Long story short, this is what I found. I think it is an AE34a3b with the cut-out carry handle. Please let me know. Also, what is the best way to approach paint removal? Thank you for your help.
Dial markings: 60-C and 43(?)
Cord numbers: RUNZEL 3D09-RJ, CD-3500053
Base markings: L253AO and 90A.
Induction Coil: D282781
Ringer: D-56435-A
Very nice find. Those are very rare with the carry handle. Paint stripper will take the paint off with no problem. However, be careful with that small piece under the carry handle - it might b plastic and paint stripper will melt it. How much were they asking?
This was at a Hospice of Central Iowa second hand store. Mostly, they sold high-end clothes and decor. The phone cost me $39.
Tina Loyd
Wow! That is definitely a find of the month.
Well all right then! I will submit my find!
Thank you,
Tina
Quote from: wds on August 16, 2015, 06:34:37 PM
Wow! That is definitely a find of the month.
That's for sure!
Oven cleaner will probably also remove the paint. Be extra careful in the vent areas because they are known to break. This could easily be a $150+ phone.
Larry
Put a type 38 handset on it and I think you will be way north of $200.
Nice Find Tina...I'd say its a keeper. I have never had one in my hands with the carrying notch. Citrus stripper will make this a show piece. Be careful with the notched out area, as stated earlier by Larry, it could be plastic. Really, REALLY nice Find!!!....Doug
It might be a good idea to use EasyOff oven cleaner to remove the paint; I have never used citrus stripper before, but I'm sure Doug knows what he's talking about! ;)
Great phone for a great price! Easily worth upwards of $300!! :o
BTW, as ugly as the green paint is, it has likely helped to preserve the finish of the bakelite during the years since it was applied. Please keep us posted with the results!
Larry
Does the induction coil have a D-number on it?
The number on the induction coil (if that is the pair of long black parts) is D-56435-A. I hope that is a good thing!
Tina
The small piece under the handle is metal. I thought that was interesting considering the rest of the phone is thick. bakelite. I noticed that the part was scratched and the scratch was shiny. (I am not the guilty party.)
Tina
Quote from: cloyd on August 17, 2015, 06:28:45 PM
The number on the induction coil (if that is the pair of long black parts) is D-56435-A. I hope that is a good thing!
Tina
That's the ringer part number.
The induction coil is above the ringer in the picture, the black round coil with the black blocks on both sides that have solder pins sticking up.
The induction coil number is D282781. I still hope that is a good thing.
Tina
Quote from: cloyd on August 17, 2015, 07:52:47 PM
The induction coil number is D282781. I still hope that is a good thing.
Tina
That's beautiful.
You can hardly have a "bad thing" with this phone. ;)
Quote from: wds on August 16, 2015, 07:58:29 PM
Put a type 38 handset on it and I think you will be way north of $200.
Stub posted this in another string, "Your phone could be a 34A3B. Do this test. Put your 41 handset with the transmitter on the left and slowly push it to the right to center it (evenly spaced) in the cradle. If the receiver starts to raise up, before it is centered, its a 34A3, if not you have a 34A3B case ( AE Catalog 4055 C pg. 16) and the 41 is the correct handset for it and the spitcup is a little different, pg. 48 of same catalog. The 34A3 uses the 38 handset ."
My phone causes the handset to raise up. That suggests it is the earlier 34A3 but it has the later type 41 handset. Yes? Did only 34A3B's have the cut out handle? I'm confused.
I agree, the type 38 handset is very cool. Is it the appropriate handset for this phone? Is this a 34A3B or a 34A3?
Tina
You decide. You could keep your existing handset and a very nice phone for cheap, or for another $40 or so you could have a real beauty.
Here's a pic of the B version . Yours looks like the A version. stub
It is neither an AE 34A3 nor an AE 34A3B.
The 34A3 was released in 1934 and appeared in AE catalogues from then until the AE 40 was released. At that time, the AE 34A3B was also released - it was identical to the 34A3 except that the cradle was modified to accept the Type 41 handset. The 34A3B does not have a handle and the bell motor is mounted on an angle just as it is in the 34A3.
The telephone with a handle is a hybrid between the AE 34A3 and the AE 40. I have not seen it in any catalogues. It is, perhaps, one of the designs used in developing the AE 40. I do not know - but I would like to.
Jack
Very good, I was about to suggest to you to perform the same test.
But in any case, I am pretty convinced that your phone is not a 34A3B, which was your original quest, sofar unanswered.
I think your phone is the mysteriously undocumented (today) 34A3A.
I didn't know about this designation until recently when I asked about it and Paul-F pointed out this version is mentioned in a 1939 article in Automatic Electric Review: http://www.classicrotaryphones.com/forum/index.php?topic=13919.0 . Our member rdelius has the same phone, which he posted initiated that thread and he saw the designation in an old journal ad, which I have not been able to locate so far.
After some research since your initial post, I have convinced myself fairly well that this identification should be correct. The article calls this the "easy lift variant" of the 34A3 and it existed before the Type 40 came out, as well as before the Type 34A3B. I believe this is confirmed by the parts list of the 34A3B in the 1940 catalog, which does not include the two connection blocks next to the ringer, which yours does have.
Your phone was configured from the factory for grounded ringing with two capacitors in the base, and a three-conductor mounting cord. Earlier today I wrote a short explanation in an old thread where similar questions came up: http://www.classicrotaryphones.com/forum/index.php?topic=14369.msg153511#msg153511
The model number is L-253-A0. The same phone configured for metallic ringing with only one condenser and a two-conductor cord was L-250-A0.
