Edison Suitcase Standard

[Phonofreak]

I have a Standard 4 clip case model S/N 21XXX. It has the smaller motor with small spring barrel. It came with an S shaped crank like you see on Model A Standards and Homes. I bought a flat bar crank that fits close to the machine. I've seen these cranks with 4 clip models. The crank does not fit, The hole is too small for the winding shaft. When did Edison make the change from the flat crank to the S shaped one?
Harvey Kravitz

[martinola]

Huh! That's very interesting, Harvey. I had always assumed that the cranks were interchangeable, but I just tried swapping cranks between my 2 Clip and my New case Model A and can confirm that I've got the same problem. I would assumed that the change came at the advent of the new style motor (for the New style case - about #44076), but your machine has a much lower number than that. My 4 Clip Model A is number 28959 and it has the old, smaller winding shaft. If your machine has the early type gear cluster and small type spring barrel, I'd guess that somebody adapted a new style shaft into the old style motor. Does it look like the frame has been drilled out for the larger diameter shaft? Is your patent plate nickel, with or without serial number? (Or for that matter; is it a later style with black background?) I'd love to see pictures. Anybody else got some info?

-Martin

[Phonofreak]

Hi Martin,
My standard has the oval serial number plate and the nickle ID plate without the S/N. I looked at the gear cluster, and I see no enlarged drilled holes. Everything looks original. I was thinking even though mine is earlier than yours, it maybe an overlap when the change came about. I have a suitcase standard mechanism with small motor S/N 35XXX in the new style banner case. That also takes the S crank.

[martinola]

Hi Harvey,

I think we're running into examples of how serial number sequence doesn't necessarily reflect the chronological order of the machines produced. Up to now, I'd always assumed that an S type crank on a square top model A was an incorrect replacement. Now, it seems that I was totally wrong in assuming that. Well, I guess I'll start having to notate crank style on my data sheet. (I'll have to pester more people to measure their winding shafts!) Can anybody else add to this?

Regards,
Martin