Hobbleskirt Coke with 1916 date error

[SODAPOPBOB]

And here's the image of the bottle showing ... 4 L 42

 

[SODAPOPBOB]

I will do a follow up on this later with more details, but I just found a couple of references saying that Laurens bottle molds were not made at the Laurens plant in South Carolina plant but they were made and ordered from a subsidiary of Laurens in Baltimore, Maryland who specialized in making bottle molds. I believe the company's name was The Emhart Corporation.

 

[SODAPOPBOB]

In other words ... 1. The molds were made in Baltimore, Maryland2. The bottles were made in Laurens, South Carolina

 

[SODAPOPBOB]

On page 29 of the Laurens Glass Works history article I posted a link to it states (in part) ... " ... Laurens purchased molds from factories in Toledo, Ohio and other mideastern factories." (More Later)

 

[SODAPOPBOB]

P.S. It never dawned on me until now, but its possible that all glass manufactures purchased their molds from outside sources. When you stop and think about it, mold making would require a foundry-type operation that melted steel to form the molds. Based on what I know about most glass factories, I don't think they were set up for molten steel, especially involving the making of hundreds of different types of molds. Sure, glass factories had mold "shops / departments," but that doesn't necessarily mean the molds were actually made there.

 

[Canadacan]

I would think it's a plant # as well. On a side note, all my early Canadians have the mold # on the side.

 

[SODAPOPBOB]

Here's an interesting read where the owner of an early Laurens Glass Works hobbleskirt Coca Cola bottle says its a BIM marked with LGW 17 for 1917. But notice in the comments where Bill Porter (oldcokes) sets the record straight and points out the bottle is actually marked LGW 19 for 1919 and not 1917. However, there is no dispute the bottle is a BIM, Blown In a Mold. Click on any of the images and they will open in a separate window with a + cursor where you can click on them again to enlarge. There is no mold number that I can see. But it at least confirms that Laurens did in fact produce a BIM hobbleskirt as early as 1919. http://www.collectorsweekly.com/stories/28305-very-rare-bim-hobbleskirt-bottle 1. Front2. Back3. Heel with LGW 19

 

[SODAPOPBOB]

P.S. I just noticed that Bill Porter's first comment is tagged as having been posted "3 years ago" whereas his last comment is tagged as having been posted "1 year ago" oldcokes, 1 year ago
"The pic shows clearly LGW 19. That is the earliest dated Laurens Coke bottle. The dated Tampa is indeed much rarer than the earlier undated one, or the later ABM." Notice where he refers to an "undated" bottle.

 

[SODAPOPBOB]

Because of the evidence presented in my last post regarding the LGW 19 BIM
bottle, I am eliminating Laurens Glass Works as having made the 1916 error
bottles. The reason I say this is because all of the 1916 error bottles
presented thus far were machine made. Consequently, it is extremely unlikely
that Laurens would make a BIM bottle with their makers mark and date mark on it
and then later on make a machine made bottle without their marks.

 

[SODAPOPBOB]

P.S. I forgot to point out the LGW 19 BIM bottle also has Tampa, Fla. on the base, which was a requirement initiated by the Coca Cola Company in 1919. In my opinion there's now way that Laurens would start making machine made bottles after the BIM bottles and not have the town/state on the base.