Evolution Of The US Jerry Can

[Chuck Lutz]

So you can GUARANTEE there is something on the OTHER side of the cans in the picture?

X-Ray vision or something?

Is your "X-Ray Vision" something that has "100% safe evidence"?

I think not....nor will anyone ELSE want to bet their life that the other side of these two cans has something stamped into them...will YOU?

[Mark Tombleson]

I'm just happy to see a post I wrote some three years ago is still relevent.

I don't remember writing it but darn it shows some stuff!

[lucakiki]

Hi Mark, yes, it is still relevant!

While waiting for the opinions of the other guys, let me have some mild fun.

There is a picture of a German can, showing no stamped information on the visible pattern.
It has the early style X pattern.
Does it likely have some information on the other side?
My answer is yes.
Why?
To begin with, because I have never heard of a Gerry Kanister not having some information on it.
Second, because in case my memory had failed me,I had anyway read this ( no prize for guessing who might be the author):
You don't think anyone as regimented as the German Army would allow anyone to start making gas cans with no info stamped on them after the WaffenAmpt inspectors told them to put them on do you?
That would lead me to suppose that if no information is visible on one side, it must be on the hidden side.
Just as on my early Kanister with the early X patern...

Now, Mark, do you think my reasoning is decently correct?
And do you think Chuck Lutz will allow a reasonable lapse of time before some further rebuttal, so the other guys might expess their thoughts?
As in: I will be happy to let them speak for THEMSELVES.

[gerrykan]

Roy, I do not recall, in the recent or not so recent past, of anyone actually making a distinction between American mistery can and European mistery cans: only very recently this definition has been introduced.
Are you aware if there is a consensus of sort, or if there is only one author who decided by himself that this would be the rule to follow from now on, rather than mantaining the old school definition?
Robin ,in his very accurate explanation of the mistery cans, did not yet use the definition of American mistery can.
I would like to hear your position..

I maintain that any can unidentified by its maker, and undated will remain at least somewhat of a mystery until solid evidence of its pedigree is established.
Solid evidence meaning irrefutable, such as construction specifications or the like.

A prime example is the aluminum CONCO water cans made for the USMC. They are identified on the bottom as being manufactured by CONCO, but they are undated.
People have stated that they were made during the USA's Vietnam war era(for use with Mighty Mites; M416B trailers; Helicopters; or just because the jungle environment is very humid), but noone has offered any solid evidence that they were actually manufactured during this time period. I believe that they probably were, but keep an open mind to any new information regarding them.

I have a digital copy of an interesting photograph, that I am inquiring about the copyright. It will neither prove nor disprove anything discussed so far, but interesting just the same. Let's hope I receive permission to reproduce it.

[Chuck Lutz]

Roy....would you go so far as to go with the concept that there are more than one or two variations of the clamshell can that are unmarked and therefore some means of subclassification based on the construction details is a valuable tool in discussing them all?

There are many cans that fall into this unknown group at this time and while many of them have slightly different details to them there are many of which that DO have the exact same characteristics....to begin with years ago Luca began calling them "Mistery Cans" because that is how his version of the word is spelled. Once I began to see a large number of them with a certain set of details to them....and that they tended to appear in the USA and eventually in the South Pacific, I used the term "Mystery Cans" to set them aside and make the discussion simpler for everyone.

Now that we have been seeing more and more evidence that not only do the construction details of these cans appear in the Conco and the eventual style of American jerry cans, but that the photos from the Pacific and the appearance of them with the Conco cans show them to have been in places like Saipan with the 4th Mar Div which did NOT visit Australia or NZ but came from California....this is starting to be close to the best we will ever find unless someone finds something in the Gov't records...

For me, until something is much greater in terms of CONCLUSIVE evidence that they were made else where surfaces, they will remain the "American Prototype" cans....no one can explain them in any other manner.

I appreciate your wanting "100% safe evidence" like Luca does, but in this country you can be executed based on "circumstantial evidence" and if there is not yet enough in favor of tis classification I do not know what else we can offer at this point.

Your thoughts?

(Luca, I think Roy can speak for himself without your cherry-picked quotes, OK?)

[gerrykan]

Chuck Lutz,
Here are three excerpts from my reply to the Private Message from Luca/lucakiki.

Luca,
I will call them 'Mystery Cans' until some actual proof surfaces.
There are too many variables involved to say with any certainty who made them, or when they were made.

The cans may be of US origin, or made with US machinery in another country, or made in another country by their own machinery.
I cannot say with certainty, as nobody else can

As always is the case with 'Mystery Cans', there are far more questions than I think there will ever be answers!

As I have said before, I think they are likely to be of US origin, but I do not know that they are.

[gerrykan]

I have a digital copy of an interesting photograph, that I am inquiring about the copyright. It will neither prove nor disprove anything discussed so far, but interesting just the same. Let's hope I receive permission to reproduce it.

