60's Chambers

[stoveman]

I'm with Ha on the vintage appliances. About 5 years ago, when we opened our guest cottage, My bride insisted on ironed sheets and pillow cases for our guests. I watched her stand and iron all those bed clothes and knew what a pain in the *** it was. We got to discussing it one day and she remembered that a relative had a Mangle for ironing when she was growing up. I poked around on ebay and found an Ironrite in Ft.Worth. I made a deal for 125 bucks and here we go to Ft.Worth. Got it home and it worked! The lady we bought it from gave us the original instruction manual and Bride learned to use it. She did sheets, pillow cases, shirts and even my boxer shorts! It is great fun to watch her operate the levers with her knees to make this contraption do all kinds of ironing. One lever raises and lowers the roller and the other starts and stops the spinning of the roller. She now does all the ironing sitting down! And our guests always tell us how great it is to sleep on ironed sheets and pillowcases.

Long live the Vintage Appliances!!!!!

[ha_asfan]

Ironrite is a brand name for a mangel. The Ironrites are the Chambers of the mangel world. Once you get the hang of one of these beauts, ironing days will never be the same ! There is the hum of the motor, the smell of heat from the giant sole plate, the steam coming off the roller and the best part, those beautiful creases ! One word of Ironrite caution, two maybe: that soleplate becomes very hot and finger tips are easily burnt and buttons, watch out for delicate buttons. OK, I know I get carried away with these types of things but gee, I sometimes think the 50's housekeeper really did have the best of the best ! Beautiful design, great long lasting materials, incredible construction, function, function and more function. We've reached a good point of balance in this house: televison, stereo and radio = new. Kitchen and household support accessories = 100% vintage. Funny thing is, the more we replace contemporary electrical items with vintage, the lower our electricity bill goes. Go figure.

[tux_sf]

Ha-
The internet archives at [url="http://www.archive.org"]www.archive.org[/url] have some of the Ironrite pages in the 'Wayback Machine.' While they list pages from 1999 to 2004, I was unable to bring up any after the 2002 sets indexed.

They can be found at

[url="http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://ironrite.com"]http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://ironrite.com[/url]

It appears that the site may have come down in late 2004, as there have been no entries to the archives since September of that year. The domain name of ironrite.com is still registered to the same people & doesn't expire until 2008, so perhaps they just couldn't afford to keep it online or something.

--Danny

PS nice to see a defense of the model C from a design perspective in your earlier postings. I agree that the design is a fairly pure representation of the Modern(ist) Style. However, I myself am more partial to the Art Deco style of the B. It is definitely a gut thing--I can appreciate a Neutra house in the Hollywood Hills, but I'd rather live in something earlier--and do. The pure Modernist style leaves me a bit cold, while the earlier styles seems more human, I guess (besides, I guess I tend to blame the Modernism of the 50's for the excesses of what I can only describe as ugliness in the 60's & 70's, which is what I had to grow up around ;-)). The B reminds me of a cruise liner or early passenger plane from the 30's with just enough ornament to make it interesting, but not so much it is frivolous. Besides, I can easily imagine a B in the kitchen of a Fred Astaire movie!

<font color="#FFFFFF" size="1">[ August 29, 2006 05:16 PM: Message edited by: tux_sf ]</font>

[ha_asfan]

Well Tux, you hit the upholstery tack right on the head ! Ginger wouldn't have had a Chambers, Fred yes, Ginger no. What is that saying..."Ginger gave Fred sex appeal and Fred gave Ginger class". The Deco styling of the B is incredible but still, I would argue that it is a proto Modern design. Deco with a leading edge towards Modernism. A model B would never ever be in a Neutra house nor Wrigh [ok, earlier ones yes, later no] or a Schindler. The purist that I am requires that design appropriate index, yes, down to appliances. Makes me crazy when I go into "restored" houses with their state of the art stainless and granite induction top kitchens. I still prefer the "kitschen" of grandma. If you disect all of the Chambers designs, you can see the clear linkage to the auto industry. The stoves really do have the same qualities as the cars of the era and the architectural link is even more present. My decision to purchase the C was based solely and exclusively on design. What I would really enjoy doing is a late 50's-60's kitchen with the cooktop and counter top oven. It would be a nice new thrill.
Here is my fantasy list of famous people and which Chambers they own: Lucille Ball Model C, Eve Arden Model C, Marie Dressler, Model A, Jean Harlow Model A Barbra Streisand, please, she still won't cook but has several of each, Robert Wagner, Model C without the skirt, Buddy Hackett, Dean Martin, Sammy Davis Jr and Frank Sinatra, all Model C, George Bush charcoal in a bucket, Colin Powell Model C, Marjorie Main Model BZ, Charo, Cher, Bea Arthur, Agnes Moorhead and Paul Lynde, definitely C highbacks in pastel colors, Mae West Model B, Rosie O'Donnel deinitely a Model A [top kept down], Liberace Model A, top open, all burners and broiler on a perpetual hgh-until inherited by Zigfried and Roy who had it converted to propane and use it only to prepare the cat's meals and lastly, Anderson Cooper, Model C in grey with the red cloisenee dials and logo. I'm sure there are more but my tofu is ready to be flipped.

