Monthly Archives: August 2022

1933 Grocery Prices

1933Aug17WashFor a snapshot of the cost of food during the Depression, this ad for A&P Stores appeared in the Washington Evening Star, August 17, 1933. The prices look like bargains, but money was scarce during the Depression, and there has been a lot of inflation in the years since then. According to this inflation calculator, one dollar in 1933 is the equivalent of $22.79 in 2022 dollars. So six cans of beans for 25 cents sounds like it would be a cheap way to eat, but that works out to about 95 cents a can today. According to this report, a coal miner in 1932 earned $13.91 per week, so even those four cents would be significant, and that assumes that someone had a job at all.

A six pack of beer was 75 cents for Pabst, or 50 cents for a brand called Michel. A pack of cigarettes cost a dime. Butter was 2 pounds for 49 cents, which works out to $5.58 per pound in today’s money. A pound of peanut butter was 12 cents, or about $2.73 in today’s money.

So even though the prices look low, pictures like that shown below were not uncommon either.



Homemade Soldering Gun: 1947

1947AugRadioCraftSeventy-five years ago, the gentleman shown here wanted one of the new soldering guns, but didn’t want to pay the high prices they were then commanding. So he did what anyone would have done, namely, make his own. He started with a power transformer, and removed the secondary windings by cutting them with a hacksaw, leaving the primary winding in place. He then added a new secondary winding of Number 4 stranded wire, with enough turns to provide a voltage of 1/2 volt. Since the voltage was stepped down by a factor of 240, the secondary current was stepped up by the same amount, which was short circuited through a 12 gauge copper wire, which served as the heating element. The author reported that in 10 seconds, the tip was ready to be tinned.

Fortunately, today, the costs are low enough that it’s not necessary to make your own tool. As you can see below, equivalent soldering guns are quite reasonably priced. And for those of us who prefer an old-school iron, the cost can be even lower.

 

The plans appeared in Radio Craft, August 1947.

1947AugRadioCraft2



Some links on this site are affiliate links, meaning that this site earns a small commission if you make a purchase after using the link.

Maria Luisa Sierra, NBC Shortwave, 1942

1942Aug15RadioGuideShown here 80 years ago is NBC broadcaster Maria Luisa Sierra. The Mexico City native broadcast her commentaries from New York over the network’s shortwave service, covering the activities of American women in wartime.

The photo appeared in Radio Guide, August 15, 1942.



1923 Grocery Prices

1933Aug14WashTo get an idea of grocery prices in the United States in 1923, this ad appeared in the Washington Times on August 14, 1923. Everything looks cheap, but there’s been a lot of inflation in the last 99 years. According to this online inflation calculator, one dollar in 1923 was the equivalent of $17.33 in 2022 money, so to compare, you need to multiply these prices by that amount.

For example, five pounds of flour was 27 cents, but that’s the same as $4.68 today. How does that compare to today’s actual price, shown below?

Similarly, a pound of butter was 52 cents, but that’s over $9 in today’s money. And 10 pounds of sugar was 83 cents, the same as $14.39 today. How does that compare to the current prices shown below?

A can of Campbell’s Tomato Soup was 9 cents, but that’s the same as $1.56 today. How does that compare?



Some links on this site are affiliate links, meaning that this site earns a small commission if you make a purchase after using the link.

Get Eclipse Glasses for the 2024 Eclipse!

Templetone Radio Mfg. Co., 1947

1947AugRadioNewsShown here, 75 years ago, is the assembly line of Templetone Radio Mfg. Corporation. The picture appeared on the cover of Radio News, August 1947, which noted that postwar radio sales were at an all-time high, and that this assembly line was typical of the activity of radio plants throughout the country.

The factory was located at 100 Garfield Avenue, New London, CT. The building still stands, and is shown below. It was built in 1920 and originally known as the Edward Bloom Silk Mill.
The building, judging from the Google street view below, appears vacant, but is apparently in the process of being converted to housing.

templetone



1962 British 2 Tube Shortwave Regen

1962AugPracWir2Sixty years ago this month, the August 1962 issue of the British Practical Wireless carried the plans for this handsome set, dubbed the “Atlantic S.W. Two” The two-tube regenerative set was designed for 15-40 meters, but with plug-in coils, the range could be extended. It was said to give good performance and was easy to construct. Also shown was an AC power supply, with transformer, which kept the headphones isolated from the high voltages, and rendered the set safe.

1962AugPracWir



1947 FM Radio Kit

1947AugRadioCraft3Seventy-five years ago, if you wanted to be the first on your block with a receiver for the new postwar FM band, you couldn’t go wrong with the Model FM-7 receiver kit from the Radio Kits Company, 120 Cedar Street, New York.

The set was complete with speaker, but there was also provision to use the set as a tuner to feed a separate hi-fi amplifier. The RF section was pretuned at the factory.

