Sort of. An e-mail from Del Monte says:

"A number 2 can is 20 ounces or 2 1/2 cups. We don't have information on a
number 4 can."

Translation: There's nobody left in their office old enough to know what a
#4 can is.

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
> Sort of. An e-mail from Del Monte says:
>
> "A number 2 can is 20 ounces or 2 1/2 cups. We don't have
> information on a number 4 can."
>
> Translation: There's nobody left in their office old enough to know
> what a #4 can is.

LOL! That's probably true. They're all retired or dead by now. Don't know
anyone who writes recipes with those specifications these days. My
grandparents used to.

Jill

On Mar 1, 12:42�pm, "jmcquown" > wrote:
> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
> > Sort of. An e-mail from Del Monte says:
>
> > "A number 2 can is 20 ounces or 2 1/2 cups. *We don't have
> > information on a number 4 can."
>
> > Translation: There's nobody left in their office old enough to know
> > what a #4 can is.
>
> LOL! *That's probably true. *They're all retired or dead by now. *Don't know
> anyone who writes recipes with those specifications these days. *My
> grandparents used to.
>
> Jill
-------------------
Can Sizes
8 ounces 8 ounces 1 cup
Picnic 10-1/2 to 12 ounces 1-1/4 cups
12 ounces vacuum 12 ounces 1-1/2 cups
#1 11 ounces 1-1/3 cup
#1 tall 16 ounces 2 cups
#1 square 16 ounces 2 cups
#2 1 pound 4 ounces or
1 pint 2 fluid ounces 2-1/2 cups
#2-1/2 1 pound 13 ounces 3-1/2 cups
#2-1/2 square 31 ounces scant 4 cups
#3 4 cups
#3 squat 2-3/4 cups
#5 7-1/3 cups
#10 12 cups
#300 14 to 16 ounces 1-3/4 cups
#303 16 to 17 ounces 2 cups
Baby food jar 3-1/2 to 8 ounces depends on size
Condensed milk 15 ounces 1-1/3 cups
Evaporated milk 6 ounces 2/3 cup
Evaporated milk 14-1/2 ounces 1-2/3 cups
Frozen juice concentrate 6 ounces 3/4 cup

Here's some more information, just to confuse everybody .
I can't imagine they expect us to remember all this while we're
strolling down the aisle in the supermarket. I just use the "by guess
and by golly" method. Works for me.
Cheers, Nancree

On Mar 1, 3:20 pm, "nancree" > wrote:
> > > Sort of. An e-mail from Del Monte says:
>
> > > "A number 2 can is 20 ounces or 2 1/2 cups. ?We don't have
> > > information on a number 4 can."
>
> > > Translation: There's nobody left in their office old enough to know
> > > what a #4 can is.
>
> Can Sizes
> 8 ounces 8 ounces 1 cup
> Picnic 10-1/2 to 12 ounces 1-1/4 cups
> 12 ounces vacuum 12 ounces 1-1/2 cups
> #1 11 ounces 1-1/3 cup
> #1 tall 16 ounces 2 cups
> #1 square 16 ounces 2 cups
> #2 1 pound 4 ounces or
> 1 pint 2 fluid ounces 2-1/2 cups
> #2-1/2 1 pound 13 ounces 3-1/2 cups
> #2-1/2 square 31 ounces scant 4 cups
> #3 4 cups
> #3 squat 2-3/4 cups
> #5 7-1/3 cups
> #10 12 cups
> #300 14 to 16 ounces 1-3/4 cups
> #303 16 to 17 ounces 2 cups
> Baby food jar 3-1/2 to 8 ounces depends on size
> Condensed milk 15 ounces 1-1/3 cups
> Evaporated milk 6 ounces 2/3 cup
> Evaporated milk 14-1/2 ounces 1-2/3 cups
> Frozen juice concentrate 6 ounces 3/4 cup

Heh, interesting that the chart jumps from #3 to #5 sized cans. I
guess we may never know about the #4 cans!

PVC wrote on 1 Mar 2007 13:27:51 -0800:

P> On Mar 1, 3:20 pm, "nancree" > wrote:
??>>>> Sort of. An e-mail from Del Monte says:
??>>
??>>>> "A number 2 can is 20 ounces or 2 1/2 cups. ?We don't
??>>>> have information on a number 4 can."
??>>
??>>>> Translation: There's nobody left in their office old
enough to know
??>>>> what a #4 can is.
??>>
??>> Can Sizes
??>> 8 ounces 8 ounces 1 cup

It does seem complicated but wouldn't the best approach be to
modify the recipes to indicate the number of floz. That value is
certainly marked on the cans in the markets.

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
> Sort of. An e-mail from Del Monte says:
>
> "A number 2 can is 20 ounces or 2 1/2 cups. We don't have information on a
> number 4 can."
>
> Translation: There's nobody left in their office old enough to know what a
> #4 can is.
>
>
My old booklets from the American Can Company also skip number
4. Odd. So, this is Del Monte? If only I was organized...

--
Jean B.

