GRAHAM GLASS COMPANY / FLAVOR BOTTLES / COCA COLA / SEARCH / RESEARCH

[SODAPOPBOB]

RE: Correction

Graham also did some revising to their patent at this time ... and even beat Coca Cola to the draw by about a month!

 

[SODAPOPBOB]

RE: Correction

I am not suggesting the three bottles pictured here are identical to the broken-top bottle. I know they're not and I haven't forgotten the broken-top bottle has an arrow on the shoulder/neck and no stars. I am merely establishing some additional groundwork in connection with my ongoing research involving the span of years and popularity of Graham soda water bottles and Coca Cola.

All three bottles are said to be from Front Royal, Virginia and date from 1924 - 1926 - and 1929

http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/coca-cola-sodawater-bottles-front-129692109

 

[SODAPOPBOB]

RE: Correction

Good morning. Guess who?

Please Note: I feel it necessary of late to include a disclaimer with each posting in the hope it will help prevent any controversy or criticism. In other words, please believe me when I say I am not trying to shove my observations down anyone's throat nor present them as the final word. I am merely searching for information whose end result I hope will lead to a factual identification and appreciation of the broken-top bottle. I also acknowledge and respect those of you who have already formulated your own opinions and/or conclusions. My observations are primarily for those, like myself, who question certain claims and are still searching for answers. Also please know that I remain open minded.

~ * ~

I obviously do not have an example of the broken-top bottle to do what I referred to earlier as an empirical / hands-on examination of it, but that doesn't mean the pictures aren't helpful because they are. The more I look at the pictures of the bottle the more I've noticed how uniformed the embossed signature looks. In my most recent experiment I printed out a close up of the script and then went on eBay and did some comparisons. The mouse/zoom feature available on eBay now really helps. Anyway, I compared the script to at least 100 bottles, which included straight-sided bottles as well as early contour/hobbleskirt bottles. I wasn't entirely sure what I was looking for but the more comparisons I did the more I noticed on straight-sided Coca Cola bottles (typically pre-1920) that the embossed script appears what can only be described as "whimpy / skinny." Whereas on the hobbleskirts the script is typically bolder, more uniformed, and what might even be described as "standardized."

I fully realize how inconclusive an experiment like this might seem, and yet I feel I would be doing you a grave injustice if I did not point out that in every instance the embossed script on the broken-top bottle more closely matched that of the hobbleskirt's than it did the straight-sided bottles.

In other words ...

My current observation suggest the broken-top bottle might have a standardized script on a non-standardized bottle.

Bob

 

[SODAPOPBOB]

RE: Correction

Here's an example of what I call a standardized script on a non-standardized bottle ...

 

[epackage]

RE: Correction

I think the script on the broken top arrow bottle strongly resembles the script on Gary's bottle, except for the fact it seems to slant to the right a little, while the script on Gary's bottle seems more vertical. Since Gary's bottle was designed in the teens I'm leaning more towards the broken arrow bottle being from that time period as well...

 

[SODAPOPBOB]

INCONCLUSIVE CONCLUSION ...

Although you might not have anticipated this coming so soon (but possibly pleased to hear it), I have decided to call it quits on this thread. I realized after my recent and exhausting research attempts that I will most likely never find the proof necessary to fully support my observations in that ...

1. The rarity of the broken-top bottle could simply mean it was produced at the request of a single Coca Cola franchise bottler who was breaking the standardization rules and intended it as a flavor bottle, but who was caught red-handed and told by the parent company to cease and desist immediately. This might be one of the reasons why there are only two known examples of the bottle and also explain why those two are broken off at the neck.

2. The embossing on broken-top bottle might be of an example of standardized script on a non-standardized bottle.

Until such time if/when that someone provides a factual and verifiable accounting of the bottle's origin and date of manufacture, I guess I'll stick with my own observations for the time being. My observations might not be accurate, but they are the best I can come up with based on the currently available evidence. However, this doesn't mean I have closed the book on the subject nor that I don't acknowledge and appreciate the observations of others, because I do. It only means that I feel the bottle's true place of origin, date of production, and purpose (Coca Cola or flavored beverage), still remains a mystery and is still unresolved.

Thanks again to everyone. I hope you eventually figure it out and that you don't hold it against me for sharing my nickle's worth of research.

Bob

P.S. ~ Please don't change the subject heading. That really hurts my feelings. Boo-hoo [] (Lol) Thanks

 

[SODAPOPBOB]

P.S. ~

I forgot number ...

3. My strongest contention has been my inability to find a marked four-sided/flat panel bottle from the teens. If one can be found and shared, I will become convinced that that particular bottle style was manufactured prior to the 1920s. But as it stands, everyone I have seen so far that is marked was from the 1920s or later. I see no evidence of that bottle style ever being produced in the teens.

That's it! I'm through rambling! I'm done!

Bob

 

[cokebottle1916]

Bob Please don't stop. I like reading the research. Investigate my bottle all you want. Tks Gary

 

[SODAPOPBOB]

Gary:

Thank you for the compliment. I had not planned on posting any additional information to this thread, but since you addressed your comments specifically to be I feel its only appropriate that I reply to them. I'm glad to hear you enjoy my research findings even though some of them are somewhat ambiguous and inconclusive. If I come up with any additional findings regarding your particular bottle I will post them on my other thread because that is where your amazing bottle is spotlighted.

As for this thread, the only thing I wish to add pertains to a couple of ILLINOIS GLASS CO. catalogs - One from 1920 and one from 1926.

In the 1920 catalog, scroll to the "Beverage Bottles & Related" section and click on the various pages pertaining to soda bottles. You will not find one similar to the broken-top bottle.

1920 Catalog Link: http://www.sha.org/bottle/igco1920.htm

However ...

In the 1926 catalog, scroll to the "Soda, Beer & Water Bottles" section and click on Page 162 - "Private Mold Soda Bottles." Notice the bottle on the lower right portion of the page. (Also see picture below). I realize the bottle pictured in the catalog is not identical to the 1916 Graham patents, but it is somewhat similar with the "bulges" at the base and shoulder. Although inconclusive, this suggest to me that that type of bottle design was popular and in demand in 1926 but wasn't necessarily popular and in demand in 1920.

1926 Catalog Link: http://www.sha.org/bottle/igco1926.htm

Bob

[ From 1926 Illinois Glass Catalog ~ Page 162 ~ Lower Right Bottle ]

 

[bottleopop]

I agree with cokebottle1916. These research articles by sodapopbob are extremely interesting and are an excellent feature of this forum. I applaud his efforts and look forward to more of his posts here! Keep them coming, Bob!