I am still trying to sort out the induction coils used in the various types, but this isn't easy. AE changed the coils slightly having slightly different DC resistances, hence my question.
The handset on your phone is not the original one. If you want it to be original, you should search for a type 38 handset. The phone won't sound as as well, but the historic experience will be better. ;D
I would like to find that out for sure also. Your right because the induction coils are the same in both phones. I read somewhere that this phone was called a AE 34 A 11 and saved the pics of wiring dia and phone, but can't remember where I found it. stub
I see was a flurry of other posts while I composed mine. I am glad none are contradicting my findings.
Here is a snapshot of a reprint in TCI SW of the 1939 article that mentions the 34A3A.
unbeldi,
In the 4055 C Catalog it shows 2 types of 3 winding induction coils for the AE 40 and 50 , regular D-282996 and super volume D-282805 . I agree with Mr. Ryan " the telephone with a handle is a hybrid between the AE 34A3 and the AE 40. I have not seen it in any catalogues. It is, perhaps, one of the designs used in developing the AE 40. I do not know - but I would like to." stub
Quote from: Jack Ryan on August 17, 2015, 08:39:45 PM
It is neither an AE 34A3 nor an AE 34A3B.
The 34A3 was released in 1934 and appeared in AE catalogues from then until the AE 40 was released. At that time, the AE 34A3B was also released - it was identical to the 34A3 except that the cradle was modified to accept the Type 41 handset. The 34A3B does not have a handle and the bell motor is mounted on an angle just as it is in the 34A3.
The telephone with a handle is a hybrid between the AE 34A3 and the AE 40. I have not seen it in any catalogues. It is, perhaps, one of the designs used in developing the AE 40. I do not know - but I would like to.
Jack
Do you have AE catalogs between 1934 and 1939?
I agree about the ringer.
In order to make space for the easy-lift finger hold feature in the cradle, they had to lay the ringer flat on the base and place the terminal boards on both sides.
Quote from: unbeldi on August 17, 2015, 09:06:33 PM
Here is a snapshot of a reprint in TCI SW of the 1939 article that mentions the 34A3A.
Interesting. The AE 34A3B is not mentioned in that excerpt implying that the AE 34A3B might be a replacement of the AE 34A3A (the AE 34 with the handle).
Except for the handle, the AE 34A3A in not a step forward in technology so operating companies that had standardised on the AE 34A3 had no real reason to upgrade and have to stock additional parts. The AE 34A3B is more compatible from a parts perspective and the AE 40 more technologically advanced - the AE 34A3A died a natural death.
Pure speculation but reasonable.
Jack
Quote from: stub on August 17, 2015, 09:18:14 PM
unbeldi,
In the 4055 C Catalog it shows 2 types of 3 winding induction coils for the AE 40 and 50 , regular D-282996 and super volume D-282805 . I agree with Mr. Ryan " the telephone with a handle is a hybrid between the AE 34A3 and the AE 40. I have not seen it in any catalogues. It is, perhaps, one of the designs used in developing the AE 40. I do not know - but I would like to." stub
I don't believe in the "development" hypothesis per se, but surely they must have considered the experience with all variant for the design of the Type 40.
The carrying feature in the Type 40 was actually quite different. The Type 40 had indentation in the side of the cradle ears to provide for firm grip, but not all Type 40 models incorporated it. The 40 was also available with plain cradle sides. They designed a second carrying method for the 40, namely the so-called ''butler handle'' which snapped into holes in the metal trim of both cradle posts.
Re induction coils: Yes, these coils were available in those two versions, usually the "super" version was indicated by an A suffix, but I am not finished compiling what I have found.
Quote from: unbeldi on August 17, 2015, 09:23:30 PM
Do you have AE catalogs between 1934 and 1939?
4055A - 1937
Which catalogue was released in 1939 - 4055B?
Jack
Quote from: Jack Ryan on August 17, 2015, 09:33:14 PM
Quote from: unbeldi on August 17, 2015, 09:23:30 PM
Do you have AE catalogs between 1934 and 1939?
4055A - 1937
Which catalogue was released in 1939 - 4055B?
Jack
Here is what I have:
1934: 4055
?
1939: 4033 (Private Telephone Systems)
1940: 4055C
1944: 4055D
Do you have PDF files?
Quote from: unbeldi on August 17, 2015, 09:31:01 PM
I don't believe in the "development" hypothesis per se, but surely they must have considered the experience with all variant for the design of the Type 40.
No, I don't any longer either. I think the AE 34A3A was intended as a compatible offering for AE 34A3 users. In the end, it was not a success and the AE 34A3B replaced it.
Experience with the handle of the AE 34A3A probably convinced AE not to use it for the 40
Jack
Although I have no proof, I believe these came out after the model 40, fitted with a carry handle to use up old shells. Never throw anything away?
1934: 4055
1937: 4055A
1939: You mentioned 1939 - I wondered if that was the year of 4055B. I don't have one.
1940: 4055C
1944: 4055D
Quote from: unbeldi on August 17, 2015, 09:36:58 PM
Do you have PDF files?
Yes, it is not a good copy. I don't know where it came from so I hope I am not betraying someone's trust...
Jack
Is there a PDF version of 4033?
Jack
Here you go- http://tinyurl.com/ld88z7d stub
The 4055 A is mine or Terrys' can't remember when we or me posted it ;D
Quote from: stub on August 17, 2015, 09:53:30 PM
Here you go- http://tinyurl.com/ld88z7d stub
Thanks!