"Jean B." > wrote in message
...
> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>> Sort of. An e-mail from Del Monte says:
>>
>> "A number 2 can is 20 ounces or 2 1/2 cups. We don't have information on
>> a number 4 can."
>>
>> Translation: There's nobody left in their office old enough to know what
>> a #4 can is.
> My old booklets from the American Can Company also skip number 4. Odd.
> So, this is Del Monte? If only I was organized...
>
> --
> Jean B.

I asked my dad a few minutes ago. He's 85, been in the grocery biz since the
mid 1950s. He's never heard of it, either, and he remembers every damned
thing.

jmcquown wrote:
> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>> Sort of. An e-mail from Del Monte says:
>>
>> "A number 2 can is 20 ounces or 2 1/2 cups. We don't have
>> information on a number 4 can."
>>
>> Translation: There's nobody left in their office old enough to know
>> what a #4 can is.
>
> LOL! That's probably true. They're all retired or dead by now. Don't know
> anyone who writes recipes with those specifications these days. My
> grandparents used to.

Anyone else but me remember "B"-sized batteries?


--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

Blinky the Shark wrote:
>
> jmcquown wrote:
> > JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
> >> Sort of. An e-mail from Del Monte says:
> >>
> >> "A number 2 can is 20 ounces or 2 1/2 cups. We don't have
> >> information on a number 4 can."
> >>
> >> Translation: There's nobody left in their office old enough to know
> >> what a #4 can is.
> >
> > LOL! That's probably true. They're all retired or dead by now. Don't know
> > anyone who writes recipes with those specifications these days. My
> > grandparents used to.
>
> Anyone else but me remember "B"-sized batteries?
>
> --
> Blinky RLU 297263
> Killing all posts from Google Groups
> The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

There are quite a few obscure old battery types out there that are
rarely seen. Believe it or not, many of them are still available from
"real" battery distributors too.

Pete C.

Pete C. wrote:
> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>>
>> jmcquown wrote:
>> > JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>> >> Sort of. An e-mail from Del Monte says:
>> >>
>> >> "A number 2 can is 20 ounces or 2 1/2 cups. We don't have
>> >> information on a number 4 can."
>> >>
>> >> Translation: There's nobody left in their office old enough to know
>> >> what a #4 can is.
>> >
>> > LOL! That's probably true. They're all retired or dead by now. Don't know
>> > anyone who writes recipes with those specifications these days. My
>> > grandparents used to.
>>
>> Anyone else but me remember "B"-sized batteries?
>>
>> --
>> Blinky RLU 297263
>> Killing all posts from Google Groups
>> The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
>
> There are quite a few obscure old battery types out there that are
> rarely seen. Believe it or not, many of them are still available from
> "real" battery distributors too.

The guys who do antique radios probably drive (if not at breathtaking
speeds) that market. That's what I know them from; I'm not 100 years
old, but I was a young electronics geek in the 1950s when some of that
gear was still to be found in the wild.


--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
> "Jean B." > wrote in message
> ...
>> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>>> Sort of. An e-mail from Del Monte says:
>>>
>>> "A number 2 can is 20 ounces or 2 1/2 cups. We don't have information on
>>> a number 4 can."
>>>
>>> Translation: There's nobody left in their office old enough to know what
>>> a #4 can is.
>> My old booklets from the American Can Company also skip number 4. Odd.
>> So, this is Del Monte? If only I was organized...
>>
>> --
>> Jean B.
>
> I asked my dad a few minutes ago. He's 85, been in the grocery biz since the
> mid 1950s. He's never heard of it, either, and he remembers every damned
> thing.
>
>
Very odd! I'll try to keep this question in my one remaining
brain cell in case I run across any old Del Monte booklets.

--
Jean B.

Jean wrote on Thu, 01 Mar 2007 17:35:13 -0500:

JB> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
??>> Sort of. An e-mail from Del Monte says:
??>>
??>> "A number 2 can is 20 ounces or 2 1/2 cups. We don't have
??>> information on a number 4 can."
??>>
??>> Translation: There's nobody left in their office old
enough to know
??>> what a #4 can is.
??>>
JB> My old booklets from the American Can Company also skip
JB> number 4. Odd. So, this is Del Monte? If only I was
JB> organized...

A Google search did not turn up any information for me on the
No. 4 size can. I suppose it's logical that there must have been
such a size once but I wonder how long ago? The lists of can
sizes seem to have no rationale whatsover tho' that's often the
case for packaging....look at the way Kellogg plays with cereal
contents.

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not

On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 11:23:41 -0500, "James Silverton"
<not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not> wrote:

> Jean wrote on Thu, 01 Mar 2007 17:35:13 -0500:
>
> JB> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
> ??>> Sort of. An e-mail from Del Monte says:
> ??>>
> ??>> "A number 2 can is 20 ounces or 2 1/2 cups. We don't have
> ??>> information on a number 4 can."
> ??>>
> ??>> Translation: There's nobody left in their office old
>enough to know
> ??>> what a #4 can is.
> ??>>
> JB> My old booklets from the American Can Company also skip
> JB> number 4. Odd. So, this is Del Monte? If only I was
> JB> organized...
>
> A Google search did not turn up any information for me on the
>No. 4 size can. I suppose it's logical that there must have been
>such a size once but I wonder how long ago? The lists of can
>sizes seem to have no rationale whatsover tho' that's often the
>case for packaging....look at the way Kellogg plays with cereal
>contents.


