Multifuell, I have always experimented with it. I wanted the lamp and got it from a friendly military dealer here in Germany from US army stocks. It had probably been stored for years as part of a field kitchen and was completely unused. It has the serial number 002410. A pure serial number, an arbitrary number, or a date of manufacture? I don't know. The accessories are sufficient and the funnel and spirit jug are Chinese products. There are a number of non-radioactive glow socks included. The lamp itself is very high quality and completely free of magnetic materials. Nothing rattles and everything I loosen comes together again very smoothly. The lamp seems to me to be much better than much of what I have read about it. The inner casing is screwed together, which I think is a good idea. Also good, the mixing tube is not pressed in by the fixing screw. Then, to my surprise, a steel burner. I've never had any contact with it, because it is often described as a cause of failure due to the different expansion of brass and steel at higher temperatures. The spirit cup is absolutely horizontal and has a defined height due to its attachment. The glass also seems to me to be very good, but then the first frown on the manometer. During the pressure test with a lighter refill gas can, the pointer does not stop just above two bar, but goes all the way to the stop at over 3 bar. I will have to readjust the pressure gauge when I get the chance. The pump stroke is also 2 cm shorter than with a Petromax. So I have to pump considerably more, which doesn't look like it at first because of the faulty pressure gauge display. The pump has two O-rings instead of one leather. It feels a little different, but that may be because I'm used to leather. The reason for O-rings is not so clear to me. It probably won't be "100% vegan", but maybe two O-rings are safer when operating with gasoline and a leaking pump base valve. I don't know that either. I'm curious to see how long they last. I've seen leathers that still work perfectly even after 60 years. The shape of the tank is new to me. It can't be compared with older lamps. The manufacture of the tank must be different from what was usual in the past. The transitions to the cap and especially to the Rapid are smoother. The larger tank capacity is probably due to this and the slightly larger dimensions. What is also important to me is that all threads are flawless and not what is claimed as such by many Chinese manufacturers. Yes, they can do better too, but it's just not the case with many clones. Multifuell is defined as what? When I was younger, I used to drive two-stroke engines at 1:25 or 1:50. The operating instructions recommended 1:1, which is also what I run best with my BW (army) gasoline Petromaxes. On cold winter days I burn up to three liters of fuel. 1 liter of the best kerosene costs over €7. I can also get good kerosine for €3.85. A liter of E10 costs me €1.75, heating oil (=diesel €1.70) is €1 and leftover bad kerosene, white spirit, spirit, barbecue lighter fluid and engine oil cost nothing and lighting it up saves me a trip to the waste oil collection point. First I lit up the Britelyt with E10 (gasoline with 10% spirit / alcohol). Very bright and without any problems. Then I emptied the tank and lit up with kerosene. As expected, the lamp was noticeably brighter and completely problem-free. Then for the ultimate challenge, 20 year old engine oil 15W40 from my old BMW R60/6 1:1 with E10. The light pulsed up to 2.5 bar on the gauge (false pressure gauge) and beyond that the pulsing stopped and was bright. Similar to my BW-gasoline-Maxen from 1959, but I only left the lamp on for 30 minutes because it has a spiral carburetor (for gasoline!). I know from the BW-gasoline-Maxes that the carburetor needs to be cleaned every 2-4 weeks. It takes less than 10 minutes to lubricate the needle bar and briefly insert a 6.5 mm drill bit into the universal carburetor. Cleaning a spiral carburetor is much more time-consuming, but it's no problem either. The manufacturer recommends using carburetor cleaner regularly in the operating instructions. I have no experience with this. What I also noticed positively is that the temperature at the top center of the hood is between 90 and 110°. With my gasoline BW Petromaxes it is between 200° and 250°. The bar that holds the mixing tube often gets a slight reddish glow from the heat at over 2.5 bar. The temperature management of the Britelyt seems to be very successful, only the cooking attachment accessory is then superfluous in my opinion. The four bars of the carrying frame are screwed together, which I think is good. A, it makes repairs easier and B, somewhat wobbly carrying frames can be firmly secured. With some older lamps I have to use two center punches and a couple of hammer blows. The mixing tube has no paddle, but I rarely adjust it from the vertical position on the Petromaxes. The Hasag petrol lamps usually manage without one. Everything else about the fuel guide, as far as I have taken it apart, is the same or at least very similar to the Petromax lamps. But