I’ve a curious variation to report in the tank inscription on this Radius No.21. Applying Stejar’s chronology of Radius 21 production variant characteristics, I had this 21 as his ‘Type 3’. Here’s the tank inscription from his Type 3, ‘Radius Ltd’ On mine, otherwise identical, it reads ‘Ltd Radius’. Excitement among philatelists concerning a mis-printed (and therefore rare) stamp in their collection is one thing, but I can’t imagine the Radius stamped inscription was a mistake. Maybe in some markets the English sequence of ‘Radius Limited’ is expressed the other way round? Whatever, it performs very well. John
@snwcmpr So, a mistake gets your vote Ken. The blunder you visualise requires a die stamp that could be constructed, like the blocks of type in a printing press. Could be. I supposed that a die would be machined entire and not made up of movable components but I’ve no evidence to support that. The frustration of the details of stove/lamp manufacturing being obscure, or missing! The construction of Stonehenge is better understood!
Given that the earlier models were simply adorned with 'RADIUS' on the tank top, it's entirely possible that the 'Ltd' was added as a separate die around 1938 when Radius became a limited company. Ross mentions in the linked post that Radius set up a limited company in the UK by 1936 at least- perhaps stoves for the UK market had the 'Ltd' stamp long before the main body of production changed, easily achievable with removeable dies? From a quick look at photos on this site it seems the size and style of the 'RADIUS' stamp remained the same before and after 'Ltd' was added, which could give weight to the theory. I have a preference for the A.B. Radius era, and don't actually have any 'Ltd' stoves to closely compare (well maybe one but I can't find it!). I've always envisaged the tank top inscription dies as being curved, mounted in a circular groove- round things generally being the easiest things to machine in engineering. None of that explains the ordering difference of course!
My opinion is not based on anything credible. It is just an observation of the grammatical error. Human error in mfg is common, but usually captured by Quality Control. Maybe this anomaly got into the home of an employee.
Well spotted, Ken, there’s a clear indication there then that the ‘Ltd’ was drafted and a die cut separately to update the company’s revised status on their products … and hastily too judging by the irregularity of the scribing of the hatched lines. The precision of the hatching in the pre-existing ‘Radius’ letters sets it apart from that in the ‘Ltd’. Compare the two ‘D’s’ also. The core element shape of each ‘D’ is different. It looks to my eye that the ‘Ltd’ stamped on Stejar’s example was done with the same die as that on mine, but following the ‘Radius’ rather than in front of it. So, as you’ve rightly surmised @snwcmpr and @Blackdog the stamping must have been done with dies made up of elements, whole words and graphics. Someone set up ‘Radius Ltd’ incorrectly. It would be interesting to see any other examples.
I concur with Blackdog I think. It's possible that 'RADIUS' & 'No21' was originally a single die ie 'RADIUS No21'. With separate dies for the Arabic text & 'Made in Sweden'. On change of company status to Ltd a die for the 'Ltd' was hurriedly made & the only place to stamp was between the Arabic text & 'RADIUS No21'. Linguistically not an odd place for Swedes who place the similar company status AB before the company name? @Christer Carlsson At some point very soon after (hence the rarity) the die was created for 'RADIUS Ltd No21'? It certainly adds a quirky bit of extra interest to the stove! Let's find some more!
It's got me thinking now. When eyeing up stoves for sale, as soon as I spot the 'Ltd' I write the stove off as a late 'un. I wonder if I've seen one of these before without noticing?
re that ^^^ Blackdog the latest last versions (type 5 & 6) are also not "Ltd". ----- John, This is an intersting piece of Radius 21 history. There is quite a bit more to your "early type 3" than has been discussed so far. Should we presume, as you made no mention, that the bottom stamp has "Ltd" present in typical type 3 position? Your filler cap, minus "Ltd" does not match the type 2 or the type 3 in *Stejar's list *Stejar when he posted in 2012 had "...the hope that others will add more variants." and we have eg ^^^ a match to yours. Does you pump lid have "Ltd"? The discussion makes sense that this is an initial type 3 tank stamping to incl. "Ltd". If so, it is an "early type 3", correct? BTW a comparison of your early type 3 with a type 2, if my initial comments here are accurate, involves quite a bit more than discussed so far. Eg.: new tank w/recessed filler shooting star not on top of tank arabic script makes debut on top of tank
That's correct. AB (Ltd.) is often placed in front of the company name. And sometimes after, so any version is as valid as the other.
It does Yes to that too Possibly so, though if it was the result of a mistake by whoever performed the task of (in effect) ‘typesetting’ the die components it could have occurred at any point during production of the Type 3, presumably following servicing/cleaning of the die, then it was spotted and corrected. Or indeed, as you suggest, production began with that composition of ‘Ltd’ and ‘Radius’ and was corrected subsequently. In either case, the ‘Radius Ltd’ wording on this example’s tank base and pump cap suggests it was the preferred composition and the reverse was unintended. Further endorsement of the intended inscription appears on the one tank side panel bearing an inscription. Some more details. Pump cap knurling. Filler cap/air screw. Type 2 cap, type 3 air screw.
Forgot to point out that though the inscription on the pump cap is that of a Type 3 … … the knurling pattern isn’t ‘diamond’ as in a Type 3 cap and in fact isn’t like that of any of the other No.21 caps. I may just check now if it’s off another Radius stove … not a ‘17’ or a ‘20’ apparently.
