Russian rebrand of HMV 102?

[Jayl65]

This portable is for sale locally and is listed as an MOAOT brand from Russia. It looks like an HMV 102 to me. Any thoughts? The owner is asking for $200.

[Phono48]

I have an identical machine in bright red. Definitely a clone of the HMV 102, it's well made, but there are noticeable differences. All the internal fittings, (lid stay, arm retaining clip, etc) are somewhat thinner than the HMV counterparts, and all are held in with very thick stubby nails, not screws. The motor is as good as the HMV, and runs quietly. I have to say, though that in my opinion, the soundbox is as good as, if not somewhat better, than the HMV No.5. A bigger diaphragm, with the same central "spider", but with a composite back, rather than pot-metal, it sounds superb. I paid around the same price, and have never regretted it.

[CarlosV]

I have also one of these in bright red, and agree that they work well. The only exception is that its lid stay insists in dropping unexpectedly. Certainly a trap to maim capitalist pigs that do not like to dance to the balalaika.

[Jayl65]

After doing some research online it appears they were made in the 1950's. There are even a few youtube videos of them. Im might hold out for an actual HMV 102. I also have my eye on a Columbia Viva-tonal 160. I might snag it first.

[bigshot]

I have one of those myself. I only paid $75 for it though. The sound is quite harsh. I prefer my VV-2-65 by a wide margin.

[ValdisT]

is listed as an MOAOT brand from Russia. It looks like an HMV 102 to me.

From the looks and the logo it appears to be a PT-3 "Molot" (meaninig "Hammer") portable, a clone of HMV 102. At around where I live they are quite common at flea markets and cost from next to nothing to around 100 Euro for units in near mint condition. It's quite a good player.

[Orchorsol]

I carried repairs to the motor, soundbox and tonearm base of one of these for a friend a few months ago. Despite restoring the best performance possible, I found the build quality and sound quality very much inferior to the HMVs, a cheap approximate copy rather than a clone as such. Of course, there may be other machines, or years of manufacture, better than the example I'm speaking of - so I'm not necessarily disagreeing with others' views.

[epigramophone]

Here is mine, purchased for £75, alongside the real thing. Yes it is a copy of the HMV102, but close inspection with a tape measure reveals that almost every dimension is different.

[ValdisT]

Yes it is a copy of the HMV102, but close inspection with a tape measure reveals that almost every dimension is different.

Exactly, and that was common practice for the Soviets back in the day. It's called "adaptation".
Before WW2, but mostly after, the Soviets had a state program in place for acquiring any and all useful western technology and adapting it for mass production in local conditions. It ranged from household goods to consumer items to transportation to military technology. They copied literally anything they didn't already have and could get their hands on. Items copied from American and British sources were re-engineered into the metric system (that's why the general appearance and construction is the same, but all dimensions on the two players are different) and certain manufacturing processes were changed to less time consuming ones (i.e. using nails in place of wood screws).
Also, usually an "adapted" design was handed out to multiple factories, often tangentially related to the item to be produced, to at least somehow combat the mind blowing shortage of everything (in case of portable record players, a quick search online turned out at least 19 factories, all producing their versions of the HMV 101/102).
As production went on, it was mandatory for each factory to come up with continuous design improvements to make it faster and cheaper to produce said items. That's why the older an item is, the generally better it was made, because said optimisation often involved hammering woodscrews in instead of screwing them in (as often seen on furniture from the 60s/70s and newer) because it takes less time and the item usually holds together just fine until you try to disassemble it.

[jboger]

Sounds like an accurate description of how furniture is made and sold by my local furniture store.