Curly cords standard on WE phones?

[poplar1]

I've seen "1958" as the year that most WE phones were equipped by default with curly cords. However, a Sept., 1958 Mountain States Bill shows a $1.50 charge for installation of retractile cord, in addition to the $2.75 charge for installing a new line. However, the bill insert for "bedroom extensions" shows all color 500s with curly cords.

[unbeldi]

By the timeline I keep on 500 sets, it was 1957 that they became standard.  The 1957 Graybar catalog also shows them with retractile cords, both the desk sets, the wall sets, and the key sets. The green and blue handsets (G3AR-51, G3AR-57) still show gray coiled cords, though.  My never installed mahogany brown of 2/58 also has a H4BH II-57 cord.

[unbeldi]

I've seen "1958" as the year that most WE phones were equipped by default with curly cords. However, a Sept., 1958 Mountain States Bill shows a $1.50 charge for installation of retractile cord, in addition to the $2.75 charge for installing a new line. However, the bill insert for "bedroom extensions" shows all color 500s with curly cords.

I don't see a year on the bill with the retractile cord.

I just looked at the actual Graybar catalog; on page 232 is stated explicitly in a box:


All Western Electric telephone sets are equipped at the factory with spring (retractile) handset cords. The letter "R" in the code indicates that the spring handset cord is installed.


The catalog does not contain the new pastel colors yet, so it was produced early in the year. So it is even possible that some sets already came from the factory with coiled cords in late 56.  This would well be in line with the late 1956 sets I have that have date-matched 1956 spring cords.

I have also seen/owned gray spring cords with a KS number, and I suspect that those are the ones that installers used to equip a set in the field with a customer requested option.

I also think it is possible that red 500 sets may have had coiled cords standard already in June 1956, such as this 500DR-53 6/56 with a H4BH II-56, and a D3BG II-56 line cord.
Would the handset cord dates be matching the set perfectly if they were installed as an option? Were customer options at this time back-ordered from the factory or retrofitted in the distribution center?

[NorthernElectric]

Maybe the customer had a new extension installed and liked the curly cord so much they got the installer to update their existing phone with one while he was there?

[andre_janew]

My grandmother had a 500 set and it had the curly handset cord.  It was a 1957 model.  I don't remember the month it was made so it could've been made late in 1957.  I do suspect that at some point the curly handset cord became standard equipment.  Why?  Have you ever seen a modular 500 set with a straight handset cord?

[WEBellSystemChristian]

I'm leaning towards NE's idea. Perhaps the customer had a 202 or 302 with a straight cloth cord, and they wanted it changed out for a coiled cord. At the same time, the installer was probably installing a new 500 in the house, which would explain the extra charge for a new extension.

[jsowers]

Yes, that's a charge to replace a straight cord with a retractile one on an already-installed phone. That's another reason why straight-corded phones are hard to find. They were updated, and who can blame them? Straight handset cords are hard to manage.

Here are a couple pictures to help establish the dates on straight cords being standard. I have a 5-56 red 501 with a straight red handset cord on it. It came from Texas and the former owner's niece said to me in an email that her uncle was totally resistant to change and that's why he kept this phone so long and never changed it. Bless his heart!

Toward the last of straight cords they color matched them and these all seem to be from 1956 and in red, yellow and dark beige, but not green or dark blue. There was a short time after colors matched and before coil cords were standard. So these aren't too easy to find. Ask Dennis!

I would say it was Fall, 1956 or thereabouts when coil cords became standard.

[AE_Collector]

Maybe the customer had a new extension installed and liked the curly cord so much they got the installer to update their existing phone with one while he was there?

That is a possibility but there were likely other factors as well. So many phones were refurbished and reinstalled potentially still with straight cords on them. It would have taken quite a bit of time to get the new retractile cords in all colors and lengths out to all the store rooms and onto all trucks. There was a period of time when retractile cords were a chargeable option and there would have been some overlap once new phones all came with retractile cords but before the various operating companies caught up and stopped charging for the coil cords. This stuff was all tariff (needed approval from the regulator to change anything to do with service and charges) back then which caused change to happen very slowly. I am sure that most operating companies had a one time charge for a color phone then as well which continued even though they then all came with retractile cords.

Terry

[poplar1]

Since the $1.16 prorated charges (9/7- 9/15)  are based on $4.50 per month -- and not on $8.50 per month ($9.44 including excise tax) for "service and equipment" shown on the 9/16/58 and 10/16/58 bills  -- I now agree that the $2.75 service charge and the $1.50 charge for the retractile cord install were not part of the original line installation. For $4.50 additional monthly charges, he may have had three additional extension phones installed (just guessing).  Even though the additional charges shown are not carried forward on either of the dated bills shown, the phone number is the same and the bill cycle is the same.

It seems this subscriber had just gotten new service, based on the page "Your telephone is on its way," explaining the availability of facilities, which would be reserved for 15 days. So it's unlikely that the "retractile cord" was for an existing 202 or 302. The flyer is also likely from around 1958: after the introduction of the 1957 colors (-58 white, -59 pink, -60 light beige, -61 light gray, -62 aqua blue), but before the Princess.

[unbeldi]

It seems to me the bill for the 'installation' (in the same picture as the two charges for calls), is from a completely different year than those two service bills of 1958.  They are vastly different in layout, color, style.  Since this subscriber appears to be a paperwork horder, it's likely that they kept the papers from the original installation. I don't see any years on those older papers.
The ad pages of the phones are probably unrelated to the installation bill, and are probably bill inserts for the 1958 service bills.
Do you have these documents or are these pictures from another source?