Quote from: Jack Ryan on August 17, 2015, 09:49:13 PM
1934: 4055
1937: 4055A
1939: You mentioned 1939 - I wondered if that was the year of 4055B. I don't have one.
1940: 4055C
1944: 4055D
Quote from: unbeldi on August 17, 2015, 09:36:58 PM
Do you have PDF files?
Yes, it is not a good copy. I don't know where it came from so I hope I am not betraying someone's trust...
Jack
Thanks much!
I can't keep track of where I get my files from either. It would take a full-time librarian.
Quality is good enough for information, nice to have but it sure doesn't provide any drastically new info.
The dial in Tina's telephone seems to be a No. 51, I think.
So this was a replacement in the 1950s, perhaps along with the black rubber cords.
No. 51 is probably also supported by the type of number card installed on the dial. This has the two-line medium height printing area (1950), the larger one came out in 1955. Before 1950 there was only room for one line of print.
Tina: Is there a date on the paper label around the cord?
I posted a topic in the wiring diagram section (http://www.classicrotaryphones.com/forum/index.php?topic=14814.msg153602#msg153602) with the circuit diagram for these telephone types and some discussion of the circuit.
Here is a linked image of the circuit, which also shows the difference between the sets for grounded ringing vs. metallic ringing.
(http://www.classicrotaryphones.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=14814.0;attach=127499;image)
Quote from: wds on August 17, 2015, 08:33:40 PM
You decide. You could keep your existing handset and a very nice phone for cheap, or for another $40 or so you could have a real beauty.
Stub,
After looking around on the internet, I have only found one type-38 handset at opw for $112 + shipping. Do you know of other sources for these handsets? I would like it to have the chrome rings to match the chrome finger wheel. I will put it in the classified ads under wanted here at CRP.
Tina
Quote from: cloyd on August 18, 2015, 05:01:39 PM
Quote from: wds on August 17, 2015, 08:33:40 PM
You decide. You could keep your existing handset and a very nice phone for cheap, or for another $40 or so you could have a real beauty.
Stub,
After looking around on the internet, I have only found one type-38 handset at opw for $112 + shipping. Do you know of other sources for these handsets? I would like it to have the chrome rings to match the chrome finger wheel. I will put it in the classified ads under wanted here at CRP.
Tina
Well, patience is a virtue! ;D
These kind of items rarely show up right when you think you need them. I would be patient and set up an automatic search on eBay. Sometimes they show up for less than you expect, but you have to be patient. I would not call them rare.
Often I see one with some other "junk" as a bundle, I think a couple of weeks ago there was one and the whole pile was less than $30.
Quote from: unbeldi on August 17, 2015, 10:14:17 PM
The dial in Tina's telephone seems to be a No. 51, I think.
So this was a replacement in the 1950s, perhaps along with the black rubber cords.
No. 51 is probably also supported by the type of number card installed on the dial. This has the two-line medium height printing area (1950), the larger one came out in 1955. Before 1950 there was only room for one line of print.
Tina: Is there a date on the paper label around the cord?
Sorry, no date on the paper label.
If the phone has a No. 51 dial, what does the 60-C and 43 printed on the back of the dial mean?
Tina
Quote from: cloyd on August 18, 2015, 06:36:02 PM
Quote from: unbeldi on August 17, 2015, 10:14:17 PM
The dial in Tina's telephone seems to be a No. 51, I think.
So this was a replacement in the 1950s, perhaps along with the black rubber cords.
No. 51 is probably also supported by the type of number card installed on the dial. This has the two-line medium height printing area (1950), the larger one came out in 1955. Before 1950 there was only room for one line of print.
Tina: Is there a date on the paper label around the cord?
Sorry, no date on the paper label.
If the phone has a No. 51 dial, what does the 60-C and 43 printed on the back of the dial mean?
Tina
I don't know, and I haven't read that anyone else really knows.
A lot of time gets spent decoding a lot of these marks that companies put on their devices. Many we just don't know, especially those by the independents. The Bell System had an amazing system of documentation, and we still don't know some of their codes either.
When I posted photos of my set, I could not find this information in my files.Copied from Telephony or Telephone Engineering and Management 1938.Did not write down the exact date- This was 25 years ago
The type 40 might have been a few months sooner
Quote from: rdelius on September 05, 2015, 12:17:49 PM
When I posted photos of my set, I could not find this information in my files.Copied from Telephony or Telephone Engineering and Management 1938.Did not write down the exact date- This was 25 years ago
The type 40 might have been a few months sooner
Excellent find! Thanks for posting.
Quote from: rdelius on September 05, 2015, 12:17:49 PM
When I posted photos of my set, I could not find this information in my files.Copied from Telephony or Telephone Engineering and Management 1938.Did not write down the exact date- This was 25 years ago
The type 40 might have been a few months sooner
Thank you for taking the time to find these! Very cool.
Tina
(http://www.classicrotaryphones.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=14814.0;attach=128748;image)
Perhaps this is a reasonable reconstruction of the page spread.
Full resolution PDF is attached with searchable index (ocr).
I wonder whether this phone was delivered by AE with a plug on the mounting cord, rather than the Bakelite connection box.
Hello all! I need your help again.
I am looking for a type 38 handset for my AE34a3a but I don't know how to verify from a photo, like on ebay, that it is the appropriate handset. Wasn't there a similar handset on the A1? If these are different handsets, how can you tell them apart? If not from the photo, then from something printed inside that I could ask the seller a question about.
