Cleo Cola

[fishnuts]

Let's look at the bottoms of a six pack of Cleo Colas, shall we?
We all know Cleo Cola is a very early painted label...and, ohh la la, what a label. I want to share what these Cleo Cola bottles tell me when I examine them. First let me point out the various pieces of information that appear on each an every Cleo bottles base.
There are five different bits of data on each bottle base. First is the Owens Illinois logo. The logo changes over the time-life of Owens/Illinios bottles...more on that later. There are three numbers that surround the logo icon. As many of us know the three numbers represent the bottling plant location, the dating code number and the somewhat mysterious 'mold' number. Correspondingly and in order, they appear appear left of the 'O/I', to the right of the 'O/I' and then below the 'O/I' (mostly). Then additionally there is, on these bottles, a number prefaced by a capitol 'G'. In the case of Cleo Cola, as all their bottles are an identical very plain and unembellished 12 oz bottle, the number is ' G 76 '.
Interesting that, because it supplies us with the first bit of hard data because it's obvious from these six (of six) samples that the G 76 probably has something to do with the bottle shape/design/size and it's manufacturer and not related to Cleo at all. The 'G' number is the same on all six examples.
The first: Cleo Cola from St Louis. Bottle made in O/I plant at Fairmount, West Virginia, as are all bottles in the sampling, represented by the '3' to the left of the very squat box-like 'O' part of the O/I logo. Then there is a '7' which we assume to represent the year 1937 to the logos right. It's third number, the 'mold' number, below the logo is an '8'. We might assume that this was the eighth mold made for bottle style G - 76.

Onward.

 

[fishnuts]

The next Cleo example comes from Rogers, Arkansas. Liike the St. Louis example, this one is a '3' indicating Fairmount bottle pland, and it is a '7' indicating again, 1937. It is also marked with a G 76. It also have a very boxy looking 'O' portion of the O/I logo, almost like a square with rounded corners. Expect to see this more on early dated O/I bottles.
However it's mold number is '1'. Now this is interesting because we already know that we have a mold #8 in the group. Where are the rest? Are there any with mold numbers between a 1 and an eight? Maybe you have one? Let me know, please.

Onward.

 

[fishnuts]

This next bottle is also from Rogers, Arkansas. This bottle was also made in Fairmount and in 1937. Positive. As you can see it reads: '3' logo '7' across the top. Again we have the very wide boxy looking 'O' of the logo. The G 76 is present as well. Where this bottle differs is in the mold number. Actually, since the bottle is mold numbered '1' that is the same as the first Rogers bottle. What we have is the addition of a dot located on the baseline behind the '1'. Why is that there? What does it mean?
We can be pretty sure it's not a dating code since it isn't on the dating number. Plus we already know historically that these Cleo's originate from the mid-to-late 30's. So, even if you still believe that the dot is a dating device, you're asking us to believe that this bottle originates 10 years before, or after, the previous Rogers bottle? I think not. I believe these Rogers bottles were made simultaneously...every Rogers Cleo I have examined has the '3 - 7 - 1' markings...in the same production batch. The dot appears, so it must mean something...but what?

Onward.

 

[fishnuts]

The next Cleo bottle hails from a bottler in Little Rock, AR. This bottle is quite rare with this being the only example I've seen and logged in my research. If you have one, I'd sure like to learn what information is on it's base. Thanks.
the bottle is from Fairmount and from 1937. It has the familiar G 76 on it and the boxy looking O/I logo.
Where there is a difference, is on the mold number and on this bottle it is an '11'. Eleven? We're having troubles finding one thru eight, and here's an eleven! Obviously, at this point we either have very incomplete data regarding the meaning of 'mold number' or the O/I makers skip numbered their molds, or both.
Furthermore, the 'll' is followed, again, by a baseline positioned dot as in the last example. Again, we know that this bottle dates from 1937 and the presence of a dot has nothing to do with dating the bottle. But, why is it there? It must have a purpose or O/I would not have included it. What ever could it be?

Onward.

