Mis-marked Pyrex bowl

General Pyrex Topics and Q&A
P_Keating
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 8:01 am

Mis-marked Pyrex bowl

Post by P_Keating » Sat Nov 10, 2018 7:55 am

Hi,

If anyone is there, I have a question. I am new to Pyrex and found a bowl recently. It is in the Butterprint pattern in the turquoise blue on white. Usually the farmer is the man is to the left (when you are looking at the bowl) and the lady is to the right. On this bowl the order is just the opposite. He is to the right and she is on the left. Does anyone know anything about this? Maybe it was just a manufacturing flaw. Just looking for answers.

Thanks much.

Doug D.
Site Admin
Posts: 320
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2015 1:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Mis-marked Pyrex bowl

Post by Doug D. » Sat Nov 10, 2018 3:57 pm

If a Cinderella 441, yes, there are known "reverse" examples. Not a flaw, per se, just a mis-made or mis-installed screen on a decoration line. A similar reverse exists on some 072 butter dishes, but is more unusual because that pattern is not symmetrical.

Related: http://www.pyrexcollector.com/unusual.php


P_Keating
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 8:01 am

Re: Mis-marked Pyrex bowl

Post by P_Keating » Sat Nov 10, 2018 6:10 pm

HI,

Thanks for your reply. I saw that on that page referring to the 441. No, this one is just a regular bowl like many you see. It is Number 3 and Model Number 14. The stamp on the bottom looks quite old. Not raised as high as many others I have held. I have yet come across one like it. I have searched everywhere as well to even find reference to one that was sold, but haven't had any luck. Thanks again.

P_Keating
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 8:01 am

Re: Mis-marked Pyrex bowl

Post by P_Keating » Sat Nov 10, 2018 6:13 pm

Ok, yes! like the top bowl of that set. I could not open the link you had sent. It froze up. That is the first one I have seen. But this is just a regular bowl. Not the Cinderella. I am trying to post a photo, but am not real certain how to do it on this site as I am new to it. That is not a real common thing to come across is it?

Doug D.
Site Admin
Posts: 320
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2015 1:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Mis-marked Pyrex bowl

Post by Doug D. » Sat Nov 10, 2018 6:55 pm

There is a section under the post composition window titled "Upload attachment". An image from your computer can be attached this way. The image must not be too large dimensionally or an error will result. 800x600 or smaller is best. Or you can just link to a photo if on a hosting site like imgur, flickr, etc.

P_Keating
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 8:01 am

Re: Mis-marked Pyrex bowl

Post by P_Keating » Sat Nov 10, 2018 7:20 pm

Here is a photo of the exact bowl on the right.



https://i.ebayimg.com/images/i/17361898 ... l140/p.jpg

Doug D.
Site Admin
Posts: 320
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2015 1:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Mis-marked Pyrex bowl

Post by Doug D. » Sat Nov 10, 2018 7:39 pm

Hard to tell from the photo if the reverse pattern one is a 402 or a 403. Which size is yours? And is the pattern reversed on both sides?

P_Keating
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 8:01 am

Re: Mis-marked Pyrex bowl

Post by P_Keating » Sat Nov 10, 2018 7:51 pm

No, it is a 403 which is stamped on the bottom. The pattern is the same on both sides.

P_Keating
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 8:01 am

Re: Mis-marked Pyrex bowl

Post by P_Keating » Sat Nov 10, 2018 8:06 pm

Oh, sorry, forgot you asked the size. It is a 2-1/2 quart size.

Doug D.
Site Admin
Posts: 320
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2015 1:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Mis-marked Pyrex bowl

Post by Doug D. » Sat Nov 10, 2018 8:13 pm

Apparently, it was possible, though not likely, for screens to be installed backwards. It would also mean, though, that potentially dozens or even hundreds of bowls could be produced before the error was caught, and that's assuming QC even considered it a problem. Definitely not unicorns, though. I haven't seen anything to date to indicate they are anything more than a curiosity value-wise. There's a 1957 ad showing a Cinderella set where all the bowls are reverse except for the small one. I can only assume the photo was flipped by the printer for compositional reasons.

Post Reply