Here are a couple of pictures of handsets that appeared on ebay that I passed up because I didn't know. This is a link to an ebay phone that may have what I need. Antique-AUTOMATIC-ELECTRIC-Monophone-Telephone-Art-Deco-Bakelite-c1925 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Antique-AUTOMATIC-ELECTRIC-Monophone-Telephone-Art-Deco-Bakelite-c1925/301735464070?_trksid=p2047675.c100011.m1850&_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIC.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D33097%26meid%3Df435321366b9444b947e870dce26f60c%26pid%3D100011%26rk%3D5%26rkt%3D10%26sd%3D161819766311)
Thank you for your help,
Indeed the 1A, and the 34A, and others used the same type of handset. However, there were two very different kinds that look identical until you open them or examine the circuit inside the telephone housing. Aside from the "normal" handset for use with an induction coil telephone, they made another version which had the induction coil integrated with the receiver. Both the 1A and the 34A could be so equipped.
They also had an antinoise variety with a special transmitter and slightly different spit cup shape, but those would probably be rare to find, but would also be acceptable on a 34.
Unbeldi,
So, you are saying that I should ask for photos of the interior of the handset. Is that right? If it has an induction coil, I should pass, but if it doesn't, it would probably be appropriate for my AE34a3a? Does anyone have photos of the interior of these two types of receivers?
Thank you,
Tina Loyd
Quote from: cloyd on September 15, 2015, 02:17:59 PM
I am looking for a type 38 handset for my AE34a3a but I don't know how to verify from a photo, like on ebay, that it is the appropriate handset.
The handsets you displayed are the correct type. There are several versions of that handset; most can be distinguished from the outside - only the AST type handset can't.
The correct handset:
- has a flat surface on the underside of the handle as shown in your images
- has a sloping transmitter module (and a type 41 transmitter) - I assume this is correct as the phone was released after the type 41 handset.
- has chrome (not nickel) or black bands
- has a black cord not a brown one
To determine if the handset is an AST type or not you need to see inside. The AST *receiver* has a single round coil inside and it is not magnetic - that is, the diaphragm will fall off.
I am going by memory at the moment - if I have forgotten something I'm sure someone will correct me.
Regards
Jack
Tina....did it work with the handset that you received the phone with? It is the correct handset and will look great. Did the handset have the chrome caps that match the dial? I'd keep it as is, but that's just me. Did it clean up well with the Citrix stripper?....Doug
Quote from: Doug Rose on September 15, 2015, 07:18:11 PM
Tina....did it work with the handset that you received the phone with? It is the correct handset and will look great. Did the handset have the chrome caps that match the dial? I'd keep it as is, but that's just me. Did it clean up well with the Citrix stripper?....Doug
Doug,
The handset that came with the phone is a painted type 41 - not the correct handset. Or have I missed something?
Jack
Quote from: Doug Rose on September 15, 2015, 07:18:11 PM
Tina....did it work with the handset that you received the phone with? It is the correct handset and will look great. Did the handset have the chrome caps that match the dial? I'd keep it as is, but that's just me. Did it clean up well with the Citrix stripper?....Doug
We have already established that a No. 41 handset is not the correct one. This phone model was available before the Type 40 was introduced, which was the first to have the 41 handset.
Quote from: cloyd on September 15, 2015, 03:17:55 PM
Unbeldi,
So, you are saying that I should ask for photos of the interior of the handset. Is that right? If it has an induction coil, I should pass, but if it doesn't, it would probably be appropriate for my AE34a3a? Does anyone have photos of the interior of these two types of receivers?
Thank you,
Tina Loyd
You want to see the inside of the receiver cavity. As Jack just pointed out you'll see the difference in the magnet assembly, the induction coil receiver has more than just two wires.
Here you go. Induction coil receiver is not the one for your phone, you need the regular one (3rd pic ) with two wires on the receiver . stub
Quote from: Jack Ryan on September 15, 2015, 07:28:10 PM
Quote from: Doug Rose on September 15, 2015, 07:18:11 PM
Tina....did it work with the handset that you received the phone with? It is the correct handset and will look great. Did the handset have the chrome caps that match the dial? I'd keep it as is, but that's just me. Did it clean up well with the Citrix stripper?....Doug
The handset that came with the phone is a painted type 41 - not the correct handset. Or have I missed something?
Jack
Jack ...I had found two of what I thought were AE34A3Bs with the chrome dial and matching chrome bands so I thought it was the correct handset. Neither had the cutout. Both phones were in working order. I guess I was wrong....Doug
Doug,
Quote from: Doug Rose on September 16, 2015, 07:02:05 AM
I had found two of what I thought were AE34A3Bs with the chrome dial and matching chrome bands so I thought it was the correct handset. Neither had the cutout. Both phones were in working order. I guess I was wrong....Doug
Doug,
Doug,
The AE 34A3 and the AE 34A3A use the Type 38 style handset but the AE 34A3B uses a Type 41 handset. The cradle of the AE 34A3B is modified so that the Type 41 handset fits properly.
Jack
thanks Jack....now I know...Doug
Quote from: Doug Rose on September 16, 2015, 07:02:05 AM
Quote from: Jack Ryan on September 15, 2015, 07:28:10 PM
Quote from: Doug Rose on September 15, 2015, 07:18:11 PM
Tina....did it work with the handset that you received the phone with? It is the correct handset and will look great. Did the handset have the chrome caps that match the dial? I'd keep it as is, but that's just me. Did it clean up well with the Citrix stripper?....Doug
The handset that came with the phone is a painted type 41 - not the correct handset. Or have I missed something?
