701B / 702B Princess housing/shell differences?

[easytiger]

In addition to the well-documented differences in the ringer/no ringer feature between the 701B and 702B WE Princess - including the differences in the design and elevation of the base configuration to account for the ringer - did the housing/shell design also require size/shape modification to account for the ringer...or was it only the base?

I've found information and previous discussions here regarding the base differences, but couldn't find anything definitive regarding whether the shells required modification as well or whether they were (and are) interchangeable between bases.  I beg a thousand pardons if I've missed it and this is redundant.

[rdelius]

The 701 shell is a little taller inside for more clearance.I found that if I took A 701 shell and put it on a 702 I would have hookswitch problems. The lead weight was removed for more space for the ringer and I believe the chassis was deeper also with slots to let sound out also.
Robby

[McHeath]

Isn't there a notch on the 702s shell for the handset and line cords that the 701 lacks?

[rdelius]

I forgot that, I have not worked on a princess in years
Robby

[easytiger]

Thanks, guys!  Having that mentioned, now that I read back through some earlier posts, I see that Dennis did mention the "mouse hole" for the handset cord in the thread below - although it looks like maybe it's the other way around.  The 701 has the cord hole that the 702 lacks - presumably because the elevation of the 702 shell to accommodate the ringer, clears the way for the cord through the notch in the base without requiring the shell to accommodate it...?

I originally read that thinking it was a description of the cord path in the base, but can see from photos in this and other threads it references the shell...

http://www.classicrotaryphones.com/forum/index.php?topic=1546.0