Stamp Community Family of Web Sites
Thousands of stamps, consistently graded, competitively priced and hundreds of in-depth blog posts to read
Stamp Community Forum
 
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

Welcome Guest! Need help? Got a question? Inherit some stamps?
Our stamp forum is completely free! Register Now!

12 Stanley Steamer (Scott 2132) Type I And II Differences

 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 7 / Views: 2,179Next Topic  
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
3654 Posts
Posted 05/21/2017   08:53 am  Show Profile Bookmark this topic Add angore to your friends list Get a Link to this Message
Creating my custom pages for varieties is ongoing. I am now in the Transportation II era.

Scott notes the difference between Type 1 and II as the length of the inscription. The difference is obvious so no question there.

I was checking tagging and noticed my Type I was responsive to SW and LW but not the tagged version. It appears whiter and brighter under both. Is this a consistent variation to also distinguish?

Interesting, PNC3 org does not explain type I and II and see no mention in Durland other than it was a different press.
Send note to Staff
Al

Pillar Of The Community
United States
8243 Posts
Posted 05/21/2017   09:25 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Petert4522 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
One of yours is printed on Hibrite paper and the other one probably either on regular paper or very little whitener added. Look through a magnifying glass while you have the Long UV light on and you should see lots of brighter threads in the Hibrite paper - far less in the regular one. This is not how to distinguish between two printings, just different treated paper.
And the reason PNC3 does not call them type I and II is because in the mind of PNC collectors there are no two types, just two different printing presses. One was printed by the Cottrell press, the other by the B-press. The Cottrell version shows a seam line, the B-press version does not. And then of course your difference in width.

Peter
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by Petert4522 - 05/21/2017 09:26 am
Valued Member
United States
194 Posts
Posted 05/22/2017   2:05 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add mstocky2 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
In checking mine, I found the following:

2132 - Type I, responsive to LW UV, Hi-brite paper
2132a - Type I, responsive to LW, Hi-brite paper
2132b - Type II, non-responsive to LW UV, dead paper
2132c - Type I, non-responsive to LW UV, dead paper
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
8243 Posts
Posted 05/22/2017   3:12 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Petert4522 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Mstocky2, the first two on your list are the same. Is that a typing error?


Peter
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
8243 Posts
Posted 05/22/2017   3:35 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Petert4522 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Angore, Idove into my collection to see what I could come up with, and with help of PNC3 ( they do indicate type I and type II! ) I came up with these characteristics:

Scott 2132, plate 1 & 2 - Overall tagging. These come in three different types paper ( I, II & IIIa ).
The two plates can come in Hibrite and dead paper, and every "shade" in between.
Scott 2132a. plate 1 & 2 - Untagged. Precanceled. Comes only on type I paper, but again in different shades, from Hibrite down to dead paper.
Scott 2132b. plate 1 - Untagged. Precanceled. This is the B-press version and comes on type III paper.
Scott 2132c. plate 1 & 2 - Tagging omitted, not precanceled. This is an error.

If you like to read up, the "1995 Plate Number Coil Catalog" edited by Richard Nazar is on the web in its entirety.



Peter
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by Petert4522 - 05/22/2017 3:36 pm
Valued Member
United States
194 Posts
Posted 05/22/2017   9:05 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add mstocky2 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Hi Peter,
The Type I and Type II I was using is how they are described in the Scott Specialized Catalogue. With Type I referring to "Stanley Steamer 1909" being 18mm long and Type II it is 17 2/3 mm long. Your info adds more depth I wasn't aware of.

Mark
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
3654 Posts
Posted 05/22/2017   9:16 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add angore to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
I thought the change in length was due to plate changes due to change in press. The PNC3 mention the press change but does not make an obvious difference on help distinguish. They have two pics without any guidance. There were paper changes not all consistent with press change.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Al
Pillar Of The Community
United States
8243 Posts
Posted 05/22/2017   10:00 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Petert4522 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Angore, you are correct on the press change. The Cottrell stamps are a bit longer because they were mounted on a cylinder and therefor stretched a fraction of an inch. Paper changes had very little to do with the change of press - the press was changed because the old Cottrells were discontinued.
PNC3 members collect plate number coils in strips of 3, 5 or 7 or in some cases longer. A plate number strip of Cottrell issues is easy to identify by the presence of a joint- or seam line, whish is missing on the B-press issues.


Peter
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
  Previous TopicReplies: 7 / Views: 2,179Next Topic  
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.


Go to Top of Page
Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Stamp Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2023 Stamp Community Family - All rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Stamp Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Privacy Policy / Terms of Use    Advertise Here
Stamp Community Forum © 2007 - 2023 Stamp Community Forums
It took 0.19 seconds to lick this stamp. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05