"The phone is a remarkably complex, simple device, and very rarely ever needs repairs, once you fix them." - Dan/Panther
Started by Dan/Panther, March 20, 2010, 11:08:11 PM
Quote from: Dan/Panther on April 09, 2010, 04:17:18 PMB.O.P.;I did my best to make it look good. Many others out there could have done the same, and many could most likely have done even better.I will say, I don't think many could have done it with more enthusiasm, or excitement.I did some cleanup and scratch removal on the shell, then polished it, and the handset with Novus. Whatdayathink ?D/P
Quote from: gpo706 on April 09, 2010, 07:32:02 PMThat looks gorgeous.I was gonna object to dremmeling the body but its a scrapper anyway, with the big chunk out of the side.I would take up the dentist drill suggestion if you want to have a half and half case.
Quote from: Dan/Panther on April 09, 2010, 03:50:44 PMTom;Do you know Doc Brown, by any chance Ralph;I'm in no way questioning Paul, or Jim. In my line of work, all my life I was trained to troubleshoot technical problems, on complicated expensive factory equipment. Why it broke, and the best way to fix it, and ac possible way to prevent further breakage of the same component.In 35 years, I learned two very important things, 1) No matter how well you know a subject, if someone else offers a comment or opinion, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, LISTEN TO THEM. It is just possible a new set of eyes and a different brain may see something you didn't.2) The simplest solution, or explanation of a problem, is USUALLY the correct one.I would be disappointed in Paul and Jim if they refused to at least, entertain alternate opinions, or points of view, and to discuss them, and offer reasons for their opinion. "That's just the way it is", won't cut it.After all "None is blinder than the one that refuses to see....."It never was and never will be my intention just to make someone angry because i don't agree with them, If I'm wrong show me, convince me, I'm not above saying to anyone any time, "I was wrong."D/P
Quote from: Dan/Panther on April 09, 2010, 01:09:06 PMJim;I'm waiting here holding my breath.Two pieces of compelling evidence points me towards 48 Pre-Production Field Trial Set.1) The write up in BST, 4/51The drawings are exactly like my phone components.Mine has the aluminum dial mount.The bell coil is wrapped in green.Mine has the aiming dots. Plus the photo with the article.2)In my mind the most compelling piece of evidence is the bottom markings (photo below) Why would that instruction be placed on the bottom of a prototype that wasn't going anyplace ?B.O.P.;We don't take that responsibility lightly either.Dan;I think Tom is like that guy in Twilight Zone, everyone else gets older and he stays young, Tom is really 250 years old.Tom;It amazes me also the way everyone rallied around this find. I'm very thankful they did. The project would have taken much, much longer without Dennis' help, Jim' help, and everyone that gave great advice.I can't ever forget, Michael Bachefski, from Toms River, New Jersey, for selling me the phone in the first place.D/P
Quote from: Dan/Panther on April 09, 2010, 10:25:29 PMJim; As far as the markings on the bottom, I will concede that yes, that factor alone could make it outside of the 1 in 50, however how do you reconcile the other factors that point to a 1 in 50 Field test set. The Ringer, aluminum dial mount, green wrapped coils parts that match drawing, and even the photo that was dated 1949, that speaks of trial sets, and the photo shows the Z dial. Do we disallow those factors or consider them. Like I said, if you consider ALL factors, one points to it could be outside of the 50, but 5 factors point to it being within the 1 of 50. My view like I mentioned before is the simplest explanation is MOST LIKELY the correct one. It would be easy to accept that the phone was outside of the 1 of 50, but it's very hard to ignore the other factors that point to it being within the 1 of 50..Secondly, If in fact this set was issued to say a Bell employee, how would they keep track of the set ? What would they use to identify this particular set to a particular person ?My thought, Joe Blow, signed for, and Received set D#177001-125.Signifying that Joe Blow received 1-D#177001- model 500 telephone set, number 125.D/P
Quote from: Dan/Panther on April 10, 2010, 01:16:50 AMThat Joe guy always was clumsy.D/p
Quote from: Jim S. on April 10, 2010, 02:14:50 AMMy long, opinion of D/p's phoner, seems to of gotten lost, before posting. I will try to recreate the key points for a posting tommorrow. I spent several hours tweaking the original post. I really liked it. i am bummed it is lost. Such is life,JimBTW it was the upcomining post that I mentioned several times earlier.
Quote from: Phonesrfun on April 10, 2010, 02:17:15 AMQuote from: Jim S. on April 10, 2010, 02:14:50 AMMy long, opinion of D/p's phoner, seems to of gotten lost, before posting. I will try to recreate the key points for a posting tommorrow. I spent several hours tweaking the original post. I really liked it. i am bummed it is lost. Such is life,JimBTW it was the upcomining post that I mentioned several times earlier.I hate it when that happens. It has happened to me several times
Quote from: Dan/Panther on April 09, 2010, 03:50:44 PMTom;Do you know Doc Brown, by any chance D/P
Quote from: Dan/Panther on April 10, 2010, 01:15:56 PMNow that I think about it though, My set is so different from the production models, I'm beginning to think it must go back a ways farther, because their wasn't enough time between 48 Field Trails, and production, to implement all of the changes, from my set, to the production set. So now my thought is this. two possible scenarios.......1) My set predates the 50, 1948 field Trial sets by a time, maybe 6 months to a year. That way they had time to correct, or change any items in my set, which would have culminated in the 50, 1948 field trial sets. From the 50, 1948 field Trials, to production, my thinking is not a whole lot was changed. Minor tweeking.So to sum up my thoughts. My set, if compared side by side to a 1948 field trail set, in my opinion, would look quite a bit different, for the reasons mentioned.OR2) There may have been two, or more groups of field trial sets, distributed at the same time, all in contention for production, and my design lost the trials. That would explain the swapping of sets midway into the trials. If all of the sets were the same, why swap them ?Example;O.K. you tired that set, now tell us what you think of this one.D/P