[thirtiesradio]

Well you are right about doing the 1930's RCA and GE sets in layers, as well as planning ahead. I took it slow and made detailed drawings. The set is working well but I need to go back deep inside sometime. Someone mentioned that it is important to add 2 resistors to protect an interstage transformer that often goes bad. I just don't want to remove that top coil assembly again to get deeply inside. Most of the RCA 140's or GE K80's (same set) are found with that transformer open. It is a great sounding and performing set but if it ever quits working I'll probably just leave it be.

I know Electrohome made some quality stereo items. I saw a couple of beautiful Electrohome mono block amplifiers on Ebay about a year ago. They sold for a lot of money and were very well constructed. I guess there is good and bad with most companies.

Hope you get the Electrohome set finished soon.

[morzh]

OK, after reading all this I won't need any prunes for a week

I better get back to it, had two days break from this.
Geez. This radio, when done, will be a cause for major celebration and a month of not touching anything that has tubes in it.

[morzh]

Well, different color wires do age very differently.

The two wires that povided filament for the rect tube, greyish-dirty touch of olive/brown wires (marsh?), coming out of transformer were as flexible and soft as the day they came out of the factory.
I hesitated but then decided to change them. Not even sure why, there were no degradation at all.

I guess colors matter.

Black is the worst, it crumbles right off and all cracked and half is missing.
Then red. It is all there but cracked and will come off easily.
Then green. There are some cracks though feels not as dry.
Blue is to be looked at.
White (well, it is off-white) is pliable and soft to touch, no cracks.
And the above mentioned marsh is also (was - removed it) good.



Now electrolytics.
One cap foamed.
But when measured it shows 15uF. Lighter weighing one.
Another did not foam. The heavier one of the two. Also shows 16uF (wow).
Both when shaken make splashing luquid sounds from inside, so I have to be prepared when opening them to catch the liquid. But that is .. after tomorrow. Tomorrow is our RnD group night out, prj leader is so happy he is buying at his own expense (and since the place carries Guinness in tall pints I fully intend to seize the opportunity).

[morzh]

Monster...freakin' monster.

[thirtiesradio]

Monster...freakin' monster.

The 808A and the larger AK sets are monsters. Heavy and very well built with thick metal chassis. If they just used cloth wiring.....

[fields 100]

Monster...freakin' monster.

The 808A and the larger AK sets are monsters. Heavy and very well built with thick metal chassis. If they just used cloth wiring.....

I would rather have large monster than the tiny one... 11" by 5 3/4" chassis, all rubber, one part sits on the top of the other. One can barely see the bottom of it so much wiring shoved in there....

[morzh]

Thirties,

It is not heavy, though yes the chassis is quality thick steel.
But the wiring exacerbated by the way it is put together is a disaster.
Yesterday I replaced a few wires and then got to trying to gut the block cap......mama mia. Did not gut it, had to cut tons of wires in the meantime.

I also cut and drained the lytics.

Bad idea to have that.....certainly not one of your beginner's projects.

[fields 100]

I will take my wish back. Just out of curiosity looked at the schematic. My sincere condolences.

[Arran]

 I think I would have just bypassed the original electrolytic caps rather then draining them, sometimes you can solder a short terminal strip to the positive lug and connect a modern radial lead cap to it rather then restuffing. If they are originals A.K obviously used electrolytic filter caps of a decent quality, those wet electrolytics are usually bone dry, and have been bypased by new ones underneath, or have been removed and replaced with newer can type dry electrolytics.  
  I think that one can reasonably complain about the poor construction methods in these later A.K sets, there was a good reason why they shut their doors in 1936 because Philco had them nailed to the wall. I don't think that whether they used the rubber wire makes much difference, if they had used the cloth stuff they would still be a bad design, Majestic, and their Canadian cousins,  used rubber wire and heavy steel too in their chassis, but unlike the A.Ks most are not that bad to work on.
Regards
Arran

[morzh]

I opened both lytics, inide all was nice and wet, the ones of the same type fom Philco would be dry.

I will restuff them, not too difficult.

As for them shutting down in 1936, the AA5 was the reason. Superhet patent expired, lots of people built cheap ones, AK could not compete without going down in quality, he chose not to.

[thirtiesradio]

 I think I would have just bypassed the original electrolytic caps rather then draining them, sometimes you can solder a short terminal strip to the positive lug and connect a modern radial lead cap to it rather then restuffing. If they are originals A.K obviously used electrolytic filter caps of a decent quality, those wet electrolytics are usually bone dry, and have been bypased by new ones underneath, or have been removed and replaced with newer can type dry electrolytics.  
  I think that one can reasonably complain about the poor construction methods in these later A.K sets, there was a good reason why they shut their doors in 1936 because Philco had them nailed to the wall. I don't think that whether they used the rubber wire makes much difference, if they had used the cloth stuff they would still be a bad design, Majestic, and their Canadian cousins,  used rubber wire and heavy steel too in their chassis, but unlike the A.Ks most are not that bad to work on.
Regards
Arran

I always thought that Atwater Kent closed their doors rather than reduce the quality of their sets to cut the prices?

