Author Topic: 102 versus 202  (Read 17052 times)

Offline Wallphone

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 688
Re: 102 versus 202
« Reply #15 on: August 15, 2011, 04:53:36 PM »
Don't worry about the sidetone, I have a B1/102 hooked up to a WE 534 subset and with me being a little hard of hearing, I liked it. If you want to get a new cover for your subset there is someone that makes them for $25. When the time comes let me know and I will find his email address.
Doug Pav

Offline bingster

  • Contest Director
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2945
    • OTRplus Classic Radio
Re: 102 versus 202
« Reply #16 on: August 16, 2011, 03:55:51 PM »
The subset in the auction appears to be anti-sidetone.  Even though it's marked "584," which is a sidetone subset, the induction coil is the anti-sidetone coil.  So it may have been altered to make it anti-sidetone at some point in it's life. 

It's a nice early one, too, from March, 1930.  Surely that must be very early for the bakelite-covered subsets.
= DARRIN =



Offline bigdaddylove

  • ***
  • Posts: 106
Re: 102 versus 202
« Reply #17 on: August 16, 2011, 04:18:24 PM »
 ;D ;D ;D

Offline Stephen Furley

  • ****
  • Posts: 433
Re: 102 versus 202
« Reply #18 on: August 16, 2011, 06:55:24 PM »
diagrams for the telephone sets or the subsets?

Sorry, I missed your reply.  Both.  It would also be interesting to compare them to the GPO 162 and 232 pyramid 'phone circuits.  The 162 was used with a No. 1 (wood) or No. 25 (Bakelite) bellset which contained a sidetone induction coil, the same bellsets were used with the No. 150 candlestick.  However, the 162 contained a separate 'transformer' which seems to have been an anti-sidetone device of some sort.  I'll have to sit down with the N-Diagram and look at the circuit sometime.  The 232 which came out a few years later looked almost identical, but was used with a No. 26 bellset, which was similar to the No. 25 but did not contain the induction coil; an ASTIC being mounted in the base of the 232.  The capacitor remained in the bellset.

I suspect that the 232 combined with the No. 26 bellset would be quite similar to a D-1 with 102 circuit, other than the induction coil being in the deskset rather than in the subset.  Of course, the Bakelite pyramid base gives rather more room to mount components than the D-1 had.  Since the 202 circuit kept the induction coil in the subset, and the 302 put everything inside the deskset, I assume that you never had anything, at least not from WE, which used an induction coil in the subset combined with a 'transformer' inside the deskset, as the 162 had.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2011, 07:05:02 PM by Stephen Furley »

Offline bigdaddylove

  • ***
  • Posts: 106
Re: 102 versus 202
« Reply #19 on: August 20, 2011, 02:07:30 AM »
The subset in the auction appears to be anti-sidetone.  Even though it's marked "584," which is a sidetone subset, the induction coil is the anti-sidetone coil.  So it may have been altered to make it anti-sidetone at some point in it's life. 

It's a nice early one, too, from March, 1930.  Surely that must be very early for the bakelite-covered subsets.

Looking closely at the photo of the subset, I see that both the mounting cord and line cord are three conductors. So, my question is this, why would you have a anti-sidetone subset with a phone wired for sidetone?

Thanks!


Offline Wallphone

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 688
Re: 102 versus 202
« Reply #20 on: August 20, 2011, 08:17:32 AM »
I noticed the 3 wire phone cord too and I don't know why they would wire it for sidetone. Try it once you get it and see if it works and what it sounds like. A couple of other issues you will need to check out is why there are only 2 wires coming from the condenser.  There should be 2 condensers and 4 wires coming from it. Your ringer is not hooked up to a condenser and it should be. Also, your ringer is wired for grounded ringing and that will need to be changed. See what the deal is with the condensers first. Only one of the two wires coming from the condenser is hooked up.
Doug Pav

Offline bigdaddylove

  • ***
  • Posts: 106
Re: 102 versus 202
« Reply #21 on: August 20, 2011, 10:20:03 AM »
Wow, sounds like I have my work cut out for me.

So I better understand, is there a diagram of subsets and their parts somewhere here? I'd like to be sure what I think is a condenser is actually a condenser and so on.

Thanks!

Offline Wallphone

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 688
Re: 102 versus 202
« Reply #22 on: August 20, 2011, 01:43:40 PM »
The condenser is mounted underneath the bells. You can see the two wires coming from it in the auction pics.
Doug Pav

Offline bigdaddylove

  • ***
  • Posts: 106
Re: 102 versus 202
« Reply #23 on: August 21, 2011, 12:02:09 AM »
Okay, let me see if I have this down.

The induction coil (which mine looks to be a 146a) is black with two wood blocks at either end with the L1/L2 and other connectors.

The condensers are the things that looks like lead bars and they are located directly under the gongs attached to the base plate.

The capacitors are the two black objects with 750 printed on them located in the ringer housing.

Am I correct in assuming that this subset is missing the connector block?

Thanks!

« Last Edit: August 21, 2011, 12:16:20 AM by bigdaddylove »

Offline Wallphone

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 688
Re: 102 versus 202
« Reply #24 on: August 21, 2011, 07:33:22 AM »
BDL, A capacitor and a condenser are one and the same and the words are interchangeable although for the most part when it comes to telephones they call it a condenser. The condenser is the thing that looks like lead bars underneath the gongs. The black objects with "750" stamped on them are 750 ohm electromagnetic ringer coils that make the clapper on your ringer go back & forth. You use all the screws on the 146 induction coil for a terminal block.
Doug Pav

Offline bigdaddylove

  • ***
  • Posts: 106
Re: 102 versus 202
« Reply #25 on: August 23, 2011, 03:17:01 PM »
Thanks, Wallphone.

