WE 302 Ringer question

[Fennec]

I am new to this stuff, and have a question on a ringer in a "junker" 302 that I am trying my hand at.

It does not seem to be a common B1A, but rather something with smaller coils, that seem to have been shoehorned into a standard brass holding bracket on the base.
The only numbers I can see are on reverse, and read:

D-2993-1-0
602

Resistance of the coils is 944 Ohms (guessing nominal 500 Ohm coils).

Would this be a genuine WE part? Or someones attempt to re-purpose the ringer from another phone? Trouble is - I cannot remember now how it was mounted originally, and it does not seem a good fit for the holding bracket - it seems too long/too high to properly engage with the back tab and the front holding screw...

Any info/guesses on this would be appreciated.

[TelePlay]

Not a WE ringer. Just guessing but I'd say Stromberg Carlson.

Certainly looks like a frequency ringer.

I'm sure one of our members with the proper catalogs will identify this finger by the part code seen on the back.

EDIT:  Just noticed the adjustable gongs for ringer volume. A interesting set up I've not seen before.

[poplar1]

Stromberg-Carlson ringer designed to fit the ringer bracket of a Western Electric 251. The 251 (AB1 tel. set mounting) was sold without ringer to independent companies.

Kellogg also made ringers for WE 251s.

[Fennec]

Stromberg-Carlson ringer designed to fit the ringer bracket of a Western Electric 251. The 251 (AB1 tel. set mounting) was sold without ringer to independent companies.

Kellogg also made ringers for WE 251s.

So, if I understand correctly, even though it is NOT a WE part, it was indeed intended for use with a WE 251, which is a close cousin of 302.
Then next question - is there a significant difference between 251 and 302 ringer mounting bracket? Google did not reveal any immediate clues to how the base of 251 looks like inside...

For reference, the induction coil in this set is a standard 101A, and everything else looks like a regular 302... I would hazard a guess that at some point this phone was used in this particular configuration then...

[TelePlay]

Could you post a few pictures of the 302 base with and without the ringer just sitting in place, as you think it should set in place.

I'd be interested in seeing that hardware configuration.

With the bracket at the bottom of the ringer, away from the gongs, it looks like it would fit right into a standard 302 B1A ringer mount.

Thanks.

[Alex G. Bell]

Could you post a few pictures of the 302 base with and without the ringer just sitting in place, as you think it should set in place.

I'd be interested in seeing that hardware configuration.

With the bracket at the bottom of the ringer, away from the gongs, it looks like it would fit right into a standard 302 B1A ringer mount.

Thanks.

I've never seen a 251 either and have wondered for years just what the ringer mounting bracket looks like, so I'd appreciate photos of the ringer mount too.

So, if I understand correctly, even though it is NOT a WE part, it was indeed intended for use with a WE 251, which is a close cousin of 302.
Then next question - is there a significant difference between 251 and 302 ringer mounting bracket? Google did not reveal any immediate clues to how the base of 251 looks like inside...

Based on the Cat. 11 description of the 251 desk set (which is pretty vague) they contain the usual 302 components other than perhaps the ringer mount and probably the ringer capacitor, which would need to be matched to the ringer frequency.  251s and 252s (the wall version) probably used a 195C capacitor containing only the 2uF section for the speech circuit. 

There was also a 250 "gutless wonder": a 302-style housing with no ringer, induction coil or "condenser", for modernizing installations which have a subset in place from a 202 or desk stand.

[unbeldi]

The base plate for 250 and 251 telephone sets is different than the 302 base.

The base has two bosses with holes in the area where the ringer mounting holes would be.  I have a stack of at least a dozen of them.

[Alex G. Bell]

The base plate for 250 and 251 telephone sets is different than the 302 base.

The base has two bosses with holes in the area where the ringer mounting holes would be.  I have a stack of at least a dozen of them.

So the ringer mounts directly to the base plate without any rubber isolation?  That must sound different!  (Not that a frequency ringer would sound the same even if it was.)

Also, I wonder how that worked with a 252.  It would seem to require taking the phone off the wall to replace the ringer.

