News:

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

Main Menu

Now the Story Can be Told - 1949 WECo 500 Set

Started by Dan/Panther, March 20, 2010, 11:08:11 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Phonesrfun

Dan:

Paul-F's description is correct.  Here is a marked up photo.  The ones on the left are shunt, and would go to R and GN;  The ones on the right are the pulse and should go to F and RR

-Bill G

Dan/Panther

Jim, Bill, Paul;
What is your take on the dial. Why would they abandon such a simple design ?
D/P

The More People I meet, The More I Love, and MISS My Dog.  Dan Robinson

Phonesrfun

Beats the heck out of me...

Ma Bell was very much motivated by cost.  Perhaps the 7a was more cost effective to produce.  The gear train in the 7A resembles the #6 dial much more than your prototype dial.

Maybe they also liked the coffee grinder sound of the more traditional Bell System dial.  That has been one of my objections of the Bell System dials as compared to the AE dials is the louder sound coming from the gears.  The nylon gear in your dial would have made a big difference in the sound, and you have even stated that your dial sounds more like a Princess dial than other dials.

Ultimately, I think it must have come down to cost, one way or the other.  The other thing is that the gear train in the 7A has a smaller footprint.

-Bill G

McHeath

Quotei remembered that the new wheel is 1/16" larger diameter. It's at 3", the original is at 2-15/16". It's amazing that .030 of an inch is that noticeable to the eye.

Ah, that's it.  The slightly larger disk makes the holes look a bit further from the edge.  I don't think it's worth worrying about at all, and again you've done a spectacular job on making that fingerwheel from scratch. 

Paul notes something I too was curious about, the view of the gear from the front of the dial face.  Would certainly enjoy seeing pictures of a 1949 7A dial to compare.

paul-f

Quote from: Dan/Panther on April 03, 2010, 09:29:20 PM
Jim, Bill, Paul;
What is your take on the dial. Why would they abandon such a simple design ?
D/P

Look at the production dial photos.  (Dial is 7A 10/49, rest of set is 1950.) 

It looks like they moved all the gears to a subassembly that could be tested seperately before being attached to the casting.  In the long run, mounting gears to a common metal plate is more stable and reliable.

The casting also doesn't have a ridge for the dust cover on the back.

You can see the handset cord terminated on the equalizer.





Visit: paul-f.com         WE  500  Design_Line

.

Phonesrfun

Here are some pics of my 1951 7A for comparison.
-Bill G

Phonesrfun

oops, I hadn't noticed that Paul also posted literally the same thing.  Looks like 49 and 51 7A dials were just about identical.
-Bill G

paul-f

#457
Bill,

It's great to have additional data points.  When researching the 500-series articles, I was lucky enough to have access to dozens of early 500s, to help determine when some changes were phased in.  I'd really like to examine sets for every month of production up through 1953, as there were probably minor changes.
Visit: paul-f.com         WE  500  Design_Line

.

paul-f

The only parts you haven't investigated are the line switch and network.

While I was taking photos, I popped the line switch cover and shot these.  WE redesigned the switch cover and mounting bracket for manufacturing.

We know the production networks were potted.  I wonder if this early one is, or if the components are visible -- in case they wanted to tweak the internals.  Possibly they're different from the production components.

Do you feel lucky?






Visit: paul-f.com         WE  500  Design_Line

.

Jim Stettler

Quote from: Dan/Panther on April 03, 2010, 09:29:20 PM
Jim, Bill, Paul;
What is your take on the dial. Why would they abandon such a simple design ?
D/P

I agree with Bill that it was probably a cost reason.  The footprint reason could of been part of the design change as well. Bell was interested in producing smaller dials for some of their other upcoming designs.

Stan may have some info in his new dial book. His book is supposed to finally be printed this May. It has  580 pages on dials. This book has been delayed for years. I posted a heads up about the book in the classified's.
Jim
You live, You learn,
You die, you forget it all.

Dan/Panther

The 49, and 51 A dials are much more compact. Cost savings alone in gear frame metal, would be substantial over several million phones. Basically they are very similar dials,  just laid out more compact, with a couple modifications.
D/P

The More People I meet, The More I Love, and MISS My Dog.  Dan Robinson

Jim Stettler

Quote from: paul-f on April 03, 2010, 10:22:28 PM

We know the production networks were potted.  I wonder if this early one is, or if the components are visible -- in case they wanted to tweak the internals.  Possibly they're different from the production components.

Do you feel lucky?



I am betting they didn't pot the field trial sets. I suspect they wanted them av liable for  testing purpose in case of failure.  The components may even have dates.
Jim
You live, You learn,
You die, you forget it all.

Dan/Panther

If by Potted you mean the grease substance filling the network, yes this one is, because some had seeped out through the cover a little around the sides.
D/P

The More People I meet, The More I Love, and MISS My Dog.  Dan Robinson

Phonesrfun

Boy, I am going to wear out my 51 from opening and closing it!   ;D

The hookswitch on mine looks identical to Pauls 1949, as does one from 1955.  The only difference is my 51 has a smoke colored make that black opaque cover and the 55 has a clear cover.

-Bill G

Jim Stettler

Quote from: Dan/Panther on April 03, 2010, 10:35:42 PM
If by Potted you mean the grease substance filling the network, yes this one is, because some had seeped out through the cover a little around the sides.
D/P


Yep, That is "potting" Don't open it.
Jim
You live, You learn,
You die, you forget it all.