Western Electric 143 Receiver - 1st edition

[Ktownphoneco]

I have a copy of an unnumbered version a Western Electric catalog which has been generally accepted as having been printed sometime between 1905 and 1908.      It shows the 122W, made with hard rubber case and cap, 143-W made from a composition material, and mentions that the receiver can be supplied with a hard rubber case and cap, but it doesn't state the type of model or catalog code number.     I'm assuming it's referring to the 144-W receiver, but it's not specifically stated.   But it does indicate that all 3 receivers were, at one point, in production at the same time.

Jeff
   

[unbeldi]

The 143 was still available in the 1920s, along side with the 144.  It's never been too clear to me what the difference is, because one of the catalogs used the same picture to show the 143 and 144.  I think they both have a nominal resistance of 75 Ω.

[wds]

The 1908 Cat. shows the 122 as a hard rubber for $1.52 (no cord)
The Composite Ball Top #143 is $1.20
The Hard Rubber Ball top #143 is $ 1.52, same price as the #122.  The hard rubber is about 25% more expensive.

The 1916 cat. shows the newer nipple top #143 composite for $2.30
The #144 Hard Rubber is $2.80 -   Again about a 25% upcharge.

So at some point the ball top #143 which was available in both materials was changed to to two products, the nipple top 143 composite and the #144 hard rubber.  The #144 is referred to as the rough service receiver, and also for humid conditions. 

[unbeldi]

That makes a lot of sense, indeed.  It must have been confusing and causing ordering problems to have to distinguish the material on every order.

[wds]

Yes, very informative discussion.  It's nice to know how these different receivers came to being, and with exception of the ball top #143, one is not older than the other.  I've always wondered why my #143's were always chipped up, but the #144 always seemed to be in good condition.  I guess the 25% upcharge was a good investment - at least for the people collecting these phones 100 years later. 

[unbeldi]

I'll gladly send you $2.80 for your receiver.

[poplar1]

I'll gladly send you $2.80 for your receiver.

What cost $2.80 in 1916 would cost $61.53 in 2015.
http://www.westegg.com/inflation/infl.cgi

[unbeldi]

I just reviewed the three patents that are usually claimed for the 144 on the shell.  None are concerned in any way with the shell materials, not even the shell shape.  They are all about the construction of the magnets and magnetic circuit, emphasizing the virtues of them being welded rather than bolted or riveted. One of them emphasizes the construction of the actual coil in particular.

US1062082 1913-05-20 1912 Craft Reynolds WECo--Telephone Receiver
US1063237 1913-06-03 1912 Anderson WECo--Welded Receiver
US1262838 1918-04-16 1917 Poole WECo--Electromagnetic Apparatus

[wds]

That's interesting.  If you had bought a stack of them in 1916 for $2.80 and held on to them until today as an investment you would have lost money. (unless they were still new in the box).   Wonder if that holds true for the phones.