This image is listed on the host website as: Copyright expired - public domain , but there are "conditions of use" that apply to the high resolution copy that I purchased.
So here is the low resolution "Public Domain" image with some magnified crops.

Photo caption: Protville, Tunisia. c. June 1943. An airman of No. 458 (Wellington) Squadron RAAF enjoys a bath on a desert airfield from which his squadron is operating. Note the jerry can beside him.









The high resolution copy can be magnified to the extreme with no evidence of any embossed/stamped markings present in the side of the can.

Links:

http://www.awm.gov.au/

http://cas.awm.gov.au/item/MEC0620

[lucakiki]

1) The little holes on the face of the handle....which are NOT found on German/Brit cans but ARE found on the mystery cans and later USMC and standard American gas cans (one or two are found).

Oh, oh looky looky what I found!



British can with the little holes...

[Chuck Lutz]

Roy....
Note the hole in the tab at the 1 o'clock (upper right) position....typical of both British and German cans....
Note the location on this German can:

German dwc top view.JPG (226.68 KiB) Viewed 378 times

Note the location of that hole on the tab on the Conco and the American Prototype at the 12 o'clock (center) position.

CONCO USMC Top.jpg (38.25 KiB) Viewed 378 times

US Proto Handle.jpg (214.11 KiB) Viewed 378 times

I do not know who made the can in the Tunisia photo, but the mfger characteristics of that tab is the only detail that photo clearly shows and the location of the hole in the tab is that of the British/German cans, not the American Prototypes....

Your thoughts?

PS a top-down photo would illustrate the handle design/mfger details that would also help on this....the SQUARED end of the cutouts being found on the American Prototype, the CONCO/USMC and the standard American cans.....and the ROUNDED end of the cutouts being features of the German/British designs.

[gerrykan]

I do not know who made the can in the Tunisia photo, but the mfger characteristics of that tab is the only detail that photo clearly shows and the location of the hole in the tab is that of the British/German cans, not the American Prototypes....

Sorry, but I cannot see the hole in the tab in the photo.

[Chuck Lutz]

Roy....it's the dark spot on the tab in the upper corner near where that hair-like stuff is...

Tunisia1943c.jpg (11.49 KiB) Viewed 371 times

[lucakiki]

1) The little holes on the face of the handle....which are NOT found on German/Brit cans but ARE found on the mystery cans and later USMC and standard American gas cans (one or two are found).

This statement, regarding British cans, is NOT always true. Period.



British can with the little holes...

[Tom Wolboldt]

Hi Luca,

I am not sure the British can you are giving as an example of having a hole is a valid sample to use since there are two holes rather than one and the outline of an added tag around the holes. Do you have samples of many other British cans with the two hole arrangement ?

I would also like to see Chuck answer you question as to how the British can was improved over the German can to set history straight rather than creating history.

I believe the goal we are all after is learning what actually was done and not creating history to what we think or want was done. All sides of G503 discussions should keep this in mind

[lucakiki]

No, Tom,I have not seen other British jerrycans with those tiny holes.
It is just that I was looking at all the pictures in the recent Jerrycan threads,to see if I could find where the British might have improved on the German design,as suggested by one expert on improvements and I came on this picture showing some holes.
I thought that maybe the quoted statement should be not taken as absolute .

You know, holes do have their role, recently, in trying to confirm one theory or another...

Of course I wholeheartedly agree on your last sentence!

[Chuck Lutz]

Tom...set a couple British cans next to a couple German cans....
1) I have noticed on my German can and a couple British cans that the clamshell SEAM is a little different on the British cans. On the German cans the mating surface is smaller and is down in the groove a bit deeper which does not make it easy to weld together.

The British cans have increased the area where the two sections meet and this makes joining them easier to accomplish. Big deal right? Well, if you are the welder assembling them and the surfaces are SMALL it takes a bit more time and a bit more skill to do that. Muliply that across a factory floor and see if small change like that will make a difference when making 1,000,000 of them.

2) Look at how the German can handle is attached to the tank. Stick welded around the front edge, around the front handles and stick welded across the rear of the handle where it meets the tank. Typical German Engineering....overkill in many ways.....more welding that the weight of the can and the fuel requires, but that's how they do things.

Now look at the British assembly...much less welding to attach the handle to the tank...It soes not NEED all that welding, so they simplified the assembly process to speed production. Is that an improvement? Well, if you ordered 1,000,000 cans and they were delivered 10% faster then the producer (saved labor) made more money and the gov't got them faster.....an improvement!

Are these big things? No...but if you can save a few minutes or save some material or something....then that is an improvement...no matter how much some say it is not.

I would ask if you think the British can is NOT an improvement with those subtle differences and would you go so far to say that the slight mfg differences made the British can SLOWER or more COSTLY or required critical machinery to produce or more highly skilled labor to produce?