Restoration or WHAT

[jmedley]

How do you do it?
Having been around these forums for a while its great to find so many members with terrific knowledge and dedication to vintage radios.
I was wondering about a poll on "How you do the Job" would be interesting.
To begin with:-

1/ "Clenched Buttocks"
Addressing the radio as a work of art, where completion or satisfaction rarely happens, because you just cannot get it good enough, with chrome plated washers etc.

2/ "Restoration"
I take this as being the returning the radio to as new (ex works)

3/ "Refurbishment"
To bring into full specification, replacing tatty wiring, components, complete cleaning etc of the chassis and re finishing the cabinet.

4/ "Repair"
To put right any immediate fault, confirming good operation and ensuring safe as to the original regulations

5/ "Mend it"
Just get it going with correct parts.

6/ "Quick and dirty"
anything goes just to fire it up

OK maybe my definitions of the options could be worded differently or maybe you disagree with how I've put it but please choose nearest to the way you actually do it

[Lucien Nunes]

I can see that your scale runs the gamut of all approaches to making the set work, but into which category would you put conservation? It can be an active process e.g. taking steps to limit deterioration or reverse the effects of previous untoward deterioration, without any specific target of making the item work or look better. Perhaps it could be category zero (or 7).

Lucien

[Steve_P]

It depends on many factors - how 'rare' is the set. is it particularly interesting in a specific way, what state is it in to begin with, what you can afford...?

Cheers,

Steve P.

[Brigham]

You've missed out the popular approach often seen in the '...other electrical and electromechanical items' section, which is:-

1). Throw away all that dangerous old stuff from the inside, and install the latest (and therefore safest) technology, while expressing incredulity at how anyone survived using such a lethal device in the first place.

And then...

2). Pretend you've got a vintage appliance.

[Martin G7MRV]

I go generally somewhere amid options 3, 4, 5. I like to make it as close to original spec as i can, but if its a cheapo i might just get it running for the fun of it. Generally, I like to make things work again to a usable state. The Ferranti ive just done cant be said to be restored, but its working (albeit possibly with a few performance issues im not bothered about at the moment) and on the shelf in my workshop, tuned to radio 4 or 2, depending on mood, so ive something to listen to while i work

[Nickthedentist]

I voted for "refurbishment" as this is what I do most of the time, but as Steve points out, it very much depends on the set, who it belongs to, how much time I've got and so on.

Nick.

[Paul_RK]

Yes, my approaches have been too various in the terms of the options offered for me to select any one of them. I've stripped and French polished maybe a dozen cabinets, but those were the ones that had too little left of their original finish to be made presentable otherwise.

My hope or wish when electing to work on a set at all (and very often I don't) is always pretty much the same, a radio in a full and reliable working state which looks as though it's spent its days on someone's sideboard receiving careful use and needful dusting - never anything like showroom condition (except I'll celebrate rather than try to downgrade any set that's happened to spend its life tucked away in a cupboard and so to be in much better than average condition to start with ) No modifications aside from any that might save an important component in the event of a particular fault.

Paul

[G6Tanuki]

I would add another entry: "Restore and enhance", which is what I'll often do.

Most of my inerest is in the area of communications/military/amateur gear. I don't like it to look 'pristine' - 1940s-era crackle-painted cabinets I'll give a wash-and-brush-up to remove the last half-century of grime; the chassis gets vacuumed-over and ticked with a soft-bristle paintbrush to remove the dust, but I refuse to get involved in paint-stripping/re-priming/re-painting. A few scratches and dents don't affect performance.

Electrically/electronically, I will happily fit modern components to replace failed/suspect/safety-impacting old ones. I can't be bothered 're-stuffing' capacitors - such things don't make the equipment work any better!

Tuning-capacitors and reduction-drives - if they're easy to remove - will be treated to an hour in the ultrasonic-bath (I hate 'twitchy' tuning!). Old potentially leaky Paxolin or Phenolic octal valve-bases on rectifiers and output-valves often get replaced by modern ceramic equivalents.
Modifications/updating: sure I'll happily add 'period' features like a twin-triode (12AX7) product-detector, or a noise-limiter using a 6H6 or EB91 - and move the BFO HT feed to the regulated HT rail (where there is one), or replace no-longer-available antenna sockets with "modern" stuff like BNC- or N-sockets. Also, I'll replace tatty speaker-cloth with expanded-metal (The Pye P75 looks rather good done like this with the expanded-metal sprayed bronze).

