Canteens...

[browningautorifle]

drinking water with shards of glass

That would be unpopular.

[Harlan (Deceased)]

Yes Indeed Jim! Soldiers of all our wars gripe a lot, but drinking glass is a legit gripe.

Also, the plastic canteens were not like the pliable material as were the Vietnam era - they are brittle and feel more like fiberglass or Bakelite.

[RT Ellis]

Plastic canteen, Stock No. 74-C-85

The prioritization of aluminum to production of other than field mess equipment is well known by collectors. What is generally unknown is that the prioritization order occurred during the "defense emergency" before U.S. entry into WWII.

Plastic was the first material the Army QMC examined as a substitute for aluminum in canteens, cups, and meat cans. The Dow Chemical Co., and other plastic producers, were requested to produce plastics suitable to this purpose. Many different plastics, and formulations were developed, some of the chemicals used sound toxic. Several formulations of Poly-unsymmetrical di-chlor-ethylene “Saran” plastic were tried, but failed the tests mainly because of brittleness. Many small lots of canteens, of experimental plastic formulations, were molded by Dow, and tested by the National Bureau of Standards.

The use of plastic for canteen cups, and meat cans, was determined unsuitable, and there was no further development. The QMC turned to the porcelain plating industry for substitute canteen cups, and meat cans, both of which were determined unsuitable and were then tin- or zinc-plated (galvanized). The porcelain plated canteen M1942, tin or galvanized canteen cup M1942, and meat can M1942 were manufactured in large numbers. These items were prohibited from issue to troops going overseas, and removed from issue at the ports of embarkation.

Dow eventually developed an acceptable formula of Ethyl Cellulose plastic "Ethocel" that had the undesirable property of transmitting odor and taste to contents. The undesirable taste and odor remained with all formulations, however in field tests it was determined that the taste and odor was not strong enough that soldiers testing the canteens refused to drink the water. In September 1942 Dow molded 10,000 canteens that were sent to various test boards for field trial. The reports of the trial were all favorable that the plastic canteen was a suitable replacement for the canteen M1910.

The QMC concluded that plastic was the future for all production of canteens, and tried many different applications of products, including tin-plating, and silver-plating, to eliminate the leeching of taste and odor to the contents. BTW alcohol in a solution of 50% or higher attacked the plastic and destroyed the canteen. Other undesirable features was the plastic would not tolerate heat, and softened when boiling water was introduced to sterilize the canteen.

The Quartermaster Corps Technical Committee in November 1942 recommended the plastic canteen for production classified SUBSTITUE-STANDARD for the canteen M1910. Production of 3,750,000 was authorized for 1942-44. The initial plan was for the manufacture of 85,000 in December 1942, 100,00 in January and February 1943, and 50,000 per month thereafter. This limited production schedule was because the War Production Board in November 1942 released aluminum and stainless steel for the production of canteens, canteen cups, and meat cans.

The known manufacturers of plastic canteens and years of manufacture:

Dow Chemical (unmarked) numerous canteens of various plastic formulations, and 10,000 Ethyl Cellulose canteens for field trial - 1942.

American Insulator Co (AICO) 1943.

Amos Molded Plastics (AMOS) 1943-44,

General Industries Co (G.I.) 1942-43.

Mack Molding Co. (MACK MOLDING CO.) 1943.

Unidentified (P.I.) 1943-44.

Strong Mfg. Co. (S.M. Co.) 1943-44.

Unidentified (unmarked) 1943-44.

[Harlan (Deceased)]

Thank you, RT Ellis!

I have many collector books, about guns, US helmets, and US gear, but none with THAT much info. That's one of the things about this site I really love. I have tried to read all I can, buts there's always someone who teaches me more and shares their knowledge!


Thanks,
~Harlan

[RT Ellis]

I suppose I should mention that I am in process of researching and preparing the draft of a book on American military field mess equipment (canteens, cups, covers, meat cans, utensils and etc.). The material provided on the plastic canteen was extracted from the draft entry on that topic, all material taken from research of documents at the National Archives in Washington, College Park, and Chicago, and material researched at the Quartermaster Museum, Ft. Lee, Va., as well as examination of many samples of canteens.

I am taking a somewhat unique approach to the subject and researching the topic in what I refer to as a horizontal study, that is through chronological progression, with quotes from original documents. Most of the books in print are what I refer to as vertical studies that are mostly merely catalogs, that cover all the equipment, uniforms and etc. from a specific time period, with very little on the history of the material. Correct information on field mess equipment is very often inaccurate. It is clear that for the most part any "history" provided is based entirely on examination of existing items, and allot of speculation.

Collectors and dealers love the terms "prototype," "experimental" and others terms that imply limited production. Association with the Marine Corps also generates interest. There isn't anything that excites a militaria collector more than speculation that an item was an experimental Marine Corps, or rigger made, equipment item. I'm convinced that much of the equipment described in these terms was dealer hyperbole to improve profits, and perpetuated by collectors to increase their status by owning such an item. Unfortunately, most of the militaria books available also perpetuate this misinformation. (For an example of the kind of misinformation provided on equipment see the Wikipedia article on the plastic canteen previously referenced here)

At best much of the non-standard or unmarked equipment was manufactured in fairly large quantities for field test, and the limited quantity of survivors suggest an experimental item. I suppose that an item made for laboratory testing of materials, or field trials, could be described as "experimental" or a prototype, as sometimes the production items were changed as a result of the testing. The terms "experimental," "test" and "trial" (as in field test, or field trial) were often used interchangeably. Precise definition of these terms is difficult, except apparently in the mind of collectors.

What I have found in research of documents, and field examination of many examples of field mess equipment there is very little of the existing equipment should be categorized as experimental. Equipment produced for material testing was made in very small quantities and very often destroyed by the testing procedures. Examples of equipment used in field testing are much more often encountered, and if properly identified as such can provide interesting comparison with production items.

