Jim Wilkins wrote in message
...
On Sep 8, 9:36 am, "Lloyd E. Sponenburgh"
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
Jim Wilkins fired this volley in news:14e63de1-24db-
:

Rather than mangling the original can why not save it intact and
fabricate a replica cover for the replacements?

Jim, one need not "mangle" the old cans. The plastic ones were generally
mounted with either two bolt tabs or by a clamping ring assembly from the
bottom side of the chassis. At the worst, only the phenolic bottom disk of
the old cap need be damaged to "re-stuff" it. With care, even that may be
preserved, and only the guts changed.

LLoyd

The OP wanted to reshape some of them oval to fit two new caps in. I
would keep the can intact. In other well-developed collecting areas
like firearms -any- modification including refinishing reduces value.
I think the practice is to save the original parts for show if you
want to make the device functional. That's what I do based on museum
exhibits.

Here are examples of the compromises necessary to operate old
equipment:
http://www.oldrhinebeck.org/
http://www.ohtm.org/
http://www.americanprecision.org/
http://www.nps.gov/sair/
http://www.ussconstitutionmuseum.org...qjbmB-KMCFSE1g
wodnRdXHg

jsw

----------

That is before safety issues come into play. Where carbon resistors have
failed I always replace with metal oxide resistors . Some people even tone
down the modern colours.
Likewise rubber sleeving perishes and modern replacement is too vividly
coloured.