Jack
Jack ...I had found two of what I thought were AE34A3Bs with the chrome dial and matching chrome bands so I thought it was the correct handset. Neither had the cutout. Both phones were in working order. I guess I was wrong....Doug
Doug,
No, in your case you are correct.
The 34A3B indeed came with a No. 41 handset and did not have the lift cut-out.
But this is not a 34A3B;Tina's phone is a 34A3A.
Quote from: Jack Ryan on August 17, 2015, 09:37:28 PM
Quote from: unbeldi on August 17, 2015, 09:31:01 PM
I don't believe in the "development" hypothesis per se, but surely they must have considered the experience with all variant for the design of the Type 40.
No, I don't any longer either. I think the AE 34A3A was intended as a compatible offering for AE 34A3 users. In the end, it was not a success and the AE 34A3B replaced it.
Experience with the handle of the AE 34A3A probably convinced AE not to use it for the 40
Jack
I suspect that the Type 34A3A was probably AE's response to the arrival of the 302 telephone by Western Electric in 1937, which featured this same type of "easy lift" feature, the rear hand-hold space for fingers between the cradle posts.
Rdelius reported that the advertisement he found was from 1938, which perfectly fits the time frame.
The hookswitch rod in the middle of the finger space made the carrying feature probably a bit awkward, perhaps even unreliable? So, when redesigning the set as the Type 40, which was out the following year, 1939, they followed Western Electric and used two plungers in the cradle ears. They also implemented a new anti-sidetone circuit which is in essence the same as the WECo circuit, resulting in better transmission quality.
Great discussion everyone. I have never had such a complete understanding of the variations of the AE 34 set.
34A3 - type 38 "style" handset, no handhold, original tilted ringer mount and coil beneath ringer.
34A3A - type 38 "style" handset, with handhold, flat ringer mount.
34A3B - type 41 handset & wider cradle area, no handhold, ....ringer?
What else can I add to this summary?
Terry
Quote from: AE_Collector on September 16, 2015, 12:14:23 PM
Great discussion everyone. I have never had such a complete understanding of the variations of the AE 34 set.
34A3 - type 38 handset, no handhold, original tilted ringer mount.
34A3A - type 38 handset, with handhold, flat ringer mount.
34A3B - type 41 handset & wider cradle area, no handhold, flat ringer mount, new anti sidetone circuit.
What else can I add to this summary?
Terry
I do not believe that the 34A3B used a new AST circuit yet. I think this is explained on page 16 in 4055C, where it states:
Thus, the telephone company
retains the advantages of standardization in
circuit and in most of the major components;The circuit is the famous anti-sidetone
circuit which has been standard in central-battery
Monophones for many years.For operating organizations
which have standardized on this circuit, and wish
to continue its use, the Type 34A3B Monophone will
prove exceptionally satisfactory.The new circuit was reserved for the Type 40 Monophone.
However, they speak of transmission improvements for the 34A3B. I believe this only resulted from the new transmitter and receiver elements, not from any circuit changes. However, reviewing my circuits, the dimensioning of the induction coil is different, probably adjusted for the new Type 41 transmitter and receiver elements. I have drawn real circuit diagrams for all three variants, and they are all identical in the layout.
PS:
34A3:
*circuit label: D-53548
(does anyone have a label to show?)*induction coil: 13Ω:14.5Ω:220Ω
with induction coil in receiver:
*circuit label: D53551
34A3A:
*circuit label: D-53677 (dial, metallic ringing) D-53676 (dial, grounded ringing, two-condensers)
*induction coil: 20Ω:30Ω:220Ω
34A3B:
*circuit label: D-53548 (dial, metallic ringing)
*induction coil: 13Ω:14.5Ω:220Ω
34A3A wiring diagram (with carry handle)
Quote from: wds on September 16, 2015, 02:17:58 PM
34A3 wiring diagram
I believe that diagram came out of a 34A3A, it has the ordering number (L-250-A0) stamped on it.
The order number for the original 34A3 was L–220–A0, or L–22x where x = 0,1, 4,5, and –A0 for dial, –B0 for manual.
It is possible of course that the form labels were indeed the same, but we should verify with one that actually has the proper order number on it.
try this - from model 34A3. (no carry handle)
Quote from: wds on September 16, 2015, 02:53:09 PM
try this. The other label came out of my 34 with the carry handle.
Interesting, it does have the correct order number (for manual service), but I believe this is the form for the 34A3B, with the revised induction coil (13:14:220) for the Type 41 handset. Does that say D53548 Issue 2?
I will check it when I get home tonight.
Quote from: stub on September 15, 2015, 10:39:47 PM
Here you go. Induction coil receiver is not the one for your phone, you need the regular one (3rd pic ) with two wires on the receiver . stub
Stub,
Thank you for the photos. They speak a thousand words. I think I am understanding, slowly but...OK, slowly. Stub, would you be so kind as to take photos of the profile of the AST-type 38 handset side-by-side with the non-AST type 38? I want to make sure I fully understand the description that Jack gave me of the correct non-AST type 38 characteristics.
Jack wrote:
The handsets you displayed are the correct type. There are several versions of that handset; most can be distinguished from the outside - only the AST type handset can't.
The correct handset:
- has a flat surface on the underside of the handle as shown in your images
- has a sloping transmitter module (and a type 41 transmitter) - I assume this is correct as the phone was released after the type 41 handset.
- has chrome (not nickel) or black bands
- has a black cord not a brown one
To determine if the handset is an AST type or not you need to see inside. The AST *receiver* has a single round coil inside and it is not magnetic - that is, the diaphragm will fall off.