My main interest though is *using* equipment not looking at it. I can still get 60 watts of FM out of my 2-metre Pye Vanguard !

[jmedley]

I thought the "conservation" post was interesting and maybe is stage one of restoration. I agree that it horses for courses. I was always taught to identify the exact faulty component for replacement and have never been in favour of blanket changes. For example wax capacitors, I change if faulty and if I am passing the radio on, then perhaps change the odd one that is subject to high voltages. Where cabinets are very poor and heavily scratched for example some of the pre/post war cellulose sprayed jobs I have stripped and then used a wiping matt polyurethane and finished with a light rubdown with fine wire wool and then waxed.

Thanks
Jim

[davidw]

I voted for refurbishment, although left to my own devices, it would probably have been repair, BUT, as I want my sets indoors, they have to look respectable and get Mrs W (Joyce) approval.

[Station X]

For example wax capacitors, I change if faulty and if I am passing the radio on, then perhaps change the odd one that is subject to high voltages.

That's what I did with the first radio I "restored". I felt very pleased with myself, but shortly after the other waxies started to fail. Since then I've changed them all. I don't like doing a job more than once.

[Skywave]

Originally Posted by jmedley

I was always taught to identify the exact faulty component for replacement and have never been in favour of blanket changes. For example wax capacitors, I change if faulty and if I am passing the radio on, then perhaps change the odd one that is subject to high voltages.
Jim

Yes, I was taught the same: only change the faulty part(s): that is corrective maintenance (C.M.). But I was also taught the importance of changing parts which my knowledge and experience told me were likely to fail soon: that is preventative maintenance (P.M.). The question that then arises is where does C.M. stop and P.M. begin? It's obvious that there is no sharp dividing line between the two. Each 'repair' job has to be judged on its own merits, taking into account who the owner is, the value of the item to the owner, the cost of parts and labour, if any guarantee is offered and even the cost of replacing the entire item (if necessary): many parameters to consider. A decision of 'how far to go' calls for skills that are really piece-and-part of the total skills required in any repair. Of course, if you are the owner of that item, then that decision becomes a lot easier, especially if you value your time cheaply.

Al.

[ThePillenwerfer]

I certainly don't make any attempt to 'Restore' things.

As most people are saying it varies from set to set. I follow the same policy as Paul in post 7 as regards cabinets.

When it comes to the works I'll change all wax/Hunt's capacitors (I've only come across a tiny number which post mortem testing has shown could have been left) and anything else that looks iffy.

I don't go mad on internal cleaning as it makes no difference to performance and, to me, isn't worth the risk of damaging something while doing it.

I'm quite happy to modify sets providing it can be done in a reversible way.

As for going back to the original spec I don't usually know what that is nor have the equipment to test it. Some radios are less sensitive than others but could still be as good as new.

- Joe

[Radio_Dave]

Depending on the condition and vintage of the equipment I guess I do either a "restoration", "refurbishment" or "repair".

People think all I do is over the top restorations because they've seen my Success Stories. However this is only because I've posted the "restorations" that I think people will be interested in reading.

I must admit that I get far more pleasure restoring a radio than listening to it. I do deliberately buy 1930's radios in dilapidated condition just so I can have months of fun and the challenge of restoring the cabinet and chassis to, as near as possible, original condition.

David

[newlite4]

I suppose I tend to do a refurbishment. I like to clean inside and out before replacing waxies and any other degraded components. The cabinet will get a fair reconditioning to improve aesthetics. I just like to get them going well enough to be able to use regularly. As long as they are clean and as safe to use as possible then that is fine.
Neil

[PJC58-Hythe]

I think it really depends on the condition of the set at the outset. I prefer to do restoration as I get the greatest satisfaction from it, but I will do refurbishment if the set is in overall good condition to start with. Very occasionally I will do repair to get a set working for someone, but even then I lean toward refurbishment if it is likely to fail again due to something else I can see that might cause an issue in the future.

Peter