Prototype set is here

[miniman82]

Said a picker brought it to his attention.

[Bill Cahill]

I have a question...
After seeing the original ads by RCA on the two model sets, and, seeing they used a cabinet similar to the BW sets, but, seeing differences, such as deeper cabinets, and, decal on topfront, instead of middle panel, why are you destroying a rare BW tv that I would dearly love to have to put this rare set into.? Seems it was in the original factory cabinet it came in.....
And, you want to change pix tube mounting from full chassis to part cabinet to make it fit? I know you believe in originality, and, accuracy. I've always admired your work. But, why ruine a BW set that I, for one, would love having to put the color chassis in? I think it's already in it's original case. And, even if not, it's certainly the same style it came in....
I'm even surprised RCA even advertised this set, showing they must have offered it for at least limited sale to the public. I would dare say the cost must have been so high that you can count the numbers left by a few digits, at best.
I fully support restoration of this set, and, seeing it playing, again. But, it seems it's in the closest to the original case now...
Bill Cahill

[Penthode]

I am afraid I agree with Bill. The RCA TC-168 is a fairly rare set and it was one of the better designed RCA receivers. Also the 70 degree 16GP4 is shorter which means stuffing the prototype receiver into the cabinet with the CRT sticking so far out the rear is not the best solution.

I feel sad such a set is being sacrificed.

Terry

[miniman82]

You're both making some pretty large assumptions...

Originally Posted by Bill

After seeing the original ads by RCA on the two model sets, and, seeing they used a cabinet similar to the BW sets, but, seeing differences, such as deeper cabinets, and, decal on topfront, instead of middle panel, why are you destroying a rare BW tv that I would dearly love to have to put this rare set into? Seems it was in the original factory cabinet it came in.

RCA themselves used TC series cabinets to house the early color receivers, see the ETF site: http://www.earlytelevision.org/rca_color_prototype.html

If RCA used a TC-165, so I really don't see a problem using a TC-168 for this one. I wanted a 165 so it could be as close to the ETF pics as possible, but this one came up. The cabinet it came in was definitely NOT right for this chassis, it was not nearly deep enough to house the whole thing and it was in very poor condition anyway. Warped beyond repair, with bad veneer to boot. And RCA never put up 'ads' for these sets, they were company prototypes never offered for public sale.

Originally Posted by Bill

you want to change pix tube mounting from full chassis to part cabinet to make it fit? I know you believe in originality, and, accuracy. I've always admired your work. But why ruin a BW set that I, for one, would love having to put the color chassis in?

I'm thinking about ways to make the chassis compatable with this cabinet, but haven't committed to anything just yet. If there is a way to keep the picture tube with the chassis, I will find it. It will likely involve new side supports, nothing major.

'Ruining' a B&W set? Pardon me for not having pity on a B&W set, when this ultra rare prototype needs a home. If you want to save it that badly, surely you won't have a problem buying it for $250 and having it shipped to your place? You could have bid on it while it was listed on Ebay, there was equal opportunity to save it there. I'm not being disrespectful with you, I simply fail to see the logic on this. As rare as a TC set is, I promise the rarity of the color set outweighs it.

Originally Posted by Bill

I'm surprised RCA even advertised this set, showing they must have offered it for at least limited sale to the public. I would dare say the cost must have been so high that you can count the numbers left by a few digits, at best.

This is a PROTOTYPE CHASSIS. It was never offered for sale to the public, nor was it intended to be. There was no advertizing at all, only historical documents and pictures to show what RCA was up to back when color development was in its hayday. Same goes for the Model 1/2/3/4 and probably 5, though I've heard stories of the 5 being in store windows for the Rose Parade. Not sure if that means the stores bought them, or they were on loan from RCA. Ed Reitan probably knows, you might ask him.

Originally Posted by Bill

I fully support restoration of this set, and, seeing it playing, again. But, it seems it's in the closest to the original case now.

I like the 168 cabinet. It's nice to look at and fits the chassis very well. There's another cabinet on it's way from Nashville right now, between the 2 I will make a decision on which one is more practical for the prototype.

Originally Posted by Penthode

I am afraid I agree with Bill. The RCA TC-168 is a fairly rare set and it was one of the better designed RCA receivers. Also the 70 degree 16GP4 is shorter which means stuffing the prototype receiver into the cabinet with the CRT sticking so far out the rear is not the best solution.

At 24 inches, it's one of the few cabinets that is deep enough to swallow the entire chassis, only a small portion of the CRT support and neck will be out of the case. I don't think RCA ever even made backs for the prototypes, at least I've never seen one. Being developmental, there was no pressure to make them look like production sets (from the back). That said, I will make a back for this one to protect it.

Perhaps the other cabinet will make a better choice? I won't know until it gets here, in the meantime I challenge you both to find a cabinet that fits this chassis while not sacrificing a 'rare' B&W set. I did the legwork to get this one here, if you know of a better one post it up. I'm in the Military and we have a saying: Don't bring up problems unless you have a solution in mind. If not, you're just complaining. Again, not being disrespectful. I'm just trying to get this thing in a decent cabinet, having bought 2 other sets already is putting a financial strain on the effort.

