Vintage test gear...

[LektroiD]

A few years ago I picked up a secondhand transistor tester which looked interesting (this was before the dawn of Atlas DCA55's). This one is certainly a home made piece of gear. Anyway, I got it out of the cupboard last week and it had a sticky meter needle, so I tore it down to repair, even the meter had been adapted with a hand drawn scale, it has the date 1944 on, so Second World War vintage.

I'll include a couple of photos below. These were taken with my iPad as that's all I had to hand, so don't expect my usual Canon quality pics.

Please share photos of your own vintage test gear, tear downs, etc. the older the better. I find this really interesting.

[SharpEars]

A few years ago I picked up a secondhand transistor tester which looked interesting (this was before the dawn of Atlas DCA55's). This one is certainly a home made piece of gear. Anyway, I got it out of the cupboard last week and it had a sticky meter needle, so I tore it down to repair, even the meter had been adapted with a hand drawn scale, it has the date 1944 on, so Second World War vintage.

I'll include a couple of photos below. These were taken with my iPad as that's all I had to hand, so don't expect my usual Canon quality pics.

Please share photos of your own vintage test gear, tear downs, etc. the older the better. I find this really interesting.

She's a beaut, despite the fact that jeans come faded in the front these days...

[HiTech]

Antique Radio Forum has many members that are into vintage test equipment. Some of them like to service vintage radios using same period test equip. It wouldn't surprise me if some of them dress accordingly too! They really love and defend the EICO cr@p and similar garbage from PACO, Knight, Heath, etc. They discuss the same old questions/issues of drifting circuits, bad power supply caps, and trying to squeeze every bit of performance out of something "ho-hum" that requires reinventing the wheel. 

Vintage test equip. is not for me.... about as low of quality I can tolerate is stuff from B&K and I only have one of their items, the 520B transistor tester. The Hickok tube testers were pretty good I admit. Had a 600 that I should've hung on to. I guess it comes down to what level of performance one needs from their test equipment which determines whether they choose vintage or more late model designs. Some vintage items were from very good brands and still work well today-- ex; General Radio, Triplett, Simpson, HP, Tek, Marconi.

[LektroiD]

Antique Radio Forum has many members that are into vintage test equipment. Some of them like to service vintage radios using same period test equip. It wouldn't surprise me if some of them dress accordingly too! They really love and defend the EICO cr@p and similar garbage from PACO, Knight, Heath, etc. They discuss the same old questions/issues of drifting circuits, bad power supply caps, and trying to squeeze every bit of performance out of something "ho-hum" that requires reinventing the wheel. 

Vintage test equip. is not for me....

So why bother replying?   

[free_electron]

A few years ago I picked up a secondhand transistor tester
it has the date 1944 on

wow, that's got to be really a unique piece ... since the transistor wasn't invented til 47 ...

[LektroiD]

A few years ago I picked up a secondhand transistor tester
it has the date 1944 on

wow, that's got to be really a unique piece ... since the transistor wasn't invented til 47 ...

You quoted completely out of context there. I said THE METER has the date 1944 on, not that the transistor tester was. Read and understand the whole paragraph before quoting me please.

I would imagine, being DIY that the meter was pulled from an earlier piece of gear, particularly with the post-war recession.

[PA0PBZ]

A few years ago I picked up a secondhand transistor tester
it has the date 1944 on

wow, that's got to be really a unique piece ... since the transistor wasn't invented til 47 ...

The re-used meter was probably made in '44 ...

[MarkPalmer]

The denim front has that mid '70's Levi's "movin-on," look to it    But I'm still researching what Leakance is 

-Mark-

[SeanB]

Probably misspelt leakage test. Those first transistors that were available to ordinary hobbyists were truly horrible spec wise, you might get one with good gain and such, or one that was so leaky that even biased off it drew 1mA of current at 3V.

I have an original Sinclair Z12 amplifier still in the box, I am so wary to power it up, seeing as they were built with the rejects from the local factories near Sinclair's offices, and the power devices and others are unmarked, though the case says they were made by Newmarket transistors.

[MarkPalmer]

All I could get for Leakance was, "The reciprocal of the resistance of insulation," whatever that means    origin 1890-95.  So.... we have 1890's terminology with 1940's technology rockin' in a 1970's denim package     

Seriously, I knew whoever made it meant leakage.  I have been working on a '62 Dymec/HP voltmeter recently that is packed with those old germaniums.  A newly acquired Peak Atlas DCA75 made testing for excessive leakage on them easy.

-Mark-
 

[HiTech]

So why bother replying?   

In case you might be interested in a forum that often deals with vintage test equipment, that's why. Enjoy your Daka-ware knobs.

[AG6QR]

But I'm still researching what Leakance is

I don't see where it says "Leakance".

To me, it looks like someone hand-wrote "LEAKGE" and then noticed the missing "A", and tried to fix the mistake by inserting it in the proper place, but a bit above the level of the "K" and "G".

I guess it looks a bit too much like a mistake that I would have made, followed by an attempted correction that I would have tried.

Anyway, I like looking at that sort of gear, even if it's not the kind of thing I'd necessarily grab as a first choice for practical use.

edit: oops, now I see that "leakance" word on the meter face.  I was looking at the control label.  The builder of that instrument certainly had some difficulty with that word... 

[G0HZU]

FWIW it looks like the original builder labelled the meter dial with LEAKANCE and also used a shortened version of this in the yellow label where it says

LEAK' CE
DIODE

on one switch position, where CE probably stands for Collector-Emitter.  Or the same switch postion can be used to test a basic diode.

[VK5RC]

Are there any clues inside as to the year of construction,  while the meter and the parrot beak knobs are very old,  the test button looks a lot younger. 

[G0HZU]

It's very difficult to date it. However, the use of the word LEAKANCE suggests that this tester was built by someone who was more familiar with critical testing of vacuum tubes or insulators rather than transistors. So my guess is it was built by a fairly old person a few decades ago and who may no longer be with us today... 

Because the gain range goes up to 500 I would think it was made some time after silicon devices became popular compared to germanium. It could be 50 years old but then again it might only be 30 years old...

The 'leakance' range could prove to be very sensitive and may prove to have an edge over modern transistor testers in this respect?

Note: I just noticed the 1000uA marking on the scale here so maybe it isn't that sensitive after all 

[VK5RC]

I would support G0HZUs estimate of age,  (not only of construction but also of the constructor),  the only slight issue is the labels are still very easily read,  unless storage has been ideal usually they are more faded.
Test equipment CSI!  HiHi.
Actually I think you can learn a lot from even old test equipment,  electrons don't change and some of the 'tricks'  they had to use,  as well as some of the attributes of thermionic and today's silicon  teach you a lot of the basics. 

[sunnyhighway]

I'd say it couldn't be older than 1965 because of the Tipp-Ex used on the dial-face.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipp-Ex

[PointyOintment]

All I could get for Leakance was, "The reciprocal of the resistance of insulation," whatever that means 

1/insulance, duh

(Somehow, my spell checker doesn't mind 'leakance' but marks 'insulance' as wrong. )