[poplar1]

So, if I understand correctly, even though it is NOT a WE part, it was indeed intended for use with a WE 251, which is a close cousin of 302.
Then next question - is there a significant difference between 251 and 302 ringer mounting bracket? Google did not reveal any immediate clues to how the base of 251 looks like inside...

For reference, the induction coil in this set is a standard 101A, and everything else looks like a regular 302... I would hazard a guess that at some point this phone was used in this particular configuration then...

Is your housing marked H1, AB1, or something else? The ringer mounting in the AB1 telephone set mounting is slightly taller, if I recall correctly. It appears to be backward compatible for B1A ringers.

Kellogg catalog #11, issued 1949, page 96 lists W-125 ringers for use in 302 sets.

[poplar1]

The base plate for 250 and 251 telephone sets is different than the 302 base.

The base has two bosses with holes in the area where the ringer mounting holes would be.  I have a stack of at least a dozen of them.

All the 251s I have worked on already had ringers, but I find it difficult to believe that they would have been shipped sans ringer mounting. The 1949 Kellogg Catalog does not have a photo of the W-125 ringer, but there is no mention of having to order brackets for mounting same.

[Fennec]

OK, here it is. The Housing is marked H1, and the rest of the phone appears to be a pretty mundane 302. Bracket is also standard-looking. I would assume that ringer should sit with the rear tab engaged under the bracket "lip", but in this case the bolt on the back of the ringer rests firmly on the bracket, and the front floats in the air, above the fixing screw tab, and with no way to secure the ringer to the bracket.

BTW, going from the other end, i.e. engaging the screw end first, would result in the rear of the ringer simply being pressed against the back of the bracket - not secure, and simple shake easily dislodges it from this position...

[Alex G. Bell]

OK, here it is. The Housing is marked H1, and the rest of the phone appears to be a pretty mundane 302. Bracket is also standard-looking. I would assume that ringer should sit with the rear tab engaged under the bracket "lip", but in this case the bolt on the back of the ringer rests firmly on the bracket, and the front floats in the air, above the fixing screw tab, and with no way to secure the ringer to the bracket.

BTW, going from the other end, i.e. engaging the screw end first, would result in the rear of the ringer simply being pressed against the back of the bracket - not secure, and simple shake easily dislodges it from this position...

Certainly seems to be an ordinary 302 that's been "cobbled", not a 251.

Kellogg catalog #11, issued 1949, page 96 lists W-125 ringers for use in 302 sets.

The 1949 Kellogg Catalog does not have a photo of the W-125 ringer,

Same for Kellogg Cat. No. 12, probably late '50s from the "received 4-2-59" written inside.

[poplar1]

OK, here it is. The Housing is marked H1, and the rest of the phone appears to be a pretty mundane 302. Bracket is also standard-looking. I would assume that ringer should sit with the rear tab engaged under the bracket "lip", but in this case the bolt on the back of the ringer rests firmly on the bracket, and the front floats in the air, above the fixing screw tab, and with no way to secure the ringer to the bracket.

BTW, going from the other end, i.e. engaging the screw end first, would result in the rear of the ringer simply being pressed against the back of the bracket - not secure, and simple shake easily dislodges it from this position...

The "lip" on the bracket in the AB1 tel set mounting is not as wide. This allows the lip to fit into the slot on the Stromberg-Carlson ringer. Here is a 5251 set showing the ringer mount with the narrow lip. (The D-2993 ringer has been replaced with a B-type.)

http://www.classicrotaryphones.com/forum/index.php?topic=16138.msg167136#msg167136

[HarrySmith]

That's interesting, I never realized WE had 2 different brackets for the 302 ringer. I guess the easy way to fit the SC ringer would be to trim the lip on the bracket to fit the slot.

[Fennec]

I guess the easy way to fit the SC ringer would be to trim the lip on the bracket to fit the slot.

Aha! That's probably it - whoever was trying to work on this set before got a "replacement" SC ringer, not realizing that it will not fit the "standard" WE 302 bracket. Thank you, poplar1 and HarrySmith - I think that carefully "trimming" the lip on both sides, essentially converting 302 to a 251, will do the trick.