Thread: Canned Goods

Cindi - HappyMamatoThree wrote:
>
> I was cleaning out the dark and cluttered shelved closet that is my pantry
> and as I started to put the cans back in I came to a realization that hadn't
> struck me before. Just when did they stop making cans stackable? I was
> expecting, as always, slightly convex tops, slightly concave bottoms that
> stack easily. Not what there was in my pantry though. Okay, how did I miss
> that? Maybe I just haven't had to stack cans often enough and this trend
> passed me by.

Convex tops? I've never seen that. If I did,
I'd be worried that the seal had failed and the
contents were expanding due to bacterial action.

Cindi - HappyMamatoThree wrote:
>
> I was cleaning out the dark and cluttered shelved closet that is my pantry
> and as I started to put the cans back in I came to a realization that hadn't
> struck me before. Just when did they stop making cans stackable? I was
> expecting, as always, slightly convex tops, slightly concave bottoms that
> stack easily. Not what there was in my pantry though. Okay, how did I miss
> that? Maybe I just haven't had to stack cans often enough and this trend
> passed me by.

Convex tops? I've never seen that. If I did,
I'd be worried that the seal had failed and the
contents were expanding due to bacterial action.

On May 9, 4:06�pm, "Cindi - HappyMamatoThree"
<lonnicusuoTAKEME...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I was cleaning out the dark and cluttered shelved closet that is my pantry
> and as I started to put the cans back in I came to a realization that hadn't
> struck me before. Just when did they stop making cans stackable? I was
> expecting, as always, slightly convex tops, slightly concave bottoms that
> stack easily. Not what there was in my pantry though. Okay, how did I miss
> that? Maybe I just haven't had to stack cans often enough and this trend
> passed me by.
>
> When did the can industry decide that they couldn't be stacked?

Stackable cans (the drawn two piece type - no welded bottom) is a
relatively new innovation... you've been sleeping. Now more and more
cans are being made with a pull top so no can opener is needed.

http://www.cancentral.com/howmade.cfm

On May 9, 4:06�pm, "Cindi - HappyMamatoThree"
<lonnicusuoTAKEME...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I was cleaning out the dark and cluttered shelved closet that is my pantry
> and as I started to put the cans back in I came to a realization that hadn't
> struck me before. Just when did they stop making cans stackable? I was
> expecting, as always, slightly convex tops, slightly concave bottoms that
> stack easily. Not what there was in my pantry though. Okay, how did I miss
> that? Maybe I just haven't had to stack cans often enough and this trend
> passed me by.
>
> When did the can industry decide that they couldn't be stacked?

Stackable cans (the drawn two piece type - no welded bottom) is a
relatively new innovation... you've been sleeping. Now more and more
cans are being made with a pull top so no can opener is needed.

http://www.cancentral.com/howmade.cfm

Mark Thorson wrote:

> Cindi - HappyMamatoThree wrote:
>>
>> I was cleaning out the dark and cluttered shelved closet that is my pantry
>> and as I started to put the cans back in I came to a realization that hadn't
>> struck me before. Just when did they stop making cans stackable? I was
>> expecting, as always, slightly convex tops, slightly concave bottoms that
>> stack easily. Not what there was in my pantry though. Okay, how did I miss
>> that? Maybe I just haven't had to stack cans often enough and this trend
>> passed me by.
>
> Convex tops? I've never seen that. If I did,
> I'd be worried that the seal had failed and the
> contents were expanding due to bacterial action.

If we can, rather consider cans where the bottom edge has a slightly
smaller diameter than the lip on the top, so that they stack (the *shape*
of the top and bottom surfaces aside), I have modern cans that stack.
Some do; some don't.

--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
NEW --> Now evaluating a GG-free news feed: http://usenet4all.se

Mark Thorson wrote:

> Cindi - HappyMamatoThree wrote:
>>
>> I was cleaning out the dark and cluttered shelved closet that is my pantry
>> and as I started to put the cans back in I came to a realization that hadn't
>> struck me before. Just when did they stop making cans stackable? I was
>> expecting, as always, slightly convex tops, slightly concave bottoms that
>> stack easily. Not what there was in my pantry though. Okay, how did I miss
>> that? Maybe I just haven't had to stack cans often enough and this trend
>> passed me by.
>
> Convex tops? I've never seen that. If I did,
> I'd be worried that the seal had failed and the
> contents were expanding due to bacterial action.

