Author Topic: WECo 5302 - F1 vs G1 Handset  (Read 10867 times)

Offline paul-f

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2809
    • Old Telephones as Entertainment!
Re: F1 vs G1
« Reply #15 on: March 12, 2011, 01:18:17 PM »
For more details and source info pointers, check out:
  http://www.paul-f.com/we300typ.htm#Fhandsets

Some care is required when identifying the handsets.  GF handsets were refurbed from either G1 or G3 handles, so are NOT marked GF.  They can be identified by the spacers visible just below the handset caps and the specially marked handset caps -- with a F or H in the center.  If it has these parts, it's a GF.

As Bill noted, occasionally (but not always) the bottom stamping on the 5302 included GF in the model number to indicate that it was supplied with the set when refurbed.

The only BSP documents I've seen mentioning the GF are the two New York Telephone BSPs referenced on the site.
Visit: paul-f.com         WE 500  Design_Line

.

Offline GG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1170
Re: F1 vs G1
« Reply #16 on: March 12, 2011, 07:36:12 PM »


Dennis' posting is a perfect description of what "high sidetone" is like.

BTW, when I was in high school we found numerous 5302s with apparent G-type handsets having an odd screw-in adaptor thingie that took F1 transmitters.  I vaguely recall a drop-in adaptor for U1 receivers on these but not well enough for that recollection to be considered reliable. 

The simple way I remember the details of how these were used is:

a) 5302 = electrically a 302, with an updated housing for subscriber acceptance when 500s were starting to become common. 

b) F1 handsets wherever possible, to avoid the waste of junking them.  Used for short loops to the CO, where the volume and sidetone characteristics would be normal.

c) G1 handsets with T1 and U3 components on long loops where the combination of F1 and HA1 would have produced low transmission & reception volume.

d) Occasional odd combinations of components for expedience during spot shortages, used where the components matched the loop length. 

e)  Mostly 5H dials; I have not personally seen a 5302 with a #6 dial, though I'm sure they existed, though I've seen plenty of 302s with #6 dials. 


Offline Dennis Markham

  • VintageRotaryPhones.com
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5583
    • VintageRotaryPhones.com
Re: F1 vs G1
« Reply #17 on: March 12, 2011, 08:43:49 PM »
I have a couple of 5302's with #5 dials but they are marked 5M.  I was told that the M indicates Modified, for use in a 5302.  I don't know how they differ from a 5H dial.

Offline paul-f

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2809
    • Old Telephones as Entertainment!
Re: F1 vs G1
« Reply #18 on: March 12, 2011, 09:56:06 PM »
The number plate is certainly different -- black with white dots.
Visit: paul-f.com         WE 500  Design_Line

.

Offline rp2813

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 842
  • 10/50
Re: F1 vs G1
« Reply #19 on: March 12, 2011, 11:35:27 PM »
It strikes me that a 5302 with a modified G handset and #6 dial would offer the best chance to fool the average subscriber into thinking they had a 500.  Only if they flipped the phone over and had a 500 handy to compare with would they notice a difference.

Out of all the phones I own, from D1 with 4H to 500 with #9, I like the smooth operation of the #6 on my 5302 the best.  I think the sound and feel of a #5 in a 5302 would seem strange to me.  On the other hand, it would be fun to have an all-1937 chassis under a 5302 case paired with G handset containing 1937 F1 and HA1 elements, providing the sacrificing of the metal 302 housing was already done by WECo back in the 50's.
Ralph

Offline deedubya3800

  • ****
  • Posts: 441
  • My 1942 Ivory 302
Re: F1 vs G1
« Reply #20 on: March 13, 2011, 03:53:55 AM »
If memory serves, my 5302 has a 6C dial. Has anyone ever seen a black 5302 with a clear fingerwheel?

Offline Dan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1961
  • 1957 WE 500-P
Re: F1 vs G1
« Reply #21 on: March 14, 2011, 09:44:19 AM »
If memory serves, my 5302 has a 6C dial. Has anyone ever seen a black 5302 with a clear fingerwheel?


My pink has a clear one and a #6 dial, but I have never seen a black one.
"Imagine how weird telephones would look if our ears weren't so close to our mouths." - Steven Wright

Offline Doug Rose

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6014
  • Blondie & the Kid of Phone
Re: F1 vs G1
« Reply #22 on: March 14, 2011, 11:16:36 AM »
If memory serves, my 5302 has a 6C dial. Has anyone ever seen a black 5302 with a clear fingerwheel?
It should be a 6D, with a clear finger wheel and white paint. These replaced the 5J and are a tad smaller across, perfect for the schrinking thermoplastic....Doug
Kidphone

Offline Stephen Furley

  • ****
  • Posts: 433
Re: F1 vs G1
« Reply #23 on: September 04, 2011, 06:28:15 PM »
I'm really confused by all of this.  I've read somewhere that one reason for the introduction of the 5302, other than using available parts, was that the new 500 as introduced gave a poor performance on long loops, and the 5302 enabled subscribers on such long loops to have a modern looking telephone while using the older components, which were more suitable for the long loops.  Here, and in other places, I read that the older F1 transmitter was best suited to short loops, while the new T1 model would be better for long ones.  This seems to contradict the previous statement.