Jack
Also, could I bother you for a photo of the interior of the non-AST type 38? I think I know what I should see there but I want to make sure.
Thank you to everyone for your input,
Tina
Here's a picture of the inside of the phone that goes with the label L220-
Quote from: Doug Rose on September 15, 2015, 07:18:11 PM
Tina....did it work with the handset that you received the phone with? It is the correct handset and will look great. Did the handset have the chrome caps that match the dial? I'd keep it as is, but that's just me. Did it clean up well with the Citrix stripper?....Doug
I haven't put much labor into any of my phones lately. I teach high school biology and we are back into the full swing of things. That means that the rest of my life gets put on hold. I will strip the phone over Thanksgiving or Christmas when I have some time off. Sitting in my favorite chair combing through ebay for phones and parts is about all the gumption I can muster in the evenings.
I will certainly post pictures when I get it cleaned up!
Tina
Quote from: wds on September 16, 2015, 03:11:37 PM
Here's a picture of the inside of the phone that goes with the label L220-
The base could be either the 34A3 or the 34A3B, indeed. The dial appears to be a Type 51 added much later, so likely this was a manual phone at one time, confirmed by the –B0 code. So perhaps the housing does go with the base.
Also, the diagram is stamped with an A, likely a frequency ringer designation and the ringer in the phone indeed is likely a 16 Hz ringer.
The only question is the exact dimensions around the cradle area, could this phone reliably accommodate the Type 41 handset or not? Have you run the test described in early (I think).
The induction coil looks rather new, judging by the end blocks. Did they use screws with this finish already in the mid-30s or did they use brass screws?
Tina,
Can't post any pics , wife left camera at sisters house . stub
I actually no longer have that particular phone. I have been very curious about the cradle measurements, and asked for measurements in the past, but haven't received any. I have tried the test of sliding the receiver to see if it drops (or rises?), but I have never been able to get the results that other people have reported. I have used a micrometer to measure some of the cradle openings on my 34's, but they always seem to be the same. Attached are some measurements I have taken in the past. I remember that the ringer was a frequency ringer, but it rang nice and loud.
I just received another 34 in the mail today and it had a wiring diagram. Maybe this one will work?
Quote from: wds on September 16, 2015, 05:54:53 PM
I just received another 34 in the mail today and it had a wiring diagram. Maybe this one will work?
Thanks, the plot thickens.
It is the same diagram, once again, D-53548. Correct catalog number, this time the dial version.
Also a frequency ringer?
Perhaps they used the same labels, before and after the 34A3A. [well, before and after is not the right phrasing, rather in terms of model number sequencing].
But why would they have switched the induction coil to higher resistances for the 34A3A when the handset was identical. Perhaps it wasn't? This raises a question that I have had for some time. How did the type number for the handset come about: Type 38? From my reading this type designation was only ever mentioned after they had already pronounced the new handset for the AE40 as Type 41. Before the AE40, the handset was only ever known as the Monophone hand set or hand unit, order number (... 900 ... series).
Has any one a Form D-53548
ISSUE 1, rather than 2 ?
I was of the impression that the type 38 handset used the removable capsul type receiver and transmitter elements which fits with your idea that the type 38 only existed from the time of the type 41 handset on. The similar looking handsets to the type 38 that did not use removable capsules were not in fact type 38 but a previous longer part number rather than a "type xx".
Terry
Pictures of the inside - SL ringer. Nice older dial that clicks when you spin it.
Quote from: AE_Collector on September 16, 2015, 06:30:07 PM
I was of the impression that the type 38 handset used the removable capsul type receiver and transmitter elements which fits with your idea that the type 38 only existed from the time of the type 41 handset on. The similar looking handsets to the type 38 that did not use removable capsules were not in fact type 38 but a previous longer part number rather than a "type xx".
Terry
Ah, thanks for that. Sure makes sense.
So, the question is when the first capsules appeared, and which of the three models used them. This doesn't make it any easier for Tina to find a handset.
Quote from: wds on September 16, 2015, 06:31:25 PM
Pictures of the inside - SL ringer. Nice older dial that clicks when you spin it.
So, the dates of the patents listed on your label are no later than 1932.
Does the handset have capsules?
I haven't been able to keep up with this thread because work has been a bit hectic. Here is a quick summary of what I think I know about the Type 38 style handset. Note that I use "Type 38 style" and sometimes just "Type 38" to refer to all of these handsets even though they were only called Type 38 when it was needed to distinguish it from the Type 41 handset.
Type 38 Style Handsets
This handset was introduced in 1925 and remained with little change into the 1940s. It had a variety of names:
== Transmitter-receiver unit (telephone referred to as the Monophone)
== Monophone Hand Unit
== Type 38 Handset (to distinguish it from the Type 41)
Despite changes to the shape of the handle, it remained compatible with newer modules and caps.
So far, I have found four different handles:
== Round – AE Inc
== Round – AE CO (this change can be dated from the company name change)
== Wide Flat bottom
== Narrow Flat bottom
Three different transmitter caps:
== The original slotted cap
== The deep "spit cup" cap for the solid back and 35A7 modules
== The shallow "spit cup" cap for the type 41 module
And four different transmitter modules:
== 5C1 (CB solid back)
== 5L (LB solid back)
== 35A7 (the first AE position independent transmitter) (Uses older cap)
== Type 41 (updated position independent module from the Type 41 handset AE 40))
All of the handles are compatible with respect to transmitters, receivers and caps.
