News:

"The phone is a remarkably complex, simple device,
and very rarely ever needs repairs, once you fix them." - Dan/Panther

Main Menu

Look what I found for $3

Started by persido, October 25, 2014, 10:55:12 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

poplar1

Quote from: unbeldi on October 26, 2014, 01:35:34 PM
Another inconsistency of that table relates to the two-tone sets, as it states that parts should be ordered by the numbers of the first chart. A bit confusing because it doesn't state that handset were in fact black.  This confusion was cleared up in an AT&T addendum in March 54 (C30.011 AD i1 5403--Colored Station Sets).



The fact that the handsets and cords are black on two-tone sets is explained in paragraph 3.03 (b) of Issue 6:

           Sets in the two-tone group have standard black hand-
           sets, standard black dial or apparatus blanks with
           housings only in gray, red, yellow and blue.


"Yellow and blue" should read "ivory and green." This mistake was corrected in later specs.
"C'est pas une restauration, c'est une rénovation."--François Martin.

JimH

Here's my red 500 dated 6/54 with gray cords and chrome number retainer.
Jim H.

unbeldi

Quote from: poplar1 on October 26, 2014, 01:53:55 PM
Quote from: unbeldi on October 26, 2014, 01:35:34 PM
Another inconsistency of that table relates to the two-tone sets, as it states that parts should be ordered by the numbers of the first chart. A bit confusing because it doesn't state that handset were in fact black.  This confusion was cleared up in an AT&T addendum in March 54 (C30.011 AD i1 5403--Colored Station Sets).



The fact that the handsets and cords are black on two-tone sets is explained in paragraph 3.03 (b) of Issue 6:

           Sets in the two-tone group have standard black hand-
           sets, standard black dial or apparatus blanks with
           housings only in gray, red, yellow and blue.


"Yellow and blue" should read "ivory and green." This mistake was corrected in later specs.

That is the Addendum I quoted, which replaced the entire paragraph.

The whole BSP appears to be premature, in fact, when it comes to colored 500s. Some collectors claim that only the first four colors were available in 1953.  I would say there were none.

Dennis Markham

#33
Jim, you beat me to the punch but I'm going to go ahead and post it anyway.  The 1st photo is out of the box....then after I cleaned it up a bit.

This set is dated 6-16-1954.  All parts are dated similarly throughout, including the strain relief on both cords.  I believe this to be an original, early full color set, like yours.  It came from eBay and the seller didn't appear to be a "phone person" meaning they sold various items.  That leads me to reinforce my belief that the phone remained original all these years.

Unbeldi, thanks for posting that BSP.  I will sticky this topic although it may be a good one to split and start a new topic or just add to previous threads about "full color" (black dial) sets and the "two-tones" with the Black, G1 handsets.

~Dennis

paul-f

#34
Quote from: unbeldi on October 26, 2014, 12:31:01 PM
It should probably also be noted that the BSP in which this table was published, is dated December 1953, when as I believe no colored 500-set were mass-produced or issued yet. As unreliable as historical timelines may be, the AT&T Events in Telephone History states that colored 500-set production was started June 1, 1954.

It's a challenge to make sense of the info from the Bell System.  It was a huge company, with different parts publishing info for different purposes.

As we have previously discussed, "Events..." was published by the AT&T Public Relations Department (later Public Relations and Employee Infotmation Department).  Dates are generally based on the dates on internal AT&T press releases and were compiled by historians and archivists who couldn't be expected to understand the nuances of all the material they were collecting and reporting. 

This is one of several errors we have proven by observation to be incorrect.  We have seen many color sets with 1953 dates.

BSPs, catalogs, ads and marketing literature are other good sources of dates, but each has its problems and biases, based on the intended audience and publication production timeframes.

As noted in this topic, we have also noted factual errors in documents, including BSPs, and seen "photos" of products in BSPs that turn out to have been field trial sets -- not the final production set.

Just because it's in print, doesn't make it true.

- - - - -
From Events in Telecommunication History, 1974
  This chronological record of important dates in the history of the telephone was compiled over a period of years and was first published in 1958.
  "Events in Telephone History" is intended as a reference work, primarily for Bell System public relations people, and for telephone employees who frequently receive queries from the public. The items shown are brief, non-technical and include answers to many frequently asked questions. Reference material is listed for many of the items.

In a work of this size, omissions are inevitable. And while every effort was made to keep the material as accurate as possible, errors in source material may cause some date conflicts.


If errors or important omissions are detected, please notify the Historian, A.T.&T. Co., 195 Broadway, New York, New York 10007, so that the changes may be included in any future revision of this booklet.
Visit: paul-f.com         WE  500  Design_Line

.

unbeldi

#35
Nobody suggested the timeline it is the ultimate truth.
But to suggest that this work is any more unreliable as anything else, because it warns of uncertainties, is not credible either.
BSPs were written in a separate department also, by BSP writers, not by the production line managers.

paul-f

Nobody suggested the work is more unreliable because of the warning or that we didn't know of errors before.

