Welcome Guest! Be sure you know and follow the Phorum Rules before posting. Thank you and Enjoy! (January 12) x

Thread Closed
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Tearing Apart
#1

Well, I'm now tearing apart my parts chassis- I think it is from a 38-3, but stamped inside is 38-1754. Details match a 38-3: 9 tube, 3 band, magnetic tuning. I'm just wondering about the 1754 stamp... Any ideas? Or is it just a miscellaneous stamping? I know my 37-650 had 37-650 clearly stamped on it in several places...

Mainly tearing this one up because it came as a parts set to me, but space requirements demand I take it to parts. No cabinet or speaker- I just was given the chassis, with a couple tubes on it. Luckily one was an excellent 6F6G I needed for the 37-650. Also, I believe it has the same power supply- although the numbers are different.

Lots of bits, however... Now I happily have more bakelites to rebuild for stock, some more junctions, rf coils, variable caps, tube sockets... Just have to figure out what to do with the magnetic tuning parts. Keep them or flog 'em? I'm having fun Icon_smile

Scott

Old Cars, Old Radios, Old Pipes and Young Women... What more is there?
#2

I'll bet that stamp in on the RF sub-chassis, right? Icon_smile

That's the part number of the sub-chassis assy, not anything to do with a "model number."
Philco sub-bases and sub-chassis' were designated with the 38- prefix.

See this Service Tip from my site about Philco's part numbering scheme:

PHILCO SERVICE HINTS & TIPS - NUMBER 34
Philco Part Numbering System


Many people confuse Philco part numbers that start with 36-, 37-, 38-, 39-, etc. with model numbers, due to the fact that Philco started using the model year as a prefix to it's model numbers in 1937 on up. There's a Service Tip on this in the TIPS section as well.
#3

You hit it, Chuck! When the light hit the back of the chassis main frame just right, I could make out the original 38-3, code ??? stamp, where it was missing... I could see where the ink had been, but it was no longer dark. Odd thing- my 37-650 had that number(37-650) stamped in the same type large number in several places, similar to the number I was originally referring to. (These are rubber stampings- not metal stamps)

Scott

Old Cars, Old Radios, Old Pipes and Young Women... What more is there?




Users browsing this thread:
[-]
Recent Posts
PT 6 chassis screws size???
Hello bridKarl, that sounds right or maybe 8/32 . Sincerely Richardradiorich — 01:00 AM
PT 6 chassis screws size???
Have this done except for missing chassis screws. It looks like 1 inch 6/32 sheet metal screw may work but can anyone s...bridkarl — 10:32 PM
Philco model 38 code 121 not receiving signal.
Hello Stormlord, Well done on rewinding that coil it turned fairly good for your first one. Sincerely Richardradiorich — 09:12 PM
Philco model 38 code 121 not receiving signal.
Well here it is. It ain't pretty, but hopefully it'll work. I checked it with my DMM on continuity and it keeps and r...Stormlord5500 — 08:56 PM
Philco 42-345 Restoration/Repair
Yes, 57 is an electrolytic cap that should be 12 mfd 400 volts according to the parts list from the Phorum library schem...RodB — 06:01 PM
Philco 42-345 Restoration/Repair
Looks like if I am reading it correctly it looks like the silver capacitor#57 that appears to be a replacement is of a l...osanders0311 — 05:09 PM
Philco model 38 code 121 not receiving signal.
Thanks Arran. Yeah this plastic is pretty thin. It's a little thinner than the original stuff. It kinda reminds me of p...Stormlord5500 — 04:37 PM
Testing a speaker and output transformer Trutone A2-G
The equivalent of one short turn is basically the same as that of a shorted load. If it is the primary's turn, then the ...morzh — 03:53 PM
Testing a speaker and output transformer Trutone A2-G
I've never had an output transformer become shorted, the failure mode is usually an open primary, or in a center tapped ...Arran — 03:52 PM
Philco model 38 code 121 not receiving signal.
As long as the plastic sheeting isn't too thick, I think that the thickness of photographic film would be just about rig...Arran — 03:19 PM

[-]
Who's Online
There are currently no members online.

>