.

 

@ColinG Yap, as @MYN says, it must've been some perceived increase in production efficiency, though the gains were palpably pyrrhic in that respect...

I've only got one X246B these days, it's that 1/65 one, it's hardly been used and the baseplate is virtually flat. If I light it, it never gets more than 70 pumps total.