[Bill Cahill]

I have a 21" SC in a chinese painted cabinet that would work better, and, changes could be made to that.
It's certainly deep enough.
I didn't know the ads were meant only for FCC until I saw it after post.
250 Is a bit rich, plus shipping, as you certainly didn't pay that much. I didn't know it was on ebay, or, I just may have tried to save it.
I really like that set, and, wish I could find such a nice one.
I'm not knocking your prototype. INdeed, I'm fully supportive of you getting it going again.
But, first, what is the real problem with saving the case it's in?
If worse comes to worse, I have a 1951 RCA 17" mtetal tube with full doors , and, a nice curved front that I'm not in love with. Wanna trade?

Please don't get so upset. I was just trying to ask if there was something better you could use.
I love color, and, admire that prototype alot, but, I also like BW. I know of relative rarity of the one you might use, and, wish I had it. I love the style, and, obviously, the condition isn't half bad, either.
Bill Cahill
By the way, the cabinet you have that it came in isn't a TC-168. It's a 6T64 using the cheap KCS 47 chassis.

[Kevin Kuehn]

I suppose there's even the possibility that this prototype was never mounted in a cabinet. Someone mentioned there were no bolt holes. Are there any signs, that it was at some point mounted? I'm guessing it spent most of it's experimental life on a test bench.

[Bill Cahill]

Now, that's a possibility I haven't thought of. Are there even any mounting brackets on the chassis? If not, perhaps moutiing it on a board with a finnished front might be better?
Bill Cahill

[tubesrule]

Originally Posted by Kevin Kuehn

I suppose there's even the possibility that this prototype was never mounted in a cabinet. Someone mentioned there were no bolt holes. Are there any signs, that it was at some point mounted? I'm guessing it spent most of it's experimental life on a test bench.

I have no direct knowledge on these early color prototypes, but as a general observation lab prototypes are considerably different from field test sets. Field test sets like my RR359's were built more like production units since they were placed in peoples houses and had to be robust. There were also 100 of them built, so they needed to be assembled more like a regular production unit. There are little differences in build quality between them and production units.
Lab prototypes like this set that were never meant to be taken outside the lab, built on the order of 1, 2 or 3 units, and not operated by anyone but engineers usually lack the build quality of field test sets. I have a prototype pre-war GE set that has no mounting flanges on the chassis or mounting holes in the cabinet, nor any evidence that it ever had a back. This was probably done as the engineers would have never bothered bolting the chassis in anyway, so why bother. They were typically housed in decent cabinets so they could take the "glamour" shots to be used when documenting and displaying the sets to licensees and the FCC.

Just my 2 cents.
Darryl

[miniman82]

Originally Posted by Bill Cahill

I have a 21" SC in a Chinese painted cabinet that would work better, and, changes could be made to that. It's certainly deep enough.

SC is not RCA and being 21", it's certainly a square set that would require extensive mods. Not a good choice, the whole front panel would have to be fabricated from scratch. Plus, I find the Chinese cabinets repulsive. This set was home grown in the USA, I'd like to keep it looking like it was.

250 Is a bit rich, plus shipping, as you certainly didn't pay that much. I didn't know it was on ebay, or I just may have tried to save it.

What the hell do you know about what I paid for this set? Bill with all due respect you have no place to tell me what's high or low here, or make speculations on what's fair. I know what I paid and believe me, selling it at $250 would be taking a loss. To want to save this is one thing, but then to come in here and tell me what's fair is a little beyond me. You'll just have to find another one.

I really like that set, and, wish I could find such a nice one.

Then I respectfully suggest that you keep watching Ebay and CL as I did and find your own, or wait and see if I don't end up needing this one. Bantering back and forth with me on this is pointless, until I make my decision.

I'm not knocking your prototype. Indeed, I'm fully supportive of you getting it going again. But, first, what is the real problem with saving the case it's in?

What case? The case it's in is the TC-168. The one it was shipped in was far beyond repair, I tossed it a long time ago.

If worse comes to worse, I have a 1951 RCA 17" metal tube with full doors , and, a nice curved front that I'm not in love with. Wanna trade?

I'm not interested in spending more money on a cabinet I may or may not use, wait and see what I decide. If I don't need the 168, you can PM me and we'll haggle.

Please don't get so upset. I was just trying to ask if there was something better you could use.

Who is upset? I will choose what I choose, it's my decision. If I don't end up with the 168, it will be in the classifieds. Again, I don't much care what B&W set this used to be. There were far more TC sets made than field test sets, I have no reservations about using this cabinet. I could see if it was a 621 or something, but as far as I'm concerned it's no different than any other 50's 16" set.


Kevin: There are no mounting tabs on the chassis, but that doesn't mean it wasn't in a cabinet. Again, we don't know what RCA did to the other prototypes. Maybe none of them had tabs.

[Penthode]

Originally Posted by miniman82

RCA themselves used TC series cabinets to house the early color receivers, see the ETF site: http://www.earlytelevision.org/rca_color_prototype.html

If RCA used a TC-165, so I really don't see a problem using a TC-168 for this one. I wanted a 165 so it could be as close to the ETF pics as possible, but this one came up.

About a year ago, I was trying to buy a TC-165 off ebay. The deal fell amicably apart due to the delivery. He is in Milwaukee, too far away for me. I think his TC-165 would be a good candidate.

The fellow's name is Tom and his email address is <[email protected]>. As I said, this was a year or so ago but he said the set was in a shed and he sounded like a reasonable guy.

Terry