Tilley X246A models have often been the subject of discussion particularly as more has been learnt about them and the move by Tilley to Northern Ireland in 1961. I replied recently to a post about a badly date stamped 1961 Tilley X246A which is a bit unusual since, in my experience, Tilley usually stamped them reasonably well. I do find the X246A models around this period interesting and that has jogged my memory to write about a couple of mine. Firstly, the PLC 95 by Neil McRae, @Mackburner, has an excellent note about the X246A with vertical cage legs and the older fount. There are also other discussions about these in CPL and one can be found here: 1961 Tilley X246A - Guardsman? The lantern in that post is dated September 1961 and I also have one from August 1961 and these sort of transitional X246A lanterns were, ‘all made between April and September 1961’. (Ref: N. McRae in PLC nbr 95). Another can be found here: How many Tilley Guardsman X246 are stamped X246A? There are some variations too in the regular X246A lanterns and these are also noted well in the PLC with an indicative date range of Oct 1961 to Oct 1964 based on what is known to date. I am writing to say I have found a September 1961 regular X246A which possibly may expand on the existing date range. However, the interesting thing about this lantern and another one that I have, which is dated October 1962, is that they both have Made in the United Kingdom on the side of the tank and MADE IN ENGLAND on the base. So October 1962, seems a bit late to be dual stamped. I attach pictures for the record. Interested in any thoughts on these.
They are an interesting lamp in my opinion, I have a few in my collection, and I believe they work well, and look good too. But I have noticed that the majority of the X246A lamps that I have come across, besides the one's I have of course have blown founts. I would say that this is because of over pressurising, when the real problem would have been the vapouriser. When did Tilley change the vapouriser from the brass fitting to a steel fitting?
That’s a good observation, @Sedgman. I wonder were the base plates made and stamped in England, but not fitted until the move to Northern Ireland… . @Buggerlugs The problem with the blown base plates relates to the change in the way the base plates were fitted. This occurred in 1957, and lanterns from this time onwards have a propensity to bulge. I don’t know when the steel non-screwed fitting for the vapouriser began. Cheers Tony
Yes I know and understand that Tilley did this, and thanks for explaining it, you have explained it very well indeed. But if you use the lamp correctly, and don't over pressurise ie: (no more than 100 pumps). Shouldn't this stop the founts from bulging? What I am trying to say is, in my experience from trying to add X246A Tilley lamps into my collection, is that the majority of X246A that I have come across seem to have the most bulging founts. Does that make sense. Thanks.
Yes it does, @Buggerlugs. The problem is that the uninitiated user tries to get “more light” by pumping the shite out of it. With the newer tanks, that leads to bulging more easily. Cheers Tony
When I compare MY 246A with my 246B I have always thought that the 246A Was the more robust tank and less prone to bulging I think what Tony says about over pumping is the problem another thought I had is this, When a lamp has been running for a while the tank naturally heats up this also in my mind would cause a softening of the brass and heat expansion which may contribute to a tank having full capacity kerosene and over pumping to bulge the tank, what do you guys think about that
I agree, but with all the Tilley lamps X246, 'X246A, and X246B, that I have come across, the X246A seems to have the majority of bulging founts. Maybe it's just my experience.
Mine all look different in terms of bulge - but none "rock" thankfully. I don't overpump as I realise that some of these thing are as old or older than me and brass "work hardens". I am also mindful of the fact that previous custodians may not have been so kind to these lanterns. Going back to the prevalence on "A" models - perhaps the pressure pip is the culprit rather than the pump design/construction ?
I have only had a couple of each at one time and i only have one of each now, 246, 246A 246B, so maybe those of us more into Tilley may see the problem more often, are you a Tilley man Buggerlugs? what about table lamps, ever seen one of them bulged?
Yes, I have pondered that .. could be a few factors in the pot of woe .. the thing that really shocked me were the excellent pictures by Henry Plews of the sawn through blown base plate/tank I thought about how much harder is is to get a decent soldered joint compared to the old base plates. I have seen quite a few of the guardsman southern rail /br tanks badly blown so presumed they weren’t up to the standard of the older ones? couple that with other problems like a move to N/Ireland and supply issues does anyone know when the vapouriser changed to an all steel version? regards pb
No I must say I haven't seen one yet, and yes I am a Tilley man. We must remember this is only my observation, as to what I have seen.
Not as much as others would have seen, I would imagine. To date I have about 180 Tilley lamps, plus Michael has about 50 in his collection, I have also sold, another 60 or so, as they weren't good enough for my collection, but got all the good parts off them. I believe I would have seen hundreds more on my trips as well. But let's not forget that other members would and do have much more than that, to some my collection is a drop in the ocean. Regards Brian.
