1952 WE 500 (Can anyone tell me why it was wired this way?)

metdial · January 17, 2009, 08:48:34 AM

The newest addition to my collection arrived the other day. It's a '52 500 with a straight handset cord from 1955. The receiver & transmitter capsules date to '55 as well (I'm so pleased that I finally got an example with 2 bakelite caps). The ringer is from '52 and the dial is a 7A from '51. The G1 handset is dated 1951 and the bakelite caps are dated '51 as well.

It came with a different kind of line cord than I am accustomed to seeing. Instead of the usual green/red/yellow combination, this cord is silver and has 4 wires running through it (green/red/black/white). It was connected to the network with bare wires instead of spade lugs. At the other end someone had attached "alligator" clips to each of the four wires. The metal retainer clip on the cord was dated '52.

I hooked up the red and green wires to a 4 prong plug (I have a modular adapter for it) in order to test it. It dialed out fine. I moved the black ringer wire from terminal G to L1 and it rang properly when a call came in.

The next day when I tried to call out on it, I got "bell tap" after dialing the first # and was unable to break dial tone. Upon hanging up the phone, it would bell tap again. The seller's auction photos clearly showed that the wiring had been altered. I had overlooked that in my initial "test session" because the phone seemed to be working properly. Oh, I forgot to mention that when the black ringer wire was removed from L1, I could break dial tone and dial out successfully.

I went to the "Bell Memorial" website, and following their instructions, changed the wiring back to its original factory configuration. The "bell tap" is gone and I'm able to dial out again with the black ringer wire connected to L1.

Has anyone else encountered a 500 that was wired this way? Why does the line cord have 4 wires instead of the usual 3 ?

Here's a picture of the wiring before I changed it back to the way "Ma Bell" would have done it:

bingster · January 17, 2009, 10:23:37 AM

Is the grey wire round and very stiff? Solid copper conductors rather than stranded?

metdial · January 17, 2009, 10:59:43 AM

Quote from: bingster on January 17, 2009, 10:23:37 AM
Is the grey wire round and very stiff? Solid copper conductors rather than stranded?

The grey wire is round and is quite flexible. The conductors are of the grey stranded variety.

bingster · January 17, 2009, 01:00:16 PM

if it's nice and flexible, it sounds like a proper mounting cord. It may be that it was just taken from a phone of another color. If it had been stiff wire, it probably would have been station wire, which is the type of telephone cable found tacked to baseboards. That's sometimes found to be wired directly into phones.

Dennis Markham · January 17, 2009, 01:03:52 PM

Bingster, from the photo it doesn't appear to be the old neutral gray cord that would be of some collectible value, does it?

bingster · January 17, 2009, 01:08:07 PM

I was hesitant to say, given the tiny portion of grey that's visible, but that thought crossed my mind, yes. Since it was missing it's lugs, and it doesn't appear restrained to the case, I'm guessing it's been cut and then stripped back to make it useable again.

Dennis Markham · January 17, 2009, 01:15:30 PM

Those green and red wires look too "new" to be from an old neutral gray cord. Those would have been the softer colored wires. Those older ones have more of a rubbery soft feel to them.

bingster · January 17, 2009, 01:22:30 PM

I think it appears to be too light in color to be one of the old ones the old ones, so I'd say you're right. I wonder if it's from a later grey phone. From another manufacturer, maybe?

Metdial, can you post a picture of any metal restraints that might be on the cord? If they're still on there, are they marked in any way?

metdial · January 17, 2009, 01:51:34 PM

Quote from: bingster on January 17, 2009, 01:22:30 PM
Metdial, can you post a picture of any metal restraints that might be on the cord? If they're still on there, are they marked in any way?

Here's a photo of the line cord retainer Bingster.

Do you have any thoughts as to why the wiring on the network was done the way it was?

Thanks,
Tom

bingster · January 17, 2009, 02:23:19 PM

Ohhhhh, VERY interesting, metdial. Dennis, what do you think? The white conductor is odd to me.

Metdial, It could be that the cord was accidentally ripped out of the phone, pulling the lugs off the conductors. Stripping them back would be the easiest way for a novice to reattach the cord.

Dan/Panther · January 17, 2009, 05:26:09 PM

In that first photo what exactly is wired incorrectly ?

Quote"I went to the "Bell Memorial" website, and following their instructions, changed the wiring back to its original factory configuration. The "bell tap" is gone and I'm able to dial out again with the black ringer wire connected to L1."

Just as it should be. And just like it is in your first photo ?
D/P

Dennis Markham · January 18, 2009, 03:52:11 PM

Bingster, with a '52 crimp date it very well could be an original neutral gray line cord. It actually looks blue in the photo but it must be gray. That is a nice cord. I can't explain why the internal wires look so new.

When I look at the original photo I see several things that are different about the wiring. Are they wrong, I don't know. If seen these phones hooked up completely different that "normal" and still worked. But look at the ringer wires. The red and slate wire normally is attached to the corner on the "A" terminal. The slate (white) wire is currently on the that terminal (in the photo). It should be on the "K" terminal. Also the red one is currently on "K" when it should be on L2. The black wire is shown on L1 where it should be along with the green lead from the mounting cord. The red lead from the mounting cord is on L2 where it should be.

It may be just the ringer is wired improperly. Just glancing the others look good.

metdial · January 20, 2009, 09:11:29 AM

Very astute observations about the wiring Dennis. I made the changes you mentioned with a little help from the "Bell Memorial" website.

When I first got the phone and hooked it up, everything worked fine. The bell didn't ring of course, because the black wire was hooked to the G terminal like you see for party line service. In the photo I posted, I had already moved the black ringer wire to L1. When I did that and tried to dial out, that's when I got the "bell tap" issue and could not break dial tone. Perhaps somebody knew what they were doing, and this phone was wired this way for a specific purpose. I don't know. Thought it was interesting though.

The line cord is also interesting. I initially thought it was not original to the phone. However, as you can see in the photo, the '52 dated crimp looks like it was crimped once and never removed and reused. As mentioned earlier, the phone is dated 3/52 and most of the parts, except for the handset cord and transmitter & receiver capsules, date to 1951-52. The conductor wires looked "too new" to me as well, and don't seem to have that soft, rubbery feel to them. Oh well, I guess we may never know, but it sure is intriguing.

Dennis Markham · January 20, 2009, 09:51:29 AM

I just noticed it is an earlier C2A ringer. Is it working now?

metdial · January 20, 2009, 10:08:23 AM

Quote from: Dennis Markham on January 20, 2009, 09:51:29 AM
I just noticed it is an earlier C2A ringer. Is it working now?

It's working great now. It's probably my favorite 500 at this time, although I just got another '52 500 delivered to me this morning. The "new" '52 is all date matching except for the handset cord which was replaced in '59. I think there's going to be some sibling rivalry for my attention between these 2 phones.

News:

1952 WE 500 (Can anyone tell me why it was wired this way?)