That is the problem with the internet - nothing is permanent. I seem to
remember there being a #4 but it was close in capacity to one of the #3
cans. Which I assume meant you could use a #3 canning line and thus
reduce setup to change over, thus causing it to fade away.

"Robert Klute" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 11:23:41 -0500, "James Silverton"
> <not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not> wrote:
>
>> Jean wrote on Thu, 01 Mar 2007 17:35:13 -0500:
>>
>> JB> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>> ??>> Sort of. An e-mail from Del Monte says:
>> ??>>
>> ??>> "A number 2 can is 20 ounces or 2 1/2 cups. We don't have
>> ??>> information on a number 4 can."
>> ??>>
>> ??>> Translation: There's nobody left in their office old
>>enough to know
>> ??>> what a #4 can is.
>> ??>>
>> JB> My old booklets from the American Can Company also skip
>> JB> number 4. Odd. So, this is Del Monte? If only I was
>> JB> organized...
>>
>> A Google search did not turn up any information for me on the
>>No. 4 size can. I suppose it's logical that there must have been
>>such a size once but I wonder how long ago? The lists of can
>>sizes seem to have no rationale whatsover tho' that's often the
>>case for packaging....look at the way Kellogg plays with cereal
>>contents.
>
>
> That is the problem with the internet - nothing is permanent. I seem to
> remember there being a #4 but it was close in capacity to one of the #3
> cans. Which I assume meant you could use a #3 canning line and thus
> reduce setup to change over, thus causing it to fade away.


This is becoming an obsession. I just emailed Alcoa. If they can't provide
an answer, I give up.

On Mar 1, 5:35 pm, "Jean B." > wrote:
> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
> > Sort of. An e-mail from Del Monte says:
>
> > "A number 2 can is 20 ounces or 2 1/2 cups. We don't have information on a
> > number 4 can."
>
> > Translation: There's nobody left in their office old enough to know what a
> > #4 can is.
>
> My old booklets from the American Can Company also skip number
> 4. Odd. So, this is Del Monte? If only I was organized...
>
> --
> Jean B.

In Japanese, the word for the number 4 is the same as the word for
death. Obviously, sometime in the first three decades of the last
century someone wanted to market cans in Japan and didn't want them to
think they were selling cans of death.

Greg Zywicki

And especially not #4 cans of gerber baby food.

James Silverton wrote:
> Jean wrote on Thu, 01 Mar 2007 17:35:13 -0500:
>
> JB> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
> ??>> Sort of. An e-mail from Del Monte says:
> ??>>
> ??>> "A number 2 can is 20 ounces or 2 1/2 cups. We don't have
> ??>> information on a number 4 can."
> ??>>
> ??>> Translation: There's nobody left in their office old enough to know
> ??>> what a #4 can is.
> ??>>
> JB> My old booklets from the American Can Company also skip
> JB> number 4. Odd. So, this is Del Monte? If only I was
> JB> organized...
>
> A Google search did not turn up any information for me on the No. 4 size
> can. I suppose it's logical that there must have been such a size once
> but I wonder how long ago? The lists of can sizes seem to have no
> rationale whatsover tho' that's often the case for packaging....look at
> the way Kellogg plays with cereal contents.
>
> James Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland
>
> E-mail, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not

In the interim, I looked in another booklet printed by a can
manufacturer, with the same result. Odd.

--
Jean B.

Jean B. wrote:
> James Silverton wrote:
>> Jean wrote on Thu, 01 Mar 2007 17:35:13 -0500:
>>
>> JB> JoeSpareBedroom wrote: ??>> Sort of. An e-mail from Del Monte
>> says: ??>> ??>> "A number 2 can is 20 ounces or 2 1/2 cups. We don't
>> have ??>> information on a number 4 can." ??>> ??>> Translation:
>> There's nobody left in their office old enough to know ??>> what a #4
>> can is. ??>> JB> My old booklets from the American Can Company also
>> skip JB> number 4. Odd. So, this is Del Monte? If only I was JB>
>> organized...
>>
>> A Google search did not turn up any information for me on the No. 4
>> size can. I suppose it's logical that there must have been such a
>> size once but I wonder how long ago? The lists of can sizes seem to
>> have no rationale whatsover tho' that's often the case for
>> packaging....look at the way Kellogg plays with cereal contents.
>>
>> James Silverton
>> Potomac, Maryland
>>
>> E-mail, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not
>
> In the interim, I looked in another booklet printed by a can
> manufacturer, with the same result. Odd.

As a regular over at alt.fan.cecil-adams (if you're not familiar with
Uncle Cecil, see http://www.straightdope.com/index.html), I can't let
this go on. I must've looked at at least two dozen tables on can
sizes, when this came up last week or so, myself. I emailed Unca
Cecil on this; I'll report back here if he handles it.


--
Blinky