 

[fishnuts]

This bottle is from Louisville, KY and bottled by Epping.
The bottle was made in Fairmount and you can see that it's crystal and not green.
Oh boy, here come the variant data. This bottle dates from 1938 as is easily seen by the '8' behind the logo.
And, let's examine the logo here, for we do not see the boxy 'O' part of the logo but a more rounded and ovate looking shape...more like a capital O. A key point here in overall dating is to check the shape of the logo, as in these examples: Boxy looking logo from 1937, a more round looking logo after 1937. Additionally there is a dot present, and again on the mold number. Not a dating device here, either. But what? In Lockhart's monograph on dating O/I bottles he mentions that he was told the dots were a quality control device...but he discounted that information in pursuit of his theorum.
I have had a retired line worker relate directly to me that the dots were used as a quality control number. Period.
At this time, however, I only know what the preponderance of my evidence shows and that is the dot is not a dating icon. It's is still 'up in the air' whether I believe the dot is a QC (quality control) item or not, in spite of first hand knowledge related to me. I still haven't logged enough bottles.
Another difference we have is that the familiar G 76 has been replaced with a G 113. This G number is also not on the base but on the bottom edge of the side panel. Knee jerk curiosity might tell me that the '113' is clear while '76' is green. But, that's too easy...and possibly not true. The bottle are identical 12 oz in every way but color. More data needed. If you have Cleo's you can help. Send me the information. Some of the earliest O/I sodas have these same G numbers on them, either on the base or on the heel. Quite often the G's are the only link establishing the manufacturer as O/I.

Onward.

 

[fishnuts]

One more cola bottle for you to examine.
Here we see the same Fairmount bottling plant but on a bottle from 1939 as the '3' and the '9' indicate.
We are welcomming back the G 76 number and it's back positioned on the base. Perhaps the G number on the Louisville bottle had to do with all that other information being placed on the base and there just wasn't space left for it. Perhaps, not. If you have any Cleo Cola bottles, please reply with their base info to this thread. Every single one seen helps, believe me.
We also see the more rounded O/I logo. Now we have another example of the 'change' noted from the 1937 versions to the post-1937 versions. Perhaps we can aid our dating of O/I sodas simply be observing the shape of the logos. We already know O/I used several variant logos over the years. Knowing when each version started and stopped would be very helpful towards that end. Perhaps the bulky boxy version is their first attempt? Need more input...from you.
Arrrgh! The mold number on this bottle is a '5'! Now in a sample of only a half dozen bottles we have an eleven, an eight, a five and three ones. Until I see and log (with your help) all the numbers from one thru eleven (plus, who knows how many more) I presume O/I skip numbered (i.e. didn't use numbers in order...which we know they did on their plant identification, so it's not out of the question)) their mold designations.

Oh, and this is not actually a Cleo brand cola but a King Cola from Granite City, IL. The queen of cola and the king of cola.

Enjoy. Hope you could learn something.

 

[morbious_fod]

G76 and G113 are your mold numbers, or style numbers if you so choose, this indicates which molds will be used. The number to the left is indeed the plant that the bottles were made at. The number on the right is indeed the date. These were most likely made in sets, and the number under the the logo is the indication of which mold was used to make that particular bottle in sequence. This was indeed used for quality control purposes, and I would venture a bet that the dot beside the number was used when one of these molds were replaced due to issues such as cracking or wearing out. This would indicate to the workers that that mold had been changed out.

Now the dot beside the date code has consistently made sense when dating post 1940 bottles, also the addition of the Duraglas logo, but this wasn't universal as some older molds were modified for use later on. The OBCo Green bottles from Marion are a good example. They used this bottler specific mold for years, and didn't change to the Duraglas embossing on the bottom until the introduction of the acl bottles in the late 1940's.

 

[fishnuts]

Reaspectfully, morb, I have to disagree about the dot after the date holding any relevance.
How then, do you explain dots found after the dating number post 1945? One can't, as there is, by your thinkng, no longer use for the dot as a dating device when there are double dated bottles. I have found quite a few with the redundant dot...