Jack
Good info Jack. I am aware of some subtle changes to the handle in addition to the capsule types but have not studdied them close enough to come up with descriptions for them like yours. Good stuff.
And yes, it could be that the name "type 38" for one of the handset variations (or all variations) isn't directly tied to a change of capsules or the shape but indeed could be a name introduced simply to differentiate it from the newer type 41 handset as there had only been the one "style" of monophone handset until the type 41 was introduced. (definition of Monophone by AE at some point in time likely early on was the handset having both transmitter and receiver in a single unit as opposed to the old two piece design used phones)
I have a question about the ringer and coil in the 34A3B. This may have been answered already. Did the ringer and coil revert back to the original angle type with the coil beneath or did it continue with the new design introduced on the 34A3A?
Terry
Terry,
As far as I can tell, AE used the word Monophone to describe a telephone (or rest) and the handset. Originally the handset was called a transmitter-receiver unit and subsequently a "Monophone hand unit".
The A3B reverted to the original AE 34A3 bell coil arrangement. Except for the handset and the modified case, the parts were identical and the phone was promoted to those operating companies that had standardised on the AE 34 and had significant parts in store but wanted the improved transmission that the Type 41 handset provided.
By the way, the Type 38 handsets with the flat handle also had a different side elevation profile. You would know exactly what I meant if you could see my arms waving...
Jack
I have two 34's ripped apart here tonight comparing parts and looking for codes etc. I figured they were both original 34A3's as they are basically identical. No wiring diagram in either but they both have labels on the outside (bottom) of the base, one ink stamped and the other a paper label. Both have the same 6 patent numbers and DES # 86263. One has L235 B0 stamped on the base and the other does not have a similar stamp of code numbers anywhere.
Just as I finished putting them back together I decided to try a type 41 handset on the cradle and I was surprised to find that it fit nicely on one but not the other. As someone tried to describe earlier, the type 41 binds a bit in the cradle on the transmitter end of the handle. The phone with L235 stamped on the base is the one that the type 41 fits nicely on.
I dont have calipers or anything to do any accurate measuring but I have a tape measure. Of course with rounded corners measurements are subjective but....The outside measurement over the left cradle ear to the far side of the right cradle ear is the same or very close. 3 & 5/8" overall. From the front of a front ear to the back of a back ear is about 2 & 1/8". The phone that the type 41 handset fits nicely on might be very very slightly smaller dimensions for each of these measurements but it is not much.
The best thing I could find to tell the difference is the width of the flat top portion of any cradle ear. The phone that doesnt like the type 41 has a cradle ear about 9/16" wide while the one that likes the type 41 is only about 7/16" wide.
There is a slight difference in the case where it bulges out to fit over and around the angled ringer right behind the back cradle ears as well. Hard to explain and I dont "do" pictures with edited in lines, arrows & descriptions etc. No idea how. But the case on the one that likes the type 41 pushes straight back just a little bit further than the other before angling downwards.
So I am guessing that I might have a 34A3 and a 34A3B that has had a type 38 handset put on it. Everything electrical appears to be identical on these two phones.
Terry
Quote from: AE_Collector on September 17, 2015, 02:03:13 AM
So I am guessing that I might have a 34A3 and a 34A3B that has had a type 38 handset put on it. Everything electrical appears to be identical on these two phones.
Terry
Are the induction coils labeled at all?
Would it be possible for you to measure their resistance across the primary or secondary coils?
If any differences, it should be 13 vs 20 ohms (P) and 14 vs 30 ohms (S).
Other than that, the two bases should be identical. We don't appear to have records anywhere that describe what AE sets underwent during refurbishing, as we do for the Bell System, where they dotted, striped, or marked the smallest nuances of sets.
Both induction coils marked D-282155.
I will see if I can get the time to measure resistance tonight.
Here in British Columbia Canada we had our "shops" that did all the refurbishing work for the BC Telephone Company. They did their own thing and nothing was ever marked in the process that I know of.
Terry
thanks,
I suppose there was no reason to mark modifications and such if you don't have the goal or scope of world domination, lol.
As you are having a hard time distinguishing between the old cradle and the 34A3B cradle, I would think that shop techs were in the same position, while not even having allotted time for such details, and refurbished whatever came in to whatever they were told to produce.
I just hope they didn't change induction coil numbers just because they used brown paper vs black paper around the windings.
The patent for this induction coil is No. 1878800 (http://www.google.com/patents/US1878800), usually listed on the AE stickers. It explains mostly the virtues of their molded Bakelite in protecting wires and connections, but I cannot help to assume this was a much more expensive product than what WECo still used at the time, simple wood blocks, chop chop drill.
I took another stab at measuring the cradles on the different models. I will fill in the 2nd column when I get home tonight. If someone could take measurements of the 3rd model type that would be great.
Quote from: Jack Ryan on September 16, 2015, 08:05:23 PM
I haven't been able to keep up with this thread because work has been a bit hectic. Here is a quick summary of what I think I know about the Type 38 style handset. Note that I use "Type 38 style" and sometimes just "Type 38" to refer to all of these handsets even though they were only called Type 38 when it was needed to distinguish it from the Type 41 handset.
Type 38 Style Handsets
This handset was introduced in 1925 and remained with little change into the 1940s. It had a variety of names:
== Transmitter-receiver unit (telephone referred to as the Monophone)
== Monophone Hand Unit
== Type 38 Handset (to distinguish it from the Type 41)
Despite changes to the shape of the handle, it remained compatible with newer modules and caps.