Boy, is this thing pieced together. Parts from the 30s and 50s. The dial was refurbed in 1950 and there is a 149A condenser from 1940. It seems that there are only two connections from the condenser.

In my excitement to get the old paint off, I took the phone apart without testing it first. Probably not the best route, but I'll have plenty of time for that once I get the 4 layers of paint of of this thing.

Offline Dan H

  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: 102 versus 202
« Reply #26 on: November 29, 2013, 04:20:00 PM »
Hi Everyone.  Been reading all the posts and I think I understand this a little better.  But I still have a couple of questions.  I have a WE phone that has a E1 handset and a D1 oval base.  It's a manual phone with no dial.  Looks to be very clean and original.  At first I though it was a 202 because it had the oval base and 4 wires coming out of the cord that would go to a subset.   Looking inside, there's no black wire inside the phone from that cord, so I'm thinking it's a 102.  I would like to install a dial, and connect it to a subset, and use it.  Installing a dial shouldn't be to bloody hard - just a few screws and wires.  I think I can use a 4-H dial or a 5H dial?  Will these wire up like a standard 202 but without that missing black wire?  Next, I need to select a subset for it.  This is a side-tone phone?  So it looks like the correct subset box is a 534?  But per the above articles I could use a 634 or 684 ok but they would lack the anti-side-tone feature?   Are phones now all anti-side-tone in design?  Is there anything really terrible about a side tone?  I'm not using the phone in a ship engine room but the quiet of my humble little abode.   Can you also hook up a 2nd phone to the subset as an extension, such as a candlestick type?  What does the anti-side-tone feature really do?  Does it just switch off the transmitter from a receiver?  By changing the cord on a phone and adding that other back wire, do you suddenly have a 202?   How come some of the 634 subsets had different size capacitors?   Comments?

Offline poplar1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6047
  • 102C-6 = "Old Brass" Hand Telephone Set
Re: 102 versus 202
« Reply #27 on: November 29, 2013, 05:31:08 PM »
Dan,

4H, 5H or 6A will work. You'll also need #4-36 screws. Both a B-1 or D-1 handset mounting can be a 102 or 202: with a 3-conductor cord it's a 102, with a 4-cond. it's a 202.

Perhaps you can find and reterminate the missing black lead by removing some of the outer covering of the mounting cord. If you want to use an anti-sidetone (AST) circuit, you need 4 wires to the subset. There is a way to connect a sidetone set to an AST subset, but then it will be a sidetone circuit.

Sidetone refers to hearing yourself talk through your receiver. The advantages of AST are that (1) there is less room noise picked up and (2) because your own voice isn't as loud in the receiver, you tend to talk louder; thus a stronger transmit level is sent out over the line. AST subsets include 634A, 634BA, 684A, 684BA, 495BP, and the base of a 302 set (including the ringer, induction coil and capacitors).

The advantage of sidetone is that you can connect more than one phone to the same subset. ST subsets include 295A, 334A, 534A. This can be a mixture of candlesticks (20AL, 51AL, etc.) and hand telephone sets such as 102s. You can also use AST telephones (202, 151AL, etc.) with ST subsets by taping up the black lead.

Most if not all 634s are conversions, meaning they were originally manufactured as 534s, most of which had only one capacitor. So either the single capacitor is replaced with a double one, or the old one is left and a second single one is added.

Normally, you can't connect two 202s or other anti-sidetone sets to a 634 or other AST subset. This is because both transmitters would be active even if only one phone is off-hook. There were sets with extra contacts (215, 151R) to disconnect the transmitter when on-hook, but these are seldom found. However, if you don't mind a sidetone circuit, you can use an AST subset acting as sidetone and connect more than one phone to the same subset.
"C'est pas une restauration, c'est une rénovation."--François Martin.

Offline Dan H

  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: 102 versus 202
« Reply #28 on: December 03, 2013, 12:18:42 AM »
Thanks for the reply.  Starting to have a better understanding of the subsets and what they do.  Didn't know about multiple phones on one subset or that 634s were modified from 534s.  I'll probably start with a 534 and the three wire phone.  Looks like I have the option to change it to AST with a different subset box and a different wire to the phone.  Guess I have to hear a version to know what I'll like.  It be nice to build a small representative collection of the evolution of phones. 
 

unbeldi

  • Guest
Re: 102 versus 202
« Reply #29 on: December 03, 2013, 01:31:58 AM »
Thanks for the reply.  Starting to have a better understanding of the subsets and what they do.  Didn't know about multiple phones on one subset or that 634s were modified from 534s.
It is certain that many 534 subsets got converted to 634 sets when the stations were upgraded to anti-sidetone instruments.

However, the catalogs do contain the 634 and its various configurations, so they most certainly were also made new, as independents could order from these catalogs. They would not get refurbished equipment.

As for the model numbers, the 1935 WeCo catalog (#9) explains the method:
"It should be noted that the code numbers of these sets correspond with those of the old sidetone type for various classes of service, except that 100 has been added; i.e., No. 584C Subscriber Set (Sidetone) is No. 684C Subscriber Set (Anti-sidetone)."

« Last Edit: December 03, 2013, 01:34:13 AM by unbeldi »