I have a 206, a 447 and a 112S which I believe are from around 1935. The very high quality of the 447 and 112S amazes me. The 112S chassis must weigh 100lbs. I know AK manufactured there own components. On parts they didn't already make they tooled up and made them as they couldn't find an outside vendor that were up to their standards. They were very well known long before making radios as a high quality manufacturer of coils, capacitors, etc...

I don't know about the circuit design of AK sets, but the 3 sets I own perform and sound a notch above the same tube count sets I have. The 206 is the best sounding small tube count table set I have. Just a very clear, pleasing sound even at high volumes. AK designed and manufactured their own speakers and they seem very well built. I've had comments on the 206's sound from visitors and it is one radio I play often. The only table top Philco I have that sounds as good as the small 206 is the 16B which has a larger 10" speaker. Of course the Philco just kills the 206 performance wise. I'd expect that though as a well designed radio with 5 more tubes should perform better.

One thing I know is the 12 tube AK 112 pulls in very faint stations that are almost inaudible on a 16B. I don't think you get the same performance until you get to the 15 tube Philcos. I admit the wiring looks a bit more cluttered on some AK's than on many other brands, but I quickly forget that when I'm tuning the dial.

When I talk with others about well built quality radios, the AK sets seem to always be mentioned.
My only problem with the sets I've restored is the rubber wiring.

[Arran]

 The quality started taking a dump at A.K a few years before they shut down, and as a matter of fact they did make some AC/DC sets at the lower end, I can't remember the models now. They also did some things like using obsolete tubes just to keep the costs down, like using 2.5 volt AC tubes in a 1935 model radio, I think that the rubber wire may have been another example. From what I read it had more to do with Mr. Kent losing interest in radio, as well as union problems, and since it was a private company, not publicly traded, he could pretty much do as he liked. 
  Yes they did make their own speakers, A.K used to manufacture auto electric parts so they had the stamping and metal working equipment in house, but the design of those speakers date back at least to the model 82 and 82, which was when they cared more. Speakers can make a large impact on the audio quality of a radio, Canadian Westinghouse had an affinity with using Magnavox speakers in their sets so naturally those sound decent as well, Rogers and Marconi used a lot of Utah and Magnavox as well. It's sort of subjective regarding the performance, and even if not there are many variables involved, alignment, aging of parts, circuit design. I believe that A.K was an RCA licensee so they could use whatever circuits RCA used, which meant technology developed by Westinghouse, G.E, and RCA, Philco did not like to pay royalties to RCA so they sought ways to circumvent RCA's patents, sometimes they worked as well or better, sometimes not.
Regards
Arran

[Phlogiston]

AK hated the idea of the union coming in like it did at Philco.

If you cut out those old resistors, save them for me. I can reuse the end caps.

[morzh]

AK hated unions.
AK also did not want to go down in quality even if for a while it had to, eventually he chose to put a stop to that.
AK also built TRF sets and had lots of heavy equipment to deal with to make parts whereas the AA5 manufacturers did not have to do any of that.

They did not go bankrupt, they closed. I respect that. At least, even if for awhile they build cheaper sets (do not see them much around, probably did not build many) he chose not to continue and so at least in my book AK remains a quality radio.

yes I hate dealing with rubber wire, but! - do not forget, the properties of rubber were not fully known, it was to their and then knowledge considered good quality insulation and everyone went to use it, one cannot blame them. People use all kinds of materials that we do not use today for one or other reason, like asbestos, lead, even cocaine (was considered good at some point). But while I hate replacing the rubber wire I see this radio was a quality built thing. The chassis is vastly superior to that of comparable Philcos or Zeniths, it is thick shiny metal that has not to the date developed any rust or has tarnished. Their tube shields are still gold-plated (or whatever it was, yellow metal) and have not oxidized or tarnished.
Their tube panels.....Philco's wafer ones pale in comparison, these ones are like they came from some military device, thick, sturdy, nice clean thick contacts, very convenient soldering.
If it weren't for rubber wiring (which, again, is not THEN quality issue) I'd love working on this one.

[thirtiesradio]

Yes the things you mention are what I noticed in the AK sets. They did that little extra that seems to have paid off even after all this time. Many of the small parts looks more substantial and usually have some type of plating or protective finish.

With that said, I shouldn't really comment much on AK's overall quality though as the 2 sets I mentioned are higher end models from their later years. The 206 wasn't high end but it seems to be better built than comparable radios. I used to own an earlier model 84 which was a lower end table set. It too looked to be very well built which gave me the impression that all their sets were of high standards.

Arran is right about the speakers dating back to the 82 and 84 era. They look exactly the same. Very heavy and they even went to the trouble of putting a small brass button with the radio model # on it. The finish is a thick wrinkle type of paint that doesn't tarnish or fade like the Zeniths and Philcos.  And a good speaker is really important on how a set sounds.