One thing is clear, the military didn't make millions of anything for experimental purposes. The production plastic canteen, and porcelain-plated canteen M1942 (approximately 5 million produced) should not be described as "experimental" as both items were SUBSTITUTE-STANDARD for the canteen M1910 and production was limited. (To the great disappointment of Marine Corps collectors I have to report that the canteen M1942 was an Army QMC initiative. The Marines received relatively few of the canteens, and promptly relegated them to issue to non-Fleet Marine Force (FMF) units.)

I appreciate your comments as it helps me to know that the information I'm putting into the book is of use, and of interest to miltaria historians.

[browningautorifle]

Only comment might be "We await your publication"...

[Harlan (Deceased)]

I have three full sets of web gear and helmets from different time periods of WWII. I have a full set of khaki early Army gear, and later USMC gear along with correct helmets.. Much of the USMC gear was unique to them and different than Army.

I have a set of WWII 1917 helmets, a mid-early WWII 1917A1 helmet that has the same shell as WWWI but a completely new interior, first WWII era (steel pot) M1 helmet and later M1 WWII helmets, Korea, early 1960 Viernam M1, and later Vietnam helmets from 1966- till the war's end, A post couple 80's helmet sets, and a Kevlar 'Desert Store' Chocolate Chip and goggles and finally a couple of current Kevlar helmets.

I guess I like to be chronological too. I bought several books about US helmets and learned a ton from them just reading them.

You're correct too with so many people trying to resell "oddities". Some are just plain junk, and others are still plentiful because they failed for combat and were sent back to storage.

Attachment 54410Attachment 54411

[Harlan (Deceased)]

Thanks again for the 'Desert Storm' era helmet with the 'chocolate chip' camo Bill!! It really filled the chronological hole/camo type I had

~ Harlan.

[RT Ellis]

Since the canteen 1-quart plastic was mentioned by some of the responders to this thread here is some information on this canteen: The Army QMC and USMC sought a replacement for the canteen CRS and canteen M1910. The QMC requirement was for a canteen that could be manufactured inexpensively in quantity, and be considered expendable in the sense that it could be disposed of without the necessity of cleaning and restocking used equipment.

Extract from unknown document describing the plastic canteen, circa 1944: " RECOMMENDATION FOR RESEARCH Polyethylene might be welded together to provide a tasteless, odorless and translucent canteen with good strength characteristics over a wide range of temperature. Polyethylene may be considered a substitute material in tropical and temperate areas where temperatures do not drop below 20F. The problem of preparing plastic canteens that can be heated over a fire might be considered."

By the late 1950s polyethylene plastic had improved to the point that a canteen of this material was practical. The Marine Corps sent two canteens test with the FMF in 1961. Both examples were reported unsatisfactory, and the Marine Corps Equipment Board recommended that the USMC work with the Army QMC to develop a canteen that would be suitable. The Army had sent several test canteens for field trial, and in 1963 borrowed a design in service with the Canadian Military Forces (CMF) since 1960.

Canteen, Water Plastic w/Screw Cap FSN 8465-889-3744, NSN 8465-00-889-3744, Specifications MIL-C-43103 30Nov59, MIL-C-43103A 2Nov64, MIL-C-43103A(1) 5Feb65, MIL-C-43103A(4) 28Dec67, MIL-C-43103B 30Sep70, MIL-C-43103B(1) 26Oct70, MIL-C-43103B(2) 28Jul76, MIL-C-43103C 27Jun80.

Canteen was identical to CMF canteens that were dated as early as 1960. Earliest production of this canteen was in 1963 although collectors sometimes refer to it as Model 1962. I have heard that there were complaints of these early canteens leeching taste and odor to contents especially if the contents was at air temperature or warmer, which was remedied by flushing with hot coffee or a soft drink, such as Coca Cola.

This canteen is known to have been produced by Australia, Belgium, Canada, Holland, Republic of Viet Nam, South Africa, and Thailand, for their respective military forces, with slight differences in the color of the plastic, and the markings molded on the bottom and front are unique to each country.

Production for commercial sales in the U.S. was by several manufacturers, notably Hayes Tooling and Plastics, that defaulted on a government contract, and went on to use the molds to produce canteens in a remarkable variety of colors. HTP produced canteens in OG, black, white, tan, red, blue, and orange. HTP also marketed a wire metal belt clip known as a "Hayes Clip." These commercial canteens have also been sold with plastic belt clips. Other than HTP, Sonetronics, which also had a contract, and others have produced canteens for commercial sale. These canteens sometimes have the three arrows in a triangle, indicating recycled material, molded on the bottom.

Recently a soft "collapsible" version of the canteen has been marketed that doesn't seem to have any government origin, and is not a standard DLA item, although the markings on the bottom appears to be standard contractor information.

Canteen Water w/M-1 Cap: NSN 8465-01-115-0026, Cap NSN 8465-00-930-2077, Specifications MIL-C-43103C(1) 25Feb83, MIL-C-43103D 15Aug88.

The principal difference in this canteen is the Cap M-1 assembled to the canteen. Because of the requirement to consume water (hydrate) while in the chemical weapons protective suit known as MOPP, the M-1 cap was developed with capability to interface with chemical protective masks provided with a tube that connected to a port and valve in the cap. Later and current versions of the cap was provided with a rubber shroud. The Cap M-1 was also adapted to the Insulated Canteen now obsolete, and provided the Cold Weather Canteen currently issued, as well as the Canteen Two-Quart Collapsible currently issued. The snap cover on the early Cap M-1 was a strap that frequently separated. The current improved Cap M-1 the cover is separate and assembles to a button molded to the side of the cap.