M-1950 / GI stove question

Post your tech questions here, lots of knowledge available.
Post Reply
TSPORT
Senior Member
Posts: 193
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 2:18 am

M-1950 / GI stove question

#1

Post by TSPORT »

Just wondering if anyone has specific knowledge on why the “lid / cup” was designed so that it could be locked in place at 2 different levels when the container is fully assembled. Stole picture from classifieds today for reference (yes, I’m aware picture is an older stove but container is same style). Obviously you could stick whatever will fit in there at the higher position but I’m curious what the military’s intent was when they requested it that way. I’m thinking it was for storage of one of the cans from a K-ration or C-ration but that is only my opinion. Anyone have any historical written reference to the purpose or factual knowledge?
Thanks!
D0BF5440-9ED7-4523-83D0-62D3824CD853.jpeg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Steve
Partial to single mantles & backpacking stoves (liquid fuel, of course!)
User avatar
mgmlvks
Super Colemanaholic
Posts: 1694
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2012 11:50 pm

Re: M-1950 / GI stove question

#2

Post by mgmlvks »

M1942 stove is substantially shorter than the other stoves.
Mike, ICCC member #1156, Slant Saver Group #011, 275 Appreciation Syndicate #0215, FAS #20 - Confusing Future Generations of Collectors One Lantern at a Time
"In order for the light to shine so brightly, the darkness must be present"Francis Bacon
(and - for those who have asked - avatar from postcard and says "Coming Home by Rail".  https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4595/2743 ... be00_z.jpg  
User avatar
cptuap
Colmanaholic
Posts: 275
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 10:50 am

Re: M-1950 / GI stove question

#3

Post by cptuap »

The M1950 and the M1942 are about the same height but the 520 is much taller. I would guess that the cans with the two height lugs were to accommodate both tall and short stoves. Of coarse that is not official knowledge but both type stoves were being made at the same time. After the war when the 530 stoves were produced they came with the tall can single lug container.
Charlie  ICCC#1375
macwacs
Colmanaholic
Posts: 401
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 12:25 pm

Re: M-1950 / GI stove question

#4

Post by macwacs »

The tall(520) and short (M42 mod) as well as the M1950 came in the cans. Often the date on the can will not match the stoves date or the manufracture. If it did not come from the manufracture or was a refurbished stove supply made no attempt to match them up. Just feel lucky just to get a can with the stove is their attitude!
RMW
User avatar
Chucker
Moderator
Posts: 7734
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 2:37 am

Re: M-1950 / GI stove question

#5

Post by Chucker »

I have always wondered the same thing. Could be just to fit taller or shorter GI stoves.

I would guess a 6 oz. C-rat can might fit in there nicely sitting on top of one of the shorter models, at the higher locking slot. But that's only a guess. Kind of a "I got something to eat when the real stuff runs out" situation?
Chuck
"...Good people pass away; the godly often die before their time. But no one seems to care or wonder why. No one seems to understand that God is protecting them from the evil days to come." Matthew 57:1

Eye-SEE-C-C Member #1333 -- MilSpecOps #003
"Michigan - from the Ojibwa word “meicigama,” meaning “great water.”
TSPORT
Senior Member
Posts: 193
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 2:18 am

Re: M-1950 / GI stove question

#6

Post by TSPORT »

I just checked. My 1965 Rogers M-1950 can is slightly smaller in diameter than my 1947 model 530. The 530 stove will not fit inside the M-1950 can, it’s a tad too wide. Obviously the M-1950 will fit in the 530 can. Who knows if the 520 stove is narrower than the 530 and will slip inside M-1950 can? (Although it will likely be too tall to put top on). I don’t have a 520 or M42 to check myself.
Steve
Partial to single mantles & backpacking stoves (liquid fuel, of course!)
User avatar
cptuap
Colmanaholic
Posts: 275
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 10:50 am

Re: M-1950 / GI stove question

#7

Post by cptuap »

Steve, you are correct, the 530 does not fit the small can. The M1942 and M1950 stoves are essentially the same size and fit the two lug can. I don't have a 520 to check either. Hope someone else here has one to compare and shed light on the question. My small cans set in the top lug are the same height as the 530 can. If the 520 is smaller dia. than the 530 but about same height, it would fit the small can set in the top lug position. I'm guessing that that is the case. Otherwise, it is puzzling. So many puzzles.:)
Charlie  ICCC#1375
User avatar
Pancholoco1911
Super Colemanaholic
Posts: 1414
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 4:17 pm

