Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Mon UGLY 9s262
#46

Geoff,
I started with "perfect brown" but had to go to "Brown Mahogany" due to some filling of dents etc that were showing through.

Yes, I think this color looks good and should make the set look nice overall even if it is not the original color scheme.

Gene


Messages In This Thread
Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 05-05-2012, 09:26 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Eliot Ness - 05-05-2012, 10:06 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 05-05-2012, 10:17 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Arran - 05-05-2012, 11:19 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Arran - 05-07-2012, 10:32 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by morzh - 05-05-2012, 10:30 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Eliot Ness - 05-06-2012, 12:28 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by TA Forbes - 05-06-2012, 12:36 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 05-06-2012, 03:23 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Eliot Ness - 05-06-2012, 04:07 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 05-06-2012, 04:52 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Eliot Ness - 05-06-2012, 07:35 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 05-06-2012, 08:53 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Eliot Ness - 05-07-2012, 10:34 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 05-06-2012, 10:15 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 05-08-2012, 07:20 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Eliot Ness - 05-08-2012, 08:07 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 05-08-2012, 08:44 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Arran - 05-08-2012, 10:30 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by codefox1 - 05-09-2012, 01:47 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 05-09-2012, 03:00 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Arran - 05-09-2012, 06:37 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 05-20-2012, 10:02 AM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Ron Ramirez - 05-20-2012, 12:14 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 05-20-2012, 01:42 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by morzh - 05-20-2012, 02:07 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 05-20-2012, 02:17 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Ron Ramirez - 05-20-2012, 04:06 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by morzh - 05-20-2012, 07:39 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by morzh - 05-20-2012, 07:47 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 05-21-2012, 02:18 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 05-21-2012, 02:24 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 05-21-2012, 02:44 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by morzh - 05-21-2012, 03:57 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 05-21-2012, 04:57 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Arran - 05-21-2012, 08:59 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 05-21-2012, 09:27 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by morzh - 05-21-2012, 10:00 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Eliot Ness - 05-22-2012, 08:02 AM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 05-22-2012, 11:30 AM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Geoff - 05-22-2012, 11:48 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Arran - 05-23-2012, 01:07 AM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 05-23-2012, 06:27 AM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Geoff - 05-23-2012, 05:09 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Arran - 05-23-2012, 11:33 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 05-24-2012, 11:28 AM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 05-29-2012, 02:45 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Arran - 05-29-2012, 10:42 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by morzh - 05-29-2012, 11:03 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Arran - 05-30-2012, 08:06 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 06-03-2012, 09:55 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by codefox1 - 06-04-2012, 01:12 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Eliot Ness - 06-06-2012, 07:15 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Arran - 06-07-2012, 04:13 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 06-08-2012, 07:44 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 06-09-2012, 05:05 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Ron Ramirez - 06-09-2012, 10:00 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 06-10-2012, 09:01 AM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Ron Ramirez - 06-10-2012, 09:13 AM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by codefox1 - 06-10-2012, 09:40 AM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by morzh - 06-10-2012, 12:12 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Eliot Ness - 06-11-2012, 09:18 AM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Arran - 06-11-2012, 05:41 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Gene Pederson - 09-10-2012, 07:05 PM
RE: Mon UGLY 9s262 - by Joe Rossi - 09-15-2012, 08:22 AM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
[-]
Recent Posts
Philco 39-116 radio and remote
Hi Brad, Thanks so much for the info!  Do you happen to have the specs for the PT-86 transformer?  I did not find a lis...RichG — 04:32 PM
Philco 269 - 444 FIVE VALVE VERSION?
Thanks Arran; If your set has five tubes/valves then it could be an A537, V537, or a U527, then again it looks like s...ChasL0001 — 11:07 AM
Philco 29 or 45
29 chassis has a shadow meter while 45 chassis does not. Shadow meter is part no. 27 in the 29 schematic. compare it t...klondike98 — 10:32 AM
Philco 269 - 444 FIVE VALVE VERSION?
Sorry, Chas. Re the burns, I broke my first TV at the age of 3.  Between my electrical experiments :yikes: (My mom wa...MrFixr55 — 09:07 AM
Philco 41-221 Restored
Thanks for the compliment Richard. The tenite grille is original. A few of the horizontal slats were slightly warped so ...RodB — 08:44 AM
Philco 29 or 45
Hello, I have just received a Philco lowboy where the tube layout label in the cabinet says 29 or 45. There is no label ...dconant — 08:29 AM
Philco 41-221 Restored
Mr fixr, That is great news I would love to see repo grille !! I too have a very similar Philco but my cabinet has fab...radiorich — 08:22 AM
Philco 41-221 Restored
Hi Rod, I always tell people that my scars give me character.  :wink:   Great job on the radio.  Is the grille origi...MrFixr55 — 08:00 AM
Philco 269 - 444 FIVE VALVE VERSION?
It looks like the PENDD61 valve/tube must have failed, so someone replaced it with the EBC33, which is a double diode-tr...Arran — 04:29 AM
Philco 269 - 444 FIVE VALVE VERSION?
Hello Chas. Radiomuseum has information on both sets.  Thanks Gary, lots of good info there. Perhaps we'll ha...ChasL0001 — 02:23 AM

[-]
Who's Online
There are currently 3164 online users. [Complete List]
» 3 Member(s) | 3161 Guest(s)
AvatarAvatarAvatar

>