38-3 Chassis in a 38-1 cabinet?
Posts: 751
Threads: 91
Joined: Nov 2015
City: Jonesboro
State, Province, Country: AR
Here's a puzzler. This was just shared in the Antique Radios Facebook Group. The cabinet is a 38-1XX. But the chassis and cabinet label are for a 38-3XX. I'd wager by the evidence in the pics, that it came out of the factory this way. Any ideas, anyone?
https://omaha.craigslist.org/atq/5767389098.html
Blessings,
Jeff W.
Jonesboro, Arkansas
http://jeffsradios.weebly.com
God loves you as you are, not as you should be, because none of us are as we should be. - Brennan Manning
Posts: 13,776
Threads: 580
Joined: Sep 2005
City: Ferdinand
State, Province, Country: Indiana
If you want my guess, and it is only a guess because the principals involved are dead...and dead men tell no tales...and this sort of thing was not documented...
I would say that the 1938 selling season neared an end, the 1939 models were waiting in the wings, and Philco had one - or a few - 38-1 cabinets and 38-3 chassis left over.
So...they created some Phactory Phranken-Philcos utilizing the mismatched cabinets and chassis and sent them out the door to be sold.
It wouldn't be the first time they did that. I have a 200X cabinet with a 201 chassis, and it has the factory stickers inside the cabinet indicating it as a 201. One was stuck over an original 200X sticker where the "MODEL 200X" still shows.
There are other examples of Philco doing this sort of thing, some of which have been documented here in the Phorum.
Now, if that cabinet didn't have a 38-3 tube layout sticker, I would have said that it was mismatched by some "collector." But with the factory tube layout sticker indicating it as a 38-3 points to this having been done at the factory.
--
Ron Ramirez
Ferdinand IN
Posts: 751
Threads: 91
Joined: Nov 2015
City: Jonesboro
State, Province, Country: AR
I kind of figured It was something like a Phranken-Philco, based on the pictorial evidence. Thanks for that little gold nugget piece of historical info, Ron. Something like this wouldn't particularly raise the value or make it any more collectible would it?
Blessings,
Jeff W.
Jonesboro, Arkansas
http://jeffsradios.weebly.com
God loves you as you are, not as you should be, because none of us are as we should be. - Brennan Manning
Posts: 13,776
Threads: 580
Joined: Sep 2005
City: Ferdinand
State, Province, Country: Indiana
Not really, in my observations. It comes down to being...another console that most collectors do not want because they take up so much room.
--
Ron Ramirez
Ferdinand IN
Posts: 751
Threads: 91
Joined: Nov 2015
City: Jonesboro
State, Province, Country: AR
Yup, I hear you on that. I have 5 consoles, and I plan on selling 2. The 38-1 I have is a keeper, as well as the 95 Lowboy and 41-605P, with the record changer intact. The 38-1 has a 12-tube chassis, and sounds great! The 38-3 I know only had a 9 tube chassis, so in that sense, I think that radio in the ad has an inferior chassis in an otherwise really nice cabinet.
Blessings,
Jeff W.
Jonesboro, Arkansas
http://jeffsradios.weebly.com
God loves you as you are, not as you should be, because none of us are as we should be. - Brennan Manning
Posts: 4,707
Threads: 51
Joined: Sep 2008
City: Sandwick, BC, CA
Kirk;
In terms of the power output stages the 38-3 would be inferior to the 38-1, since the 38-3 employs that goofy screen grid inversion setup Philco liked to use, I other then the "magnetic tuning" (or AFC) feature of the 38-1 I don't think that there would be much difference in the front end. Since the 38-1 was a more expensive set then a 38-3 that may explain why they at some point ended up with left over 38-1 cabinets, or ran short of 38-3 cabinets one day back in 1938.
Regards
Arran
(This post was last modified: 09-09-2016, 03:29 AM by Arran.)
Posts: 751
Threads: 91
Joined: Nov 2015
City: Jonesboro
State, Province, Country: AR
Hey Arran, I think you got me confused with Kirk (old restorer). This is Jeff W. . But yes, I see where the 38-1 would be costlier, and not sell as many. That would be another reason to have leftover cabinets. The 38-1 did have push-pull output.
Blessings,
Jeff W.
Jonesboro, Arkansas
http://jeffsradios.weebly.com
God loves you as you are, not as you should be, because none of us are as we should be. - Brennan Manning
Posts: 4,707
Threads: 51
Joined: Sep 2008
City: Sandwick, BC, CA
(09-09-2016, 11:20 AM)PhilcoPhan1936 Wrote: Hey Arran, I think you got me confused with Kirk (old restorer). This is Jeff W. . But yes, I see where the 38-1 would be costlier, and not sell as many. That would be another reason to have leftover cabinets. The 38-1 did have push-pull output.
Sorry Jeff;
I thought that Kirk replied to this thread saying that he had a 38-1. Actaully both the 38-3 and 38-1 have a push pull power output stage, but the 38-3 uses a different circuit, actually a simplified and cheaper circuit (Philco called it screen grid inversion) that only requires the two power output tubes and a first audio tube, there is no audio interstage transformer or a phase inverter/splitter tube. Philco used this in a number of models, but probably most prolifically in the early 1940s in their 40-180, 41-280, 42-380 and related models. Some say that the sets that use a proper phase inverter setup have a fuller sound, I don't know is that is true but they do have more output power.
Regards
Arran
Posts: 2,026
Threads: 367
Joined: Jun 2010
City: Dover, OH
Like Ron said, definitely examples of Phactory Phrankens out there. I have one, possibly two in my collection. That odd model 19 or 17 (need to get it out again) and my model 30 in the earlier version lowboy cabinet.
No matter where you go, there you are.
Users browsing this thread: 6 Guest(s)
|
Recent Posts
|
New Philco Repair Bench
|
I tried accessing the site through our library and got the same response. It's reported to our tech gurus. GaryGarySP — 11:50 AM |
New Philco Repair Bench
|
I am sure this is the archive, and not the Chuck's site.morzh — 09:50 PM |
Made mistake & did not label connection
|
It's not like we are good friends with that wire and can tell it from other ptetty identical looking wires.
Why'n't you...morzh — 09:49 PM |
Made mistake & did not label connection
|
I'm not sure why that wire wasn't covered in the video. I'm pretty sure the 6A8 won't work until that pin is grounded. Y...RodB — 09:47 PM |
Made mistake & did not label connection
|
You'll have to forgive me, I am not sure what you mean. Can you explain what you are really saying. If anyone does not...georgetownjohn — 08:05 PM |
Made mistake & did not label connection
|
Those are details better left to the ones who know. Maybe you disconnected the wrong end of the wire.RodB — 06:22 PM |
Made mistake & did not label connection
|
Maybe this is starting to make some sense in my hard head. Is this why the wire in question was not in the great Ron Ra...georgetownjohn — 04:34 PM |
Made mistake & did not label connection
|
I was correct with the 6A8 pin connection's, 7 and 8 are connected to ground as well as the tube shield (the broken line...RodB — 02:41 PM |
Made mistake & did not label connection
|
What does the dotted line representing that surrounds the tube in the schematic?georgetownjohn — 02:17 PM |
Made mistake & did not label connection
|
Hello John,
I have been there either label got lost or was not labeled !
Sincerely Richardradiorich — 02:15 PM |
Who's Online
|
There are currently 6567 online users. [Complete List] » 2 Member(s) | 6565 Guest(s)
|
|
|
|