If we can, rather consider cans where the bottom edge has a slightly
smaller diameter than the lip on the top, so that they stack (the *shape*
of the top and bottom surfaces aside), I have modern cans that stack.
Some do; some don't.

--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
NEW --> Now evaluating a GG-free news feed: http://usenet4all.se

Cindi - HappyMamatoThree wrote:
> I was cleaning out the dark and cluttered shelved closet that is my pantry
> and as I started to put the cans back in I came to a realization that hadn't
> struck me before. Just when did they stop making cans stackable? I was
> expecting, as always, slightly convex tops, slightly concave bottoms that
> stack easily. Not what there was in my pantry though. Okay, how did I miss
> that? Maybe I just haven't had to stack cans often enough and this trend
> passed me by.
>
> When did the can industry decide that they couldn't be stacked?
>
> Cindi
>
>
Usually they make the bottom rim diameter smaller or use drawn cans that
don't have a bottom rim to make cans stackable. I think a fair amount of
the canned items we buy are made that way.

Cindi - HappyMamatoThree wrote:
> I was cleaning out the dark and cluttered shelved closet that is my pantry
> and as I started to put the cans back in I came to a realization that hadn't
> struck me before. Just when did they stop making cans stackable? I was
> expecting, as always, slightly convex tops, slightly concave bottoms that
> stack easily. Not what there was in my pantry though. Okay, how did I miss
> that? Maybe I just haven't had to stack cans often enough and this trend
> passed me by.
>
> When did the can industry decide that they couldn't be stacked?
>
> Cindi
>
>
Usually they make the bottom rim diameter smaller or use drawn cans that
don't have a bottom rim to make cans stackable. I think a fair amount of
the canned items we buy are made that way.

George wrote:

> Cindi - HappyMamatoThree wrote:

> > When did the can industry decide that they couldn't be stacked?

> Usually they make the bottom rim diameter smaller or use drawn cans
> that don't have a bottom rim to make cans stackable. I think a fair
> amount of the canned items we buy are made that way.

It's a mix for me. The stackability is nice, but you lose the ability
to open them from the bottom. Some very thick things it's easier to get
the contents out if you partially open the bottom. Also, you open both
ends of tuna cans to make molds and such.



Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

George wrote:

> Cindi - HappyMamatoThree wrote:

> > When did the can industry decide that they couldn't be stacked?

> Usually they make the bottom rim diameter smaller or use drawn cans
> that don't have a bottom rim to make cans stackable. I think a fair
> amount of the canned items we buy are made that way.

It's a mix for me. The stackability is nice, but you lose the ability
to open them from the bottom. Some very thick things it's easier to get
the contents out if you partially open the bottom. Also, you open both
ends of tuna cans to make molds and such.



Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

"Mark Thorson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]..
> Cindi - HappyMamatoThree wrote:
>>
>> I was cleaning out the dark and cluttered shelved closet that is my
>> pantry
>> and as I started to put the cans back in I came to a realization that
>> hadn't
>> struck me before. Just when did they stop making cans stackable? I was
>> expecting, as always, slightly convex tops, slightly concave bottoms that
>> stack easily. Not what there was in my pantry though. Okay, how did I
>> miss
>> that? Maybe I just haven't had to stack cans often enough and this trend
>> passed me by.
>
> Convex tops? I've never seen that. If I did,
> I'd be worried that the seal had failed and the
> contents were expanding due to bacterial action.

Perhaps my terminology was incorrect. The top has a slight lip and the
bottom has no lip and is slightly smaller so that it fits into the top of
the next can.

I am sorry I incorrectly used the previous terms.

