[TA Forbes]

Good point. Maybe that is why there are not many around.

[morzh]

Someone here when we once discussed it (about a year or so ago) and I asked if I should believe my eyes when I was seeing the tranny under-chassis, I was told that the tranny being cooked is quite a common problem with the 50.

[TA Forbes]

Was it baked, boiled, broiled, or fried?

[morzh]

It was smothered.

[Ron Ramirez]

What year by chance?

Fall of 1931.

http://www.philcoradio.com/gallery/1931c.htm#a

The first production models uses 70 cabinets with front panels cut and drilled to accept the 50 chassis. Soon after, production began on the more common 50 cabinet.

http://www.philcoradio.com/gallery/1931c.htm#b

There doesn't seem to be a lot of 50 sets in the 70 cabinet. The first time I saw one, I thought some collector had taken liberties with a 70 cabinet and a 50 chassis.

...and then I saw another, and then another...enough to convince me that this was a legitimate (if short-lived) factory issue.

[Arran]

I've never owned a model 50 in any variety but my uncle did years ago, in the 1960s or 70s. He told me that the performance was less then thrilling, even so far as a 5 tube TRF sets go, that may explain why they don't turn up that much. Even back then they used to publish reviews of the latest radio models, so if one was lackluster it's likely that people would have passed it over in favor of the next model up or switched to a similar model of a different brand that performed better, like a Crosley. Many that were bought were probably dumped later for similar reasons rather then keeping them in service. I don't know how much of an issue the transformer was, since it was only a five tuber maybe they figured it would not have to work too hard? At least this example has a nice looking cabinet and is in good cosmetic condition.
Regards
Arran