The One that Destroyed Every Assumption I've ever Made

[benhutcherson]

Hello Folks,

A couple of weeks ago, I spotted this auction on Ebay

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=130284058815 ( dead link 04-13-21 )

I saw the straight cord and '53 date, and thought that I was all set to get a nice, date matching '53 set. After all, according to

http://members.dslextreme.com/~zuperdee/telephones/500_history/we_500_history.html

coiled cords were standard after 1956.

Upon receiving the telephone, everything I thought I knew about the darn things seemed to go out the window.

First, much to my surprise, the telephone which I received had plastic feet that were screwed on



Upon opening it, I discovered something else-I had always been under the impression that networks were never replaced. There it was, however-a nice, white-topped 425B network dated '63



And, finally, the strain relief on the handset cord is, in fact, marked for '63 also



(hard to see, but it's there).

So, has anyone encountered a telephone as mismatched as this one?

[Sargeguy]

That handset cord looks a little thin, almost like a line cord. 

[bingster]

Not me, but it makes sense, given the code in vermillion.  I can't make out the letters, but it looks like the digits are "663?"  That's probably a refurb date, and it correlates with the dates on the cord and network.

[Dan]

Yes.  

http://tinyurl.com/c4ks84

I thought I was getting a soft plastic from 1955 that was ivory.It was actually white, despite the color on the auction. It was also a 501, not a 500. (party line with a frequency ringer). It also had a 1969 hard shell replacement and I couldn't get it to ring. Fortunately, the seller refunded me the $$ INCLUDING shipping. I left him + feedback. He didn't mention it had to "R" orange refurbishment  codes on the back and never imcluded them in the pics or description.

Also the dial was a 7C coded color 3 (black) and was dated 1969.

[Dan]

I would mention to him that 66 "S" is not the code, but 663 as in refurbished March 1966.Maybe he'll give you your $$ back

[bingster]

Dan, sorry for the trouble with that one, but I'm glad it worked out for you.  

It's a good lesson in spotting little clues for everybody, though.  This one has a handset cord with a long strain relief which indicates a handset cord from much later than 1955 (which should have a short, stubby relief), and the feet aren't visible at the front of the phone, indicating they've been replaced.  With those clues, you can tell it's a refurb, and more investigation is needed before purchasing.

[benhutcherson]

Sargeguy,

The handset cord is significantly thinner than my other straight 500 cord, however the one on this telephone is definitely a handset cord-and one intended for a 500.

The wires are red, black, white and white, with the white wires significantly longer than the black ones. It also has the proper 500 strain relief at the handset end, identical, as near as I can tell, to the one on my '52 500 set.

[McHeath]

Okay, so it seems that they were still making straight handset cords into the early 60s.  The thinner cord would make sense as the coiled handset cords got thinner as well in the 60s.

And screwed on feet?!  That's weird. 

I guess we can't assume anything on these phones, Ma Bell was the original recycler. 

[Sargeguy]

At least it has some interesting features!

[Dennis Markham]

I have seen those rubber feet attached to a phone now and then with those screws.  Those appear to be the type used on 5302's.  The feet on the 302's that were screwed on, as you know screw in from inside and are not visible on the bottom.

With regard to the ivory/white phone, it is important to remember to ask all the questions.  Most of these sellers do not know telephones.  They may not think to report a vermillion stamp on the bottom.  Ask for more photos.  As about the date on the plastic case...is it stamped along the inside front edge or is it molded into the plastic.  If it is stamped on the front edge, is it later than June of 1959?  If it is it MAY be hard plastic.

Ben, who would have thought to ask about the feet being rubber?  When I expect them to be leather covered I will ask if there are any rips in the leather.  If they don't say it and the buyer doesn't ask, anything can happen.  I don't think I've ever seen a replacement network on an older base.  You would think the original date would have been painted over after they did that.  Since the network appears to have been attached with rivets, one would assume it was done at the refurb shop.

[benhutcherson]

Dennis,
That's just the thing that has me baffled so much with this one.

I thought I would never, ever see a straight cord combined with anything but leather feet.

The network is attached as one would expect for an early 1960s telephone-there's no doubt in my mind that it's a factory installation. In fact, if I didn't know to expect either a 425A or a black-topped 425B, I doubt I would notice anything amiss(aside from the big 3-63 date on the side).

I know that many collectors aren't fond of so-called frankenphones, but to me finding a telephone like this is just as exciting as finding a nice, old date-matched one.

[Dennis Markham]

Ben, as long as you're happy about what you bought that's all that matters.  It's still a nice phone and it works too!  I have seen those replacement handset cords that are straight but appear thinner than the original rubber coated ones.  Some are so thin that there is room around the cord as it enters the handset, making kind of a sloppy fit.

[benhutcherson]

Dennis,
Like I said, this one is actually set up like a proper cord. It has the molded-in strain relief that fills the hole in the handset perfectly, and fits in the hook on the bottom of the transmitter cup as it should.

Dan,
I wouldn't consider asking for my money back on this one. It was my stupid goof for not asking more questions and making assumptions. Besides that, I've already put way too much time into cleaning it up(it was a lot dirtier than it looked in the auction photos) to make doing so worth my while.

I couldn't ever bring myself to ask for a refund on something like this, as the seller certainly didn't misrepresent anything. If they had, it would have been out of ignorance-not intentional.

[Dan]

Ben, good move on not asking for the refund--the reason I asked for mine is that I had just receives a white We500 a few days before this "ivory" labelled white one, and I really didn't need two white ones.

[Dan/Panther]

Ben;
In your second link above, in 1952, it states...
Shifted from clear dial faceplates with black paint to double injection-molded faceplates.
Can someone elaborate on this, I don't quite understand what they were, before the two part injection mold ?
D/P