The post is simply a reminder that no written material should be taken as fact without some form of sanity check.  There are enough inconsistencies that all of them can't be true.

Further, even if true on the publication date, info was subject to change as products and procedures were modified.
Visit: paul-f.com         WE  500  Design_Line

.

jsowers

#37
This is a very interesting discussion.

Here's something else you may like to see. This 500 set belongs to a friend of mine and it has some parts with 1953 dates. The phone base, ringer and dial are from 4/54, but the housing is from 11-3-53. It also has the chrome card holder ring. The caps are both dated two different dates, 12-53 and 1-54. The handset looks to be 11-53 too. I counted it as a 1954 phone on the red survey, in case anyone is interested.

Do you think this means they started making plastics in late 1953 and assembled the phones sometime in 1954? I haven't seen one dated 1953 on the base--yet.
Jonathan

unbeldi

#38
Quote from: jsowers on October 26, 2014, 04:52:40 PM
This is a very interesting discussion.

Here's something else you may like to see. This 500 set belongs to a friend of mine and it has some parts with 1953 dates. The phone base, ringer and dial are from 4/54, but the housing is from 11-3-53. It also has the chrome card holder ring. The caps are both dated two different dates, 12-53 and 1-54. The handset looks to be 11-53 too. I counted it as a 1954 phone on the red survey, in case anyone is interested.

Do you think this means they started making plastics in late 1953 and assembled the phones sometime in 1954? I haven't seen one dated 1953 on the base--yet.
Congratulations, this is the kind of evidence we need: A date stamp on a housing.
The plastic pieces are really the only parts that can prove anything for this subject. Since the BSP is dated December 1953, they probably just started to manufacture stock parts. All other parts were already in steady production so if your set had been supposed to be installed in 1953, the other parts were already available. Perhaps not the cords. But clearly there was a 6-months delay in actually assembling your telephone.
Gray cords were also sourced from outside vendors with the number KS-16318, perhaps others as well.

Is the cord original?
Is the dial a 7D-3 or a 7A?

Davids survey was intended to find out which year WECo actually manufactured red sets, so your set would have qualified for both years, I think.

The only sets that qualify to prove actual availability of colored sets in 1953 must have all dates matching in 1953, obviously. And the long delay of assembling your phone, in addition of the double-dating of the handset caps all speak for first installations in 1954, but we need more samples.

unbeldi

Your example with the double-dated caps also shows that the date stamps on piece parts did NOT necessarily indicate the manufacturing date, but rather some kind of inventory date, perhaps after they had passed QA inspection. It was a different manufacturing stage that put the stamps on the parts, and in this case a batch of handset caps was put in queue again, perhaps by mistake or some other technical reason.

jsowers

Quote from: unbeldi on October 26, 2014, 05:09:35 PM
All other parts were already in steady production so if your set had been supposed to be installed in 1953, the other parts were already available. Perhaps not the cords. But clearly there was a 6-months delay in actually assembling your telephone.
Gray cords were also sourced from outside vendors with the number KS-16318, perhaps others as well.

Is the cord original?
Is the dial a 7D-3 or a 7A?

The cords both look original and the handset cord is black instead of dark gray. I think the mounting cord is dark gray. Both have 54 dates. Here are pictures of those and the 7D-3 dial and the entire phone. What you said about cords could be true, that maybe the handset cords weren't ready yet because they were outsourced, or it could just be the installer only had black coil cords and not dark gray. They hadn't installed dark gray cords on anything else before this, so they were a new thing.

I'm glad this phone helped fill some gaps and answer some questions. I don't have it here--it belongs to a friend in California--so I can't see it up close. If you need pictures of anything else, I can probably get them.
Jonathan

persido

Wow alot of great information.
I am torn about putting this phone on Ebay, a friend of mine says I should keep it because it's a rare color, but on the other hand, I don't appreciate it as much as a collector that collects 500's would,  lol wish I found a red or blue 302.
maybe at the next yard sale.

Scot

WEBellSystemChristian

Quote from: persido on October 26, 2014, 11:49:41 PM
Wow alot of great information.
I am torn about putting this phone on Ebay, a friend of mine says I should keep it because it's a rare color, but on the other hand, I don't appreciate it as much as a collector that collects 500's would,  lol wish I found a red or blue 302.
maybe at the next yard sale.

Scot
If you don't think you would like it very much, or if it doesn't fir into your collection very well, you should sell it. Let it go to someone who really needs one of these to complete their 500 collection. These Oxford Grays command a very high price, enough to get a nice Pekin Red 302!
Christian Petterson

"Whether you think you can or think you can't, you're right" -Henry Ford

Kenton K

That's funny. I would have loved to find an oxford gray, instead, I got a silly red 302. Gosh darn it!

Slal

Three dollars? ; 0 !

Not only phone of the month material, but phone equivalent or winning the lotto I'd! 

Congrads.

--Bruce