So far, I have found four different handles:
== Round – AE Inc
== Round – AE CO (this change can be dated from the company name change)
== Wide Flat bottom
== Narrow Flat bottom
Three different transmitter caps:
== The original slotted cap
== The deep "spit cup" cap for the solid back and 35A7 modules
== The shallow "spit cup" cap for the type 41 module
And four different transmitter modules:
== 5C1 (CB solid back)
== 5L (LB solid back)
== 35A7 (the first AE position independent transmitter) (Uses older cap)
== Type 41 (updated position independent module from the Type 41 handset AE 40))
All of the handles are compatible with respect to transmitters, receivers and caps.
Jack
Great information Jack! The AE1A phone handset looks like the type 38. If it is, can you tell which type this is? This picture is from the beautiful phone that celnout has on ebay.
Thanks,
Tina
I measured the cradle of my model 34A3B and sure enough the cradle measurements are different than my other two models. The ear width is narrower, and the overall width of the cradle area is a little smaller. The 41 handset does fit a little better on the 34A3B, but still not perfect. The handle is not symmetric - the end by the transmitter is a little fatter than the receiver end. The fatter side prevents the handset from sliding all the way to the left, but it will slide all the way to the right. The only way to slide it all the way to the left is if the handle lifts up.
This has been a great discussion. I finally know the difference between the three models. I'm surprised that AE would manufacture an entirely different shell just to accommodate the 41 handset.
Quote from: wds on September 17, 2015, 05:35:05 PM
I'm surprised that AE would manufacture an entirely different shell just to accommodate the 41 handset.
I suppose it's not much different than WECo making a new shell to reuse old 302 bases while giving the customer the illusion of having something more modern.
Thanks for the measurements.
Quote from: cloyd on September 17, 2015, 03:52:54 PM
The AE1A phone handset looks like the type 38. If it is, can you tell which type this is?
It is hard to tell *exactly* which handset it is but it is a later one with a flat handle. The transmitter cap has a deep "spit cup" so it does not have a Type 41 transmitter module; so not the last of them. It would be OK with your telephone except that it is finished in brass and has a black cord.
I'd look for auctions for just handsets or perhaps broken phones with good handsets. Don't but shiny expensive ones and be prepared to be disappointed with some. They are often chipped at the cable entry point and many people use the "bigger hammer" approach to cap removal. This results in the internal Bakelite key being broken off. Often there is a worn "dent" in the centre-underside of the handle; this is caused by the hook switch plunger after many, many phone calls. It is worst on phones with a Bakelite plunger. You will get what you want eventually.
The phone in the auction is interesting. It is neither an AE 1 (the one with the tall perch) nor an AE 1-A (the one with the short perch); it is a combination of parts.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/301743238462
Jack
Okay, ohm meter results are in. I found a third AE 34A3 here to check as well. All three including the one that appears to be a 34A3B have induction coils with windings of 13 - 14 - 220 ohms.
Terry
Quote from: unbeldi on September 17, 2015, 08:32:41 AM
Quote from: AE_Collector on September 17, 2015, 02:03:13 AM
So I am guessing that I might have a 34A3 and a 34A3B that has had a type 38 handset put on it. Everything electrical appears to be identical on these two phones.
Terry
Are the induction coils labeled at all?
Would it be possible for you to measure their resistance across the primary or secondary coils?
If any differences, it should be 13 vs 20 ohms (P) and 14 vs 30 ohms (S).
Other than that, the two bases should be identical. We don't appear to have records anywhere that describe what AE sets underwent during refurbishing, as we do for the Bell System, where they dotted, striped, or marked the smallest nuances of sets.
I am still trying to find the correct type 38 handset. The insides of this one is not the AST version but it isn't what I expected either. Is this what they are supposed to look like? Let me know what you think of this one. It was a lineman's handset.
Thank you,
Tina
Personally I don't like these newer handsets - if you look at the transmitter contact at the bottom, you can see it's bent. Those things always break off, and that one looks like it's ready to go - and you can't get replacements. i much prefer the older style transmitter that's almost burger proof.
Tina,
The one you have pictured above is the Type 38 Handset conversion -
2nd and 3rd pic is a standard Type 38 Handset - 34A3
4th pic is 41 with a mouthpiece that matches the catalogs for 34A3B minus the chrome bands.
It is possible that the Type 38 Handset conversion could be correct for your phone ? stub
( Left click on pics to enlarge )
Quote from: AE_Collector on September 18, 2015, 01:50:35 AM
Okay, ohm meter results are in. I found a third AE 34A3 here to check as well. All three including the one that appears to be a 34A3B have induction coils with windings of 13 - 14 - 220 ohms.
Terry
Quote from: unbeldi on September 17, 2015, 08:32:41 AM
Quote from: AE_Collector on September 17, 2015, 02:03:13 AM
So I am guessing that I might have a 34A3 and a 34A3B that has had a type 38 handset put on it. Everything electrical appears to be identical on these two phones.
Terry
Are the induction coils labeled at all?
Would it be possible for you to measure their resistance across the primary or secondary coils?
If any differences, it should be 13 vs 20 ohms (P) and 14 vs 30 ohms (S).
Other than that, the two bases should be identical. We don't appear to have records anywhere that describe what AE sets underwent during refurbishing, as we do for the Bell System, where they dotted, striped, or marked the smallest nuances of sets.
Thanks for the measurements.
But it doesn't settle any questions at this time, unfortunately. Perhaps the bases simply got mixed up in refurbishing, or there is something else to consider.