Hello. I just got a Tilley FL6. The guy that I got it from says it has a new old stock burner and he had it running two years ago. I need to find a place that would have the appropriate mantle I’m also concerned that the shut down knob is facing diagonally sort of close to the reflector at what could be considered about 10 o’clock position. If that makes any sense? I would like to relocate it pointing to the back where the access hole is but I haven’t dug into it yet to find out what it takes to make that happen. I am assuming it is in that position because that’s where it got tight. The question would be would I have to make shims to go behind the seals to get it to the position? And then I wonder do I even need to worry about that on and off knob? If I dump the pressure in the tank to turn it off? Is that safe to do?
The correct mantle for an FL6 is Part No. 191. I've no idea where you'd get them in the USA - try eBay. What you call the 'shut down knob' is actually called the control cock. You use this for two purposes - as you say, to turn off the lamp although you should then dump pressure by unscrewing the pump. Its second function is to clean the jet should it become blocked with a bit of junk - you quickly flick the knob to the right (clockwise) and then back to the left (anticlockwise). That actually advances a cleaning needle into and out of the jet. Most lanterns have this function. You won't be able to clear jet blockages with the knob in the position you describe so it's important this is corrected. The reason the control cock is set in the wrong place is because the rubber seal underneath has become flattened in use. You could faff about with shims but the simplest solution is to fit a new seal which will be the correct thickness for the knob to end up facing the hole in the back. The seal probably will need changing anyway and so will all the others. The best place to get a seals kit is The Fettlebox who advertise on the right of this page. Hope that helps...
Thanks. I will get seals and search a mantel. Are there other manufactures mantels that work okay? That are easier to get?
It’s a special mantle for that type of burner. You can use a Tilley 164 mantle, but it won’t be as good. Tilley 164 mantels are available on the bay of evil. They are good for testing the FL6 burner. Tony
I've tried a few in mine, I honestly can't see any difference, perhaps someone can enlighten us lol. Is it a larger/smaller mantle? is the light more concentrated for the reflector? anyway, I can vouch for the fact that a normal 164 fits and works just fine. Martin
@paparazi The 164 and 191 both glow quite well. And some 164s might burn in to behave reasonably close to a 191, but the mantles were made to different specifications. Do you know why? Tony
Welcome to the forum. What surprises me always is that these questions are asked here and not to a seller. Generally. Assuming your seller is also US resident.
Lead gasket is a good trick when you want something in the right position. the gasket can be compressed almost a full turn. Fairly bright with original 191 mantle. Just renovated one FL6 with gasket kit from Fettlebox.
I asked him some questions but it was eBay so that makes it kind of a pain. Thank to this forum for all the help and advise.
Tony? same here, not sure what the differences are, I can only make assumptions as to maybe a tighter weave/smaller resultant ball, brighter more centralised for better reflected results?
The FL6 burner is actually slightly smaller than the usual Tilley burner and is rated at 200cp rather than the usual 300cp IIRC. Thus the 191 mantle has a slightly smaller aperture at the top. It seems to me that if new mantles (and seals) have to be obtained, it's just as easy to get the correct ones as others which were intended for something else...
I've got a spare 500cp spigot and was wondering what cp effect it would have, sometimes idle hands and time to kill the mind works in various ways.I've been toying with trying this for quite a while but never had the inclination before.
Haven't we rather strayed off-topic here? That's not to say this recent discussion isn't worthwhile but it's hardly helping the original poster. Perhaps the thread needs to be split from post #17 and this recent development posted as a thread of its own. Just sayin'...