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

I just don't understand!!!
#1

Well I started working on that 38-17 I got a few months ago. It looked pretty good in the CL pic but when I got it home it really looked AWFUL. I think some previous owner took a can of brush on poly and thew it at the cabinet and then brushed out.
The front panel on this set is a photofinish job so that was going to be a problem. Can't strip it or I'll loose the photo. So I ended up hand sanding it to get the poly off. Shot it with some high gloss Mohawk clear. I was surprised that the photo was in excellent condition very nice looking and has striking grain pattern. Why would some moron do that to a nice set?? The rest of the cabinet is in good shape with a few dings here and there. Still have to do some more stripping of the rest of the cabinet but did the top with some sanding sealer and grain filler. Stripping those little nooks and crannies is a pita but in the end it should turnout to be a nice and somewhat rare set.
Terry
http://www.flickr.com/photos/53710524@N0...hotostream
ps. Will post a few pics of the progress when I get a chance
#2

My opinion is that today most people aren't really aware of how wood used to be finished, or even what photofinish is. I have read threads more than once where an unknowing owner of a radio was going to refinish it and sanded the photofinish right off before they realized what had happened.

If you think about it, poly has been around a while now and when it came out it was the "improved" wood finish that needed no where near the maintenance of lacquer. Plus it would not be affected by water the same way.

Gene
#3

Wow, you have your work cut out for you! Must have taken some mighty careful sanding to get rid of the poly on the photofinish. Keep posting progress pictures Terry. This one is going to be interesting.

Jerry

A friend in need is a pest!  Bill Slee ca 1970.
#4

I was surprised at how durable the photofinish was in terms of sanding. I started with 600G but ended up with using 320G to sand off the poly. There was a couple of spots I had to touch up because I wore though the photo but all in all it's pretty tough ( the photofinish). Tnx for the encouragement I need all I can get these days.

Terry




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
[-]
Recent Posts
Philco 42-345 Restoration/Repair
Ok MrFixr55,  I have tried the DeoxIT D5 on the band switch and even though it has relieved the tension I felt when turn...osanders0311 — 11:11 AM
Part numbers to model cross
Is there a reference somewhere where you can punch in Philco part numbers and see what models those parts were used in?Jim Dutridge — 10:17 AM
Philco 42-345 Restoration/Repair
Hi OSanders, Look carefully at the band switch. Turn it slowly and "wiggle" it around the desired band. ...MrFixr55 — 12:33 AM
5U4 vs 5Z4 tubes
I think that RCA and GE introduced metal tubes in the USA in 1936.  I don't know if they were being made by RCA, GE or b...MrFixr55 — 11:20 PM
Philco 42-345 Restoration/Repair
Vlad95, Thank you for the stringing guides and wow there are so manyosanders0311 — 06:01 PM
5U4 vs 5Z4 tubes
A pre war Hallicrafters, and an early one too, very nice! 1936 is pretty early for metal tubes too, which would explain ...Arran — 05:58 PM
Philco 42-345 Restoration/Repair
Thanks Rod, "When you hear the background hiss and no station it usually indicates that the oscillator quit" ...osanders0311 — 05:52 PM
Philco 42-345 Restoration/Repair
RodB :beerchug:Vlad95 — 10:22 AM
Philco 42-345 Restoration/Repair
Vlad, you nailed it. Swiss and German roots.RodB — 09:54 AM
5U4 vs 5Z4 tubes
Well this is a Hallicrafters SX/9 circa 1936. No real issues so far although I dodged a real bullet with a cap that was...bridkarl — 07:59 AM

[-]
Who's Online
There are currently 345 online users. [Complete List]
» 1 Member(s) | 344 Guest(s)
Avatar

>