Re: M-1950 / GI stove question

#8

Post by Pancholoco1911 »

520 vs 530
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
~Pancho~

ICCC MEMBER #: 1993
User avatar
cptuap
Colmanaholic
Posts: 275
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 10:50 am

Re: M-1950 / GI stove question

#9

Post by cptuap »

Poncho, Wouldn't happen to have a M1950 can to test that 520 in would you? Looks like it might work.
Charlie  ICCC#1375
User avatar
Pancholoco1911
Super Colemanaholic
Posts: 1414
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 4:17 pm

Re: M-1950 / GI stove question

#10

Post by Pancholoco1911 »

cptuap wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 9:08 pm Poncho, Wouldn't happen to have a M1950 can to test that 520 in would you? Looks like it might work.
I have the 1942 but not 1950. My 520 is civil defense and fits in my m1942 case, 530 doesn't fit
~Pancho~

ICCC MEMBER #: 1993
User avatar
cptuap
Colmanaholic
Posts: 275
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 10:50 am

Re: M-1950 / GI stove question

#11

Post by cptuap »

I suppose we shouldn't assume that the civil defense is the same as the standard military model, or should we? My M1942 can and my M1950 can are the same other than the dates.
Charlie  ICCC#1375
TSPORT
Senior Member
Posts: 193
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 2:18 am

Re: M-1950 / GI stove question

#12

Post by TSPORT »

Pancholoco1911 wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 6:36 pm 520 vs 530
Judging by the picture, looks to me like the 520 will fit the M-1950 case. If the 520 and 530 are the same height, the lid looks like it will lock on at the higher notch as well (520 in M-1950 can). Thanks Pancho!
Steve
Partial to single mantles & backpacking stoves (liquid fuel, of course!)
User avatar
Pancholoco1911
Super Colemanaholic
Posts: 1414
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 4:17 pm

Re: M-1950 / GI stove question

#13

Post by Pancholoco1911 »

TSPORT wrote: Tue Jan 05, 2021 2:16 am
Pancholoco1911 wrote: Mon Jan 04, 2021 6:36 pm 520 vs 530
Judging by the picture, looks to me like the 520 will fit the M-1950 case. If the 520 and 530 are the same height, the lid looks like it will lock on at the higher notch as well (520 in M-1950 can). Thanks Pancho!
I'll measure tanks tomorrow but did a quick test and I truly believe that the 520 civil defense is wider than the military 520. Don't have a military 520 to check all three of them.
~Pancho~

ICCC MEMBER #: 1993
Cottage_hill_bill
Serious Colemanaholic
Posts: 562
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 5:17 pm

Re: M-1950 / GI stove question

#14

Post by Cottage_hill_bill »

Tsport - the stove shown in your picture is the M1941 (520) not a M1950. Only Coleman called it the 520, that was an internal model number. Both AGM and Coleman made the M1941.
The M1941 and OCD stove are the same stove with the exception that the OCD has a spring catch on one of the frame supports to capture the half canister that came only with OCD stoves.
Canisters and stoves were always two separate items in the army's logistic and inventory system. The original M1941s came with the single position tall canister that is similar to the 530 canister. When the M1942 single burner was developed the canister changed to the two-position canister so that it would accommodate either stove. Since the M1950 is about the same dimensions as the M1941 there was no reason to develop a new canister for it.
Reese
North West Florida

Reese’s Law of Thermodynamics:  At temperatures below incandescence hot metal looks exactly like cold metal.

User avatar
cptuap
Colmanaholic
Posts: 275
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 10:50 am

Re: M-1950 / GI stove question

#15

Post by cptuap »

Reese, Steve's original picture was to show the 2 position can not so much the stove. The accommodation of the 2 position to the either of the M1942 or M1950 or the M1941 is pretty much what I surmised. The 530, essentially an after the war item directed at the civilian market was a different breed but based on the Coleman 520. I have found all of these stoves to be very useful for their intended purpose and vary hardy in construction. I am happy to see that the government in this case made a common sense move with the 2 position can. Not what is always expected. :)
Charlie  ICCC#1375
Post Reply