[mwoodruff]

Hi — I pulled what appears to be a 17b out of the attic a while back.  Chassis rough, cabinet even rougher.  (This set was an antique when I was in the high school radio club 45 years ago.). 

After lurking here for a couple of weeks, downloading some schematics, and refreshing my memory as to what a superheat receiver is, now I have some total newbie questions:

How do I know what a “Type 42” tube (for example) is?

In a cardboard box I found a Cunningham CX-326 and National Union NX-171A and some te others, what “type(s)” are these?

[morzh]

https://www.radiomuseum.org/tubes/tube_42.html
42 s a power pentode.

Just type the tube type with the wod "tube" in google and you will have your answers.

Welcome.

[klondike98]

Welcome to the Phorum!


Tubes are identified by numbers and letters. At morzh said, a 42 is a power pentode. An 80 is a full wave rectifier. specifications for tubes can be found in a number of online places. I like to use the N7JPDatabase: http://www.nj7p.info/

Click on Tube SQL Database, then enter the tube number you want to lookup and click on LOOKUP. For example here's the 42 tube info: http://www.nj7p.info/Tubes/SQL/Tube_query.php?Type=42

If you need parts and resources to restore your chassis, take a look at the Phorum's resources pages: http://www.philcoradio.com/phorum/showth...?tid=14950

If you decide to restore the set, post your questions in the Electronics Restoration or the Cabinet Restoration sections.

[Radioroslyn]

Hi and welcome,

>In a cardboard box I found a Cunningham CX-326 and National Union NX-171A and some te others, what “type(s)” are these?


The CX-326 is more commonly known as 26 tube. It's a low gain triode w/an odd filament voltage and current. Mostly used in ac TRF set from the late '20s. Was superseded by the 24A which is a tetrode and has a standard 2.5v heater.

NX-171A is known as a 71A and is a power triode use the audio output stage of '20s battery set or later ac sets in push pull. good for abt .75 of a watt per tube. 5v 250ma directly heated cathode.

[Steve Davis]

Hi and welcome to the Phorum! 

The 17B is a fairly uncommon model and should be restored.  The reason the 17B is not too common, most people that could afford such an expensive radio, would buy a 16B. The 16B and the 17B were basically the sane radio except, the 16B offered four shortwave bands.   

Steve

[Radioroslyn]

Might be a little presumptuous but from an other section of the Phorum.  http://philcoradio.com/phorum/showthread.php?tid=16003 For later in your restoration.

[mwoodruff]

Thanks to everyone who responded; it’s great when these forums work well.

It now seems that I may have a 16b and not a 17b.

I base this on Some small differences in the tube layout diagram (or what remains of it) in my cabinet compared to the ones that radioroslyn posted (thanks!), as well as the fact that the dial indicator has at least four scales (barely visible).

Also seems that the set was sold by Sears, Roebuck.

I have posted two pics, including the chassis on the workbench that I share with my wife in the dining room.

[klondike98]

try posting those pics again, they do not seem to have appeared.

[Ron Ramirez]

If you are having trouble posting pictures, please look at the links below.

http://www.philcoradio.com/phorum/showth...p?tid=4407

http://www.philcoradio.com/phorum/showthread.php?tid=29

[Ron Ramirez]

Oh, and regarding "Type 42"...that reminds me of something.

Back when Antique Radio Classified was the hottest thing in the hobby, ARC's then-owner employed an editor who INSISTED on not only partially rewriting any articles submitted by anyone, but especially in referring to tubes as "Type 42" instead of just "a 42 tube" or "42". I recall this used to drive my old friend Doug Houston (RIP) crazy.

And when you think about it, an article that names off the tube complement of a radio with the redundant "Type" (i.e. Type 39/44, Type 36, Type 75, Type 42, Type 80) does get old after reading it for awhile. I think Doug was spot on in his disagreement with this practice.

[mwoodruff]

Here are the pics of the chassis and the remnant of the tube diagram inside the cabinet.

(Seems that pics have to be .png, not .jpg, correct?)

Thanks again for the help.

Matthew Woodruff        

[Ron Ramirez]

JPGs should be fine.

Can you post a frontal view of the chassis? Based upon the back view it looks like a 5-band (early version) model 16 and not a 17.

[EdHolland]

That looks like a multi-band set very similar to my 16X. It has the vertical sliding scale illumination. Also the 3 coil cans.

[Ron Ramirez]

Is there an echo in here?

[mwoodruff]

16x?  Now I'm getting confused ...   :)

 Attached is a front pic (problem was the file size, but still having difficulties posting from iPad). 

I am away from the set now, but I have asked Santa for some electrolytic capacitors---and a pony.

Cheers and happy holidays.