[spin321]

OK,
I know that I am probably comitting heresy here and other members of this board will in all likelyhood be out to tar, feather, draw and quarter me; but I have to say it. To my non-designers eye, unless you go all the way back to the Martha Wahshington models of the 1930s, all of the Chambers models look exactly the same to me! Allright there are some minor diferences in the addition or deletion of a backsplash, burner cover, surface lamp, or change of knob material, but essentially they all look EXACTLY the same to me from the backsplash down! one of the things that I love so much about Chambers Ranges is the fact that the design is so perfect that it is at home in any setting over several decades. I think that the addition or removal of the backsplashes and lamps, chrome handles or black ones are all just incidental.
Quite frankly, the only reason that I chose a lowback C over another model is that it will slide in nicely under my 1948 youngstown cabinets. Other than that, any model would do! Thery're all terrific!

[tux_sf]

Ha-
I agree with most of your model assignments, with a couple of changes. . .

Although it is too obvious--I would have to give Lucille Ball a Freedom Red 90C (not just for the hair, but for the McCarthy hearings too!). Of course, it would have to have a matching red hood, since the Lucy of the 50's always had a proper hat.

Now Liberace. . .well, the man's homes all looked like mid-range hotel rooms. It is amazing, but I have the auction catalog from what passed for his estate. Frighteningly bad, and not in the kitschy way that could redeem it! Simply boring & bland. If he had a Chambers, I could only see him with an electric drop-in stove top & maybe not even an oven.

Oh, Ginger I see with a Western Holly--the kind with the porthole door windows for the broiler & oven (I think those are from the 50's, but then again, early Ginger wouldn't have needed a stove for anything since she would have eaten out mostly, I imagine!). Definitely not a Chambers as they were never flashy.

--Danny

<font color="#FFFFFF"><font size="1">[ August 30, 2006 12:26 AM: Message edited by: tux_sf ]</font></font>

<font color="#FFFFFF" size="1">[ August 30, 2006 12:55 AM: Message edited by: tux_sf ]</font>

[spin321]

Tux, I agree with you about the subtle changes. mostly I'm just talking about the basic design, shape and lines of the stove. To me they all look just about the same from below any backsplash or cover that a model may or may not have. Most of the little things that are mentioned are small features that people either care about or don't, like the opening for the pilot light or the texture of the stove top itself. As far as "design" of the overall stove goes; sorry, I still just don't see it! But like I said before.....It's just my own opinion coming from my own very non critical eye!

[tux_sf]

Nachum-
Well. . .the body style of the A, B & C models is basically the same, at least from between the top & the legs.

The handles are quite different in some ways between each if you give them more than a passing glance, but these differences are somewhat subtle.

The A's pull outward. The B's & later twist clockwise. The thumb releases are flat topped on earlier models, the C's have that nice teardrop shape (although I like the way those look I don't quite understand why Ha says they are easier to use than the flat ones on my B--I think I need to get my hand on a C some time to try it & see).

The tops really do look different though--at least between the A & B versus the BZ & C. Outside of the griddles & t-well covers, of course, which look pretty much the same from the outside unless you have the 'ridge-less' griddle. And you have the little pilot opening on the BZ & C, as opposed to the hot spot in the A's & B's (well, I think they all end up being hot spots, but I imagine you can control it a bit better on the BZ & C). Finally, the ridges on the A & B top--which I believe were required by the manufacturing process at the time--but are actually quite practical in that they help protect most the surface of the top when you are moving heavy pots between burners.

Personally, I really love the different burner grates on the A's & B's--the different designs not only give the stove top a distinctive look, but they do effect the function of the burner.

The 'open center' grate really diffuses the heat to keep things from scorching even with the fire on high.

The 'finger grate' lets the heat through for fast cooking (great for the wok!).

Finally, the 'percolator grate,' well, for me it just looks cool. I'm afraid I've never used a percolator to make coffee. Drip, press, espresso. . .YES. . .boiling in a percolator. . .well, no thank you!

--Danny

[debgro]

I started watching for an ironrite when Ha mentioned one in 11-2005. The ironrite.com site was up then. It a shame it's gone it was a great reference!

[bluetantra]

For those of you interested in more Ironrite information, check out this great site:

[url="http://www.jitterbuzz.com"]http://www.jitterbuzz.com[/url]

Once you get through a really cool intro page, click on the "Collectables" button at the bottom of the page. There's a wealth of information about all sorts of retro appliances (including how they work as well as patent drawings!), furniture, fashions, ad nauseam, from the '40s. There's also a great deal of the site devoted to the swing dances of that era.