I don't think the Britelyt is a Petromax clone. It sets its own accents and does so very well. Despite all the prophecies of doom, I think it is a very good utility lamp and it also cut a very good figure on the display shelf. The lamp is a real eye-catcher. I am very satisfied with this lamp and perhaps in a few decades it will also be a "ClassicPressureLamp". I would have liked to show excerpts from the English/German operating instructions here. But I didn't because I'm not so familiar with the rights. In no time at all you have an advocate on your heels trying to slow you down. The britelyt.com site offers operating instructions in various languages for download. That was the first inspection and the first test runs. My impression must now prove itself over decades. Please ask again in 30 years' time. If anyone has any further questions, I look forward to hearing them and will do my best to answer them. Always a bright light on your way! An addition from the German Wikipedia to Petromax: In the USA, however, the trademark rights were not renewed by the owner Schott AG at the end of the 1990s and were re-registered by the American Lamp Supply Co. However, this company did not use the trademark rights itself. When this registration expired at the end of 2006, the trademark was re-registered by the US company Britelyt, which had already been selling lamps under the name Petromax during this period. An objection by Pelam to this application was withdrawn in September 2009 and the trademark was registered for Britelyt on October 27, 2009. In 2017, Britelyt's American trademark rights and domains were sold to the Petromax Group.
Nice and well done presentation. Unless you sell an identical copy under the same name you don't get a lawyer on your heels, I guess. What I see is a copy of the petromax design of E&G. No doubt about that. Changing shapes of for instant the inner hood doesn't make it another lantern. Function wise it is the same principle. As for multi fuel: does the petromax you compare it with burn with the same mixture(s)?
Hello VimVe, yes, in principle I have been lighting the fuel mixtures in my Petromax 829 HK500 BW from 1959 with the straight universal carburetor for years exactly as specified by Britelyt in the user manual. However, I often add a little more gasoline to be on the brighter side. If it's only the appearance that determines whether it's a clone or not, you're certainly right and half of my lamp collection with many well-known manufacturers from the 30s and 40s of the last millennium are clones. :-)
Using the coiled or straight vaporiser, the mixing tube, inner hood makes it a copy. And yes they all copied or bought competitors out or build in license.
A nice test and comparison. Well-described and presented. Britelyt had a patent by the Drapers. Quality-wise, I'd say it is pretty good and well-made. In my humble opinion, it still appears like a Petromax-styled lantern... It isn't exactly identical. I'm sure there had been no attempts by the inventors or manufacturer to copy the exact geometries, etc. In terms of working principle, I don't see any significant difference between it and any Petromax-styled kerosene-fueled lanterns. Like any kero-fueled Petromax lanterns or similar clones, the Britelyt would still light-up satisfactorily with a wide variety of liquid fuels. That's to say, anything ranging from highly volatile light naphthas and gasolines to low-volatility kerosene and diesel. It was basically the 'Multifuel' claim by Britelyt that had fueled some disputes earlier. There had been numerous concerns and criticisms on regards to the lack of certain safety features for operation with high-volatilty and inflammable fuels such as gasoline, Coleman fuel, etc. Much of it being 'sparked' by the claim that it could be safely operated with the mentioned fuels as it is...which was, certainly not agreed upon by many. As a result, people began to draw comparisons to outline what are features required to make it 'safe' enough. A lot of the referencing were made, notably, with the standards set or features found on a typical gasoline-fueled Coleman lantern. Among the more prominent or so-required features which are lacking on the Britelyt are: 1) Positive fuel shut-off valve. 2) Omission of the fount air pressure-relieve valve. 3) A positive shut-off feature on the pump's air stem. 4) An air tube or snorkel at the end of the pump tube to prevent the likelihood of liquid fuel leakage from the pump/check valve. 5) An all-metal check valve which is completely fuel resistant. (as opposed to non-return valves with rubber pips under continuous submerssion in the liquid fuel). 6) An air tube connected to the mixing chamber to allow air intake from a 'cold' location and to avoid leaving any openings to the mixing chamber at the hot side(under the hood). Honestly, not all gasoline lanterns had been designed complete with all the above features.
Thanks for this concise summary, Myn. Especially the lack of this many safety features on the Britelyt, made me realise that in terms of safety, a Coleman is far superior!