Cindi

"Mark Thorson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]..
> Cindi - HappyMamatoThree wrote:
>>
>> I was cleaning out the dark and cluttered shelved closet that is my
>> pantry
>> and as I started to put the cans back in I came to a realization that
>> hadn't
>> struck me before. Just when did they stop making cans stackable? I was
>> expecting, as always, slightly convex tops, slightly concave bottoms that
>> stack easily. Not what there was in my pantry though. Okay, how did I
>> miss
>> that? Maybe I just haven't had to stack cans often enough and this trend
>> passed me by.
>
> Convex tops? I've never seen that. If I did,
> I'd be worried that the seal had failed and the
> contents were expanding due to bacterial action.

Perhaps my terminology was incorrect. The top has a slight lip and the
bottom has no lip and is slightly smaller so that it fits into the top of
the next can.

I am sorry I incorrectly used the previous terms.

Cindi

"Blinky the Shark" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected] et...
> Mark Thorson wrote:
>
>> Cindi - HappyMamatoThree wrote:
>>>
>>> I was cleaning out the dark and cluttered shelved closet that is my
>>> pantry
>>> and as I started to put the cans back in I came to a realization that
>>> hadn't
>>> struck me before. Just when did they stop making cans stackable? I was
>>> expecting, as always, slightly convex tops, slightly concave bottoms
>>> that
>>> stack easily. Not what there was in my pantry though. Okay, how did I
>>> miss
>>> that? Maybe I just haven't had to stack cans often enough and this trend
>>> passed me by.
>>
>> Convex tops? I've never seen that. If I did,
>> I'd be worried that the seal had failed and the
>> contents were expanding due to bacterial action.
>
> If we can, rather consider cans where the bottom edge has a slightly
> smaller diameter than the lip on the top, so that they stack (the *shape*
> of the top and bottom surfaces aside), I have modern cans that stack.
> Some do; some don't.

Paying particular attention when I hit the grocery store today, most of what
I needed didn't stack easily. I really couldn't tell any rhyme nor reason
for the stackability.

Cindi

>
> --
> Blinky
> Killing all posts from Google Groups
> The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
> NEW --> Now evaluating a GG-free news feed: http://usenet4all.se
>

"Blinky the Shark" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected] et...
> Mark Thorson wrote:
>
>> Cindi - HappyMamatoThree wrote:
>>>
>>> I was cleaning out the dark and cluttered shelved closet that is my
>>> pantry
>>> and as I started to put the cans back in I came to a realization that
>>> hadn't
>>> struck me before. Just when did they stop making cans stackable? I was
>>> expecting, as always, slightly convex tops, slightly concave bottoms
>>> that
>>> stack easily. Not what there was in my pantry though. Okay, how did I
>>> miss
>>> that? Maybe I just haven't had to stack cans often enough and this trend
>>> passed me by.
>>
>> Convex tops? I've never seen that. If I did,
>> I'd be worried that the seal had failed and the
>> contents were expanding due to bacterial action.
>
> If we can, rather consider cans where the bottom edge has a slightly
> smaller diameter than the lip on the top, so that they stack (the *shape*
> of the top and bottom surfaces aside), I have modern cans that stack.
> Some do; some don't.

Paying particular attention when I hit the grocery store today, most of what
I needed didn't stack easily. I really couldn't tell any rhyme nor reason
for the stackability.

Cindi

>
> --
> Blinky
> Killing all posts from Google Groups
> The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
> NEW --> Now evaluating a GG-free news feed: http://usenet4all.se
>

"Cindi - HappyMamatoThree" <[email protected]> wrote

> Perhaps my terminology was incorrect. The top has a slight lip and the
> bottom has no lip and is slightly smaller so that it fits into the top of
> the next can.

I understood you. Like the way tuna cans stack, they are made
to fit together neatly.

nancy

"Cindi - HappyMamatoThree" <[email protected]> wrote

> Perhaps my terminology was incorrect. The top has a slight lip and the
> bottom has no lip and is slightly smaller so that it fits into the top of
> the next can.

I understood you. Like the way tuna cans stack, they are made
to fit together neatly.

nancy

On Fri 09 May 2008 08:16:32p, Cindi - HappyMamatoThree told us...

