I would like some advice from the kero guys. I’m interested in getting a kero lantern and am wondering which is better in terms of brightness, maintenance and fuel consumption as well as any other feedback with regards to the Preston loop vaporizer and the Coleman type.
Brightness will depend on the rated candlepower. Condition of the burner, proper adjustment, and brand of mantle can also make a difference. Vapalux / BiAladdin and pre 1960's Tilley are good solid kerosene lanterns that are easy to maintain without the need for special tools, the down side is that the vapourisers are consumables, i.e., when they're shot, throw them away and fit a new one. They are are expensive enough here in the U.K. and shipping to the U.S.A. will add considerably to the cost. One U.S. quart should give you 10 to 12 hours of good steady light. Generally speaking, lanterns with a Preston loop are of a more complex design and usually require some special tools for maintenence. Correct adjustment is imperative for a good clean burn and hence a bright light. As for spare parts for Petromax type lanterns, you should be able to get most of what you need from BryteLite. Primus lanterns are well built and generally easier to service than Petromax types but if you need a new cleaning needle or jet, you'll probably have to order them from overseas - again, adding to the cost. Coleman made well built kero lanterns and the generators are easy to clean out if they get carboned up. Mike at Oldcolemanparts will be able to supply spare generators for older models should they be needed. Henry.
@Henry Plews . Thanks for your most informative input. I was more or less angling towards the Preston loop type lanterns. What are the differences between the Coleman fuel type vaporizer and the kero ones? I can understand the jet and pricker but are there more differences?
Kero generators tend to be larger diameter to better deal with the carbon build up inside. Then it's all about the mixture. For the same jet size kero needs less air so either a slightly smaller jet or a restricted air intake. In the US Coleman Kero might be best. US collectors are familiar with the designs and this makes restoration easier and the parts can be found without overseas mailing. For simplicity Vapalux/Bialaddin but for familiarity Coleman. ::Neil::
Yes, because kero is a heavier fuel, the internals are different. This image shows a Coleman fuel generator on the left and a kerosene one on the right. You'll see that the kero generator doesn't have a cardboard(?) tube and that the spring coil is made from thicker wire which helps with heat transfer and also allows more room for carbon build-up. This particular kero generator is a relatively modern one for a Coleman 201 and you may notice that the coil is aluminium - earlier ones were made from brass. This generator is for coleman 327 and you'll see that it has two coils, the finer one is a snug fit around the cleaning needle and goes inside the larger one. Again, this helps with heat transfer to the heavier fuel. Should the need arise, both of these kero generators are relatively easy to disassemble to clean out excessive carbon. The loop in a Preston type is a little more difficult to clean but not impossible. Heat and quench will usually crack heavy carbon deposits which can then be shaken out. Another method is to drill it out with a length of cable e.g. bicycle brake cable, frayed at the end. You could even try oven cleaner but it's difficult to get it into the loop. Industrial strength carbon remover doesn't foam like oven cleaner so is easier to get into the loop but it's usually reserved for industry and may be difficult to obtain. Henry.
Are you sure about that, Neil? I understood that kero needs more air for the same jet size than white gas/ CF does. Since on Colemans the air supply plumbing is usually a fixed given, kero uses a smaller jet than CF.
I was thinking the same thing Phil. This has given me more info on the differences than I have been able to hunt down. You guys are great. Thanks a lot.
In terms of simplicity and bang for your your buck, Coleman Kero lanterns take some beating, particularly as you live in the states. I've got a couple and put simply, in most circumstances they just work. I have a model 201, a model 639 and I'm looking for a 339 or a 214 as they are supposed to be good. I was reading about kerosene pressure lanterns in a book by Ron Brown (available on Amazon at a very low price) and he states that the 639 can run on Kerosene, white fuel and diesel with no changes at all! I haven't tried that yet butif it's true, that makes it a pretty special beast! Also, you could consider converting a Dual Fuel 285 (or possibly a 295) to Kero as allegedly all you need to do is change the generator to a 214 model and add a preheat cup. Some say this works, others that it doesn't andsome say you have to use a blowtorch to heat the vaporiser. Of course, in the UK, Tilley lamps and Bialaddin can be found all over the place and they're quite cheap to buy.
@ColinG I have a copy of the same book by Ron Brown - not much I didn't already know but there were a few things I was unaware of. I converted a Coleman turd 275 to kero simply by installing a 201 generator and adding a preheat cup. The business end of the generator was a slack fit where it enters the air tube and although it worked well, I thought it could be better. I put the coil, needle and jet from the 201 into the original generator tube thus ensuring a good fit in the air tube. The difference was very noticeable. A brighter and steadier light. It pays to experiment. Henry.
Yes because Coleman kero lamps such as 427K and 168K both used a standard Quick-Lite Q99 or R55 generator and they have a restrictor fixed inside the air intake tube. So same jet size but reduced air. ::Neil::
You are correct, Neil; I've seen the restrictors. But are they intended to reduce the total volume of air or do they speed up the velocity of the air stream through them like a venturi so that the fuel vapour and air mix better? If one considers the design and location of the more extreme air restrictors found on alcohol conversion lanterns like the Petromax or Primus, it seems more likely to me that what we are referring to is a primitive type of venturi. Also, if one considers the Coleman 236 and 237, the 635 and 639 etc. there is no difference between the air/mixer tubes of the kero and CF models but the kero jets are always smaller than the CF jets. The nominal CP ratings are the same, though. My apologies for differing from you; I think this is a very interesting technical discussion as there is evidence to support both hypotheses.
There are also the Coleman 157X and 159X lamps, both using the R55 generator, that were supplied with a restrictor device on the intake of the air tube. The restrictor was to be in place when using CF and was to be removed when using kerosene.
Amazing how ones mind starts dwelling on these things. I would like to take a closer look at these lanterns if given the chance. Venturis sounds to be the more feasible answer for mixing. Kerosene has a higher calorific value so in order to give out the same performance of Coleman fuel it sounds logical to restrict the fuel feed. Guess it's something more to research.mmm
Phil. Your last comment tends to confirm my theory. You want to lean the mix out to gain max brightness and also minimize carbon build up.
From the physics it should be clear. Under equal conditions any gaseous substance has a given number of molecules in a fixed volume: 1 Mol contains 6.022*10e23 molecules (the Avogadro constant) and consumes 22,4 litres under normal conditions. So if you would take that amount of 1 Mol Ethanol it would weigh ~48 g, Petrol would weigh ~100 g Kero would weigh ~150 g (notice: in the same gaseous 22.4 l volume!). Then it's obvious that you need more air (or Oxygen) for Kero than for Petrol. Or vice versa: less Kero than Petrol for the same amount of air. That's why Kero lanterns have smaller jets, or Petrol lanterns (and in particular Alcohol lanterns) use air throttles. The carbon build up is independent from the air throttle, but basically depends on the length/weight of the molecules: the longer/heavier, the easier they break / crack thermally. So Kero or Diesel build up more carbon than Petrol or Alcohol.
Martin I wasn’t very clear in the carbon buildup description. I agree with your wording and description. When I mentioned carbon build up, I was referring more to a soot emission resulting from a rich mixture.