I've only noted or logged about a thousand bottles, so I can't say with 100% accuracy, but I'm beginning to believe that the dot, no matter where it's located is a quality control icon. Dots placed on the baseline, dots placed on the midline, dashes, underscores and 'pimples' are also all found on either the date number AND/OR the mold detail number. None have to do with the date. But those things mean something...at least to O/I production people.

I know you have the Fleener, is it, that is code dated 2? And you know historically that is must be a 1942, right? And the bottle indicates that with the '2' in the date position. The dot? Who knows? I understand that Fleener is exceedingly rare and doesn't that mean you have only seen the one example? If so, how can you make a generalization based on one example of the bottle?
I believe the Rogers Cleo Cola to be rare enough. Probably only one batch run by O/I. Yet, I show examples of non-dot and dotted variants. Why? Can you explain...without referencing Lockhart?

I've also found several other 'dot pairs'...one with, one without. If the dot is a dating devind in one position, but not the other, i'd like to hear your evidence. Please.

 

[morbious_fod]

So how exactly did Owens Illinois differentiate the change over from the single date code of the 1930's from the date code of the 1940's?

When I have more time I'll take pictures of some of the bottoms of the bottles from Kingsport, notorious for the short lifespan of their bottling companies, which will help narrow down the time period, because a quick look at my Rex, which I have held at least six of, and the Holston Beverages, which I have seen even more of, and both are known to be 1941 because the company only lasted about a year and a half, and both have the dot beside the 1 date code. The Holson also has the Duraglas logo embossed on the bottom, but the Rex doesn't most likely due to it's small size.

The Fleenor is LGW, and so are the Nesbitts from the Fleenor Nesbitt Bottling Company.

As for the use of the dot after 1945, as I stated they used several older molds by re-striking the date after 1945. The green OCBCo being the example given.

 

[fishnuts]

morb, My bad on thinking the 1941/2 was the Fleener when obviously it's not.

How did O/I differentiate? That's a million dollar answer, if I had one. I just do not have enough bottle bases noted in the data base to be able to give an answer. And, at this point, I do not acknowledge that they did differentiate.

You see, most people that try and work out a dating scheme seem to always think that the dating began in 1930 or 1931.
But O/I bottles tell us they wern't ever johnny on the spot in getting bottle information systematically consistent...or even present. Owens and Owens/Illinois quickly absorbed several bottle makers all at about that same time. Among those were American Glass and Root who's bottles continued to be produced for several years under their old names even though O/I was the owner and 'parent'.
Aside: Not being a Coke bottle guy I know very little about them but I understand there is a dearth (or non-existance) of Coca Colas O/I made and dated 29,30,31. Maybe because those O/I to Root transition bottles during those years were still produced at the Root plant and still masked with their name/numbers instead of O/I name & number.

I am beginning to believe that O/I might not have begun using their logo and numbering system for several years
Most of the formulae that I've toyed with break down when real data is applied to them. You see, every bottle must follow the rule. If you state a theorum that bottles are marked thusly, when you find a bottle that does not fit that criteria, you have to know that your theorum does not hold up. Such has been my research so far about dots and dating. The dots mean something...Lockhart currently (today) now thinks his monograph need lots of updating and with not so much, if any, emphasis on the dot theory early discussed as it's far more complicated and not systematic enough to simply declare a dot means the 1940's and no dot means 1930's.

If I had to test a theorum about dating O/I bottles here's what it would be. Beginning in 1935 bottles are dated with a 5.
Add a year, and 6 is used, and so on until 1940 which get the zero in the date space. 1941 begins and they used a 1, and so on thru 1944. Then we come to 1945 and we know the single digit 5 was already used. Presto! Double digit dating appears: 45, 46, 47 and so on. There's your differentation. Plug in any bottle you have...regardless of dot/no dot and check how historically accurate they are. See if you can find one that doesn't fit. Not every plant was 'up to speed' on that, either so we have anomalies plant to plant as consistency finally appeared.

Could be that your very small bottler had only one order of bottles? Um, yes? And that they all came from the same run and same mold position? Um, again, yes. That would mean that all would be marked either, or, regarding the dot and the run would have no variances...
Towards that end, please check those local brands you have and relate to me what you find.