>
> "Mark Thorson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]..
>> Cindi - HappyMamatoThree wrote:
>>>
>>> I was cleaning out the dark and cluttered shelved closet that is my
>>> pantry and as I started to put the cans back in I came to a realization
>>> that hadn't struck me before. Just when did they stop making cans
>>> stackable? I was expecting, as always, slightly convex tops, slightly
>>> concave bottoms that stack easily. Not what there was in my pantry
>>> though. Okay, how did I miss that? Maybe I just haven't had to stack
>>> cans often enough and this trend passed me by.
>>
>> Convex tops? I've never seen that. If I did,
>> I'd be worried that the seal had failed and the contents were expanding
>> due to bacterial action.
>
> Perhaps my terminology was incorrect. The top has a slight lip and the
> bottom has no lip and is slightly smaller so that it fits into the top
of
> the next can.
>
> I am sorry I incorrectly used the previous terms.
>
> Cindi
>
>

Actually, that can design is considerably newer than the equal size rimmed
top and bottom cans, although it has been around for quite a while. If you
notice, that design seems to be more common for some foods than for others.
Don't know why. They still make both designs.

--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Friday, 05(V)/09(IX)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
Countdown till Memorial Day
2wks 2dys 3hrs 35mins
-------------------------------------------
I turn around \ (it's fear) \ I turn
around again\ (it's love) (Laurie Anderson)
-------------------------------------------

On Fri 09 May 2008 08:16:32p, Cindi - HappyMamatoThree told us...

>
> "Mark Thorson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]..
>> Cindi - HappyMamatoThree wrote:
>>>
>>> I was cleaning out the dark and cluttered shelved closet that is my
>>> pantry and as I started to put the cans back in I came to a realization
>>> that hadn't struck me before. Just when did they stop making cans
>>> stackable? I was expecting, as always, slightly convex tops, slightly
>>> concave bottoms that stack easily. Not what there was in my pantry
>>> though. Okay, how did I miss that? Maybe I just haven't had to stack
>>> cans often enough and this trend passed me by.
>>
>> Convex tops? I've never seen that. If I did,
>> I'd be worried that the seal had failed and the contents were expanding
>> due to bacterial action.
>
> Perhaps my terminology was incorrect. The top has a slight lip and the
> bottom has no lip and is slightly smaller so that it fits into the top
of
> the next can.
>
> I am sorry I incorrectly used the previous terms.
>
> Cindi
>
>

Actually, that can design is considerably newer than the equal size rimmed
top and bottom cans, although it has been around for quite a while. If you
notice, that design seems to be more common for some foods than for others.
Don't know why. They still make both designs.

--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Friday, 05(V)/09(IX)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
Countdown till Memorial Day
2wks 2dys 3hrs 35mins
-------------------------------------------
I turn around \ (it's fear) \ I turn
around again\ (it's love) (Laurie Anderson)
-------------------------------------------

"Cindi - HappyMamatoThree" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:ns8Vj.3298$[email protected] t...
>
> "Mark Thorson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]..
>> Cindi - HappyMamatoThree wrote:
>>>
>>> I was cleaning out the dark and cluttered shelved closet that is my
>>> pantry
>>> and as I started to put the cans back in I came to a realization that
>>> hadn't
>>> struck me before. Just when did they stop making cans stackable? I was
>>> expecting, as always, slightly convex tops, slightly concave bottoms
>>> that
>>> stack easily. Not what there was in my pantry though. Okay, how did I
>>> miss
>>> that? Maybe I just haven't had to stack cans often enough and this trend
>>> passed me by.
>>
>> Convex tops? I've never seen that. If I did,
>> I'd be worried that the seal had failed and the
>> contents were expanding due to bacterial action.
>
> Perhaps my terminology was incorrect. The top has a slight lip and the
> bottom has no lip and is slightly smaller so that it fits into the top of
> the next can.
>
> I am sorry I incorrectly used the previous terms.
>
Oh and I suppose you expect this lame little apology to spare you the
BEATING, do you?