05-26-2017, 08:16 PM
[Image: http://www.philcoradio.com/images/phorum/schem/112b.jpg]
Click here to see the full-size version.
This drawing is correct. I once owned a late version 112 (112X to be exact) so I am somewhat familiar with it even though it has been several years since I let it go.
On a somewhat different subject but on topic with the late version 112, please note resistor (51). This is rated at 15K, 2 watts. It was running at its design maximum in 1931, and with today's higher line voltage, it is really going to be stressed out. I recommend that you replace it with a 5 or 7 watt resistor to give it a greater margin of safety and to keep it from burning out prematurely on today's higher line voltage.
Click here to see the full-size version.
This drawing is correct. I once owned a late version 112 (112X to be exact) so I am somewhat familiar with it even though it has been several years since I let it go.
On a somewhat different subject but on topic with the late version 112, please note resistor (51). This is rated at 15K, 2 watts. It was running at its design maximum in 1931, and with today's higher line voltage, it is really going to be stressed out. I recommend that you replace it with a 5 or 7 watt resistor to give it a greater margin of safety and to keep it from burning out prematurely on today's higher line voltage.
--
Ron Ramirez
Ferdinand IN
![[-]](https://philcoradio.com/phorum/images/bootbb/collapse.png "[-]")