There has been talk of using 'old' elements in modified 'G' type handsets, but I don't see how this could be done; the F1 transmitter is too large to fit in a G type handset.  You couldn't just  bore it out; there isn't enough material to be able to do this.  I'm not sure about the receivers; I don't have the older type here at the moment.  Going the other way it's easy to physically put a T1 transmitter into a F1 handset of course, or even into a E1 with the 625A transmitter holder in addition to the F1-T1 adapter ring.

What, other than size, is the difference between the F1 and T1 transmitters?  I've tested my 302 with three transmitter types, F1, T1 and an electret T1 drop-in replacement.  I can hear no difference between the F1 and the T1, either in sidetone, or when listening at the other end of the line.  Of course, both the F1 and the T1 will be quite old by now, as are my ears, and all are likely to have some fall-off in performance with age.  I have to say that I think the F1 was a better than average transmitter for it's age.  The modern electret drop-in replacement does sound quite different, both louder and better quality speech, but that is not surprising.

Offline LarryInMichigan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4642
Re: F1 vs G1
« Reply #24 on: September 04, 2011, 06:43:59 PM »
Quote
There has been talk of using 'old' elements in modified 'G' type handsets, but I don't see how this could be done; the F1 transmitter is too large to fit in a G type handset.  You couldn't just  bore it out; there isn't enough material to be able to do this.  I'm not sure about the receivers; I don't have the older type here at the moment.  Going the other way it's easy to physically put a T1 transmitter into a F1 handset of course, or even into a E1 with the 625A transmitter holder in addition to the F1-T1 adapter ring.

WE did manage to put F1 transmitters into G handsets and called them GF handsets.  Check out his thread: http://www.classicrotaryphones.com/forum/index.php?topic=3412.msg45284.

Larry

Offline paul-f

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2809
    • Old Telephones as Entertainment!
Re: F1 vs G1
« Reply #25 on: September 04, 2011, 07:39:27 PM »
Stephen,

Your memory probably reversed the situation.  The advantage of the 425A network in the 500 was better performance on long loops.  The equalizer was needed for sets that were installed close to the CO to limit the loop current.

As a cost reduction measure, WE provided 500s without the equalizer that were not to be installed near COs.  (500T, later renamed 500J or 500K).

300s and 5300s were installed in zones near the COs.

You'll find more background than you can digest in an evening in this thread:
  http://www.classicrotaryphones.com/forum/index.php?topic=2394.0

Also check out the reference list (and a summary of the early 500s) here:
  http://www.paul-f.com/we500_Early.html#References
Visit: paul-f.com         WE 500  Design_Line

.

Offline deedubya3800

  • ****
  • Posts: 441
  • My 1942 Ivory 302
Re: F1 vs G1
« Reply #26 on: September 05, 2011, 05:39:54 PM »
I have a GF handset, and I can tell you that it took some serious modification to make an F1 element fit. The threads of the G1 are removed and replaced with an extra ring with a larger diameter and smaller threads and a different cap is used.

Offline GG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1170
Re: F1 vs G1
« Reply #27 on: September 06, 2011, 04:08:17 AM »


From my memory of the GF handsets (highschool & college), they didn't remove the threads from the G handset shell.  The adaptor ring was simply screwed in place over the existing threads, and the different transmitter cap was screwed on top of it. 

Occasionally if one of these got sticky in the wrong place, unscrewing the transmitter cap would reveal the F1 transmitter held inside the cap by the adaptor ring.  With a little effort the sticky ring could be unscrewed from the inside of the transmitter cap, allowing removal of the F1 in order to give the transmitter cap a good cleaning w/ soap & water. 


Offline HowardPgh

  • ****
  • Posts: 393
Re: F1 vs G1
« Reply #28 on: July 05, 2012, 02:43:29 PM »
Does the F1 come out of that cap? Is the adapter ring just screwed on or is it glued on? I don't want to break something I don't have a replacement part for.  The handset is bakelite and has the cord holder on it rather on the back of the transmitter(as in a normal G1).
Howard
Howard

Offline Phonesrfun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4867
  • "Number Please"
Re: F1 vs G1
« Reply #29 on: July 05, 2012, 03:32:51 PM »
I have one at home, I can check tonight and see what the arrangement is. 
-Bill G