This ad appeared in the August 1947 issue of Radio Craft.  You can find a schematic of the set at this link.

And if you want to put together your own FM radio today (and practice your soldering skills at the same time), you can’t go wrong with the Elenco kit shown here.

And if Junior wants in on the fun, then the Snap Circuits FM receiver shown below can be put together by kids of any age. The manufacturer recommends it for kids over 8 years old, but as long as Junior knows not to eat the parts, it should be fine.



Some links on this site are affiliate links, meaning that this site earns a small commission if you make a purchase after using the link.

Get Eclipse Glasses for the 2024 Eclipse!

Radio Invades Hicksville: 1922

1922AugRadioNewsStarting about a hundred years ago, radio was becoming very much a rural phenomenon, as shown by this cover illustration from the August 1922 issue of Radio News.

For an interesting scholarly look at radio’s impact on rural America, see the article “Radio in the 1920s: A Social Force in South Dakota,” by Reynold M. Wik, South Dakota History, Vol. 11, p. 94 (1981).



Some links on this site are affiliate links, meaning that this site earns a small commission if you make a purchase after clicking on the link.

1962 One Tube 6 Meter Transceiver

1962AugPEThis handsome one-tube six-meter transceiver made its debut 60 years ago this month, in the August 1962 issue of Popular Electronics.  The set was put together by author Michael Robbins, K6OAH, who reported that from his Los Angeles location, during a band opening, the set was able to pull in signals from the Mexican to the Canadian border. The transmitter put out a respectable 2 watts.

The secret of the design was the 6EZ8 triple triode. On receive, it allowed one stage of RF amplification before the superregenerative receiver, which probably meant that the receiver didn’t radiate an annoying signal. The set ran on AC power, although it included two flashlight batteries to power the carbon microphone.

1962AugPE2



Combination Handwashing Sink/Toilet Tank

Sinktwice

A basically good idea for some situations, but with some serious limitations

More than once, I’ve seen a meme extolling the virtues of a product similar to the one shown here. The accompanying text is usually along the lines of:

In Japan, a sink is built above the toilet tank for hand washing. The water drains into the toilet tank to be used for the next flush, and saves millions of gallons of water each year.

This is usually followed by many gushing comments stating what a great idea it is.  Along the way, it usually turns into a discussion of how stubborn Americans refuse to adopt this idea, or that a conspiracy by the Big Toilet Companies has suppressed the idea. Invariably, when I point out the disadvantages, everyone wants to argue with me, although nobody actually wants to buy one, even though they are readily available.

It’s actually not a bad idea, and there are certain niche applications where it could really come in handy. For example, if you wanted to install a toilet in a room that simply did not have room for a sink, it would be a good choice.

The people who take a strong position about what a good idea this is often don’t seem to understand exactly how it works, and their comments often reflect their confusion. When you flush a toilet, the water to flush is expelled from the tank, and runs through various pathways in the porcelain and into the bowl. Simultaneously, the tank starts refilling with water for the next flush. This product runs that refill water through a faucet on top, through a drain, and into the tank. So in the minute or so that the tank needs to refill, the little faucet on top of the toilet is running. It uses the same amount of water as any other flush. But since it’s now running outside the tank, if you want, you can wash your hands with it. Again, this is an excellent idea, and probably has some niche applications.

But there are a few problems, and depending on your solution to these problems, you might cause more environmental problems of the type you were hoping to solve.

First of all, in most parts of the country (other than areas with very high humidity), you flush the toilet with cold water. But most people wash their hands with hot water. There are two solutions to this problem. Interestingly, one viable solution is to simply resign yourself to the use of cold water. The CDC in its wisdom, for example, provides handwashing instructions calling on you to “wet your hands with clean, running water (warm or cold)” before applying soap.

However, most Americans probably prefer the familiar warm water when washing hands. So the other alternative is to connect the toilet to the warm water, instead of the cold. But this means that every time the toilet gets flushed, you are heating up 2.5 gallons of water, whether or not you wash your hands. And even if you wash your hands every single time, you use much less than 2.5 gallons in the process. So the net effect is that by making this change, you are unnecessarily heating up a lot of water, which you will literally flush down the toilet. That doesn’t sound like a very “green” thing to do.

Another potential problem is buildup of dirt or soap scum in the rim jets of the toilet. When you flush the toilet, water goes through various pathways in the porcelain, and into the bowl. Some of these, particularly the rim jets at the top of the bowl, are rather small. They are designed to have clean water run through them, and it seems to me that if you run grey water through them, there’s a potential for them to get clogged up.  (And of course, if anything else ever gets poured down the drain, it runs the risk of clogging those little openings.)

It is possible to clean the jets, at least to some extent, by getting down on your hands and knees in front of the bowl, and reaching in with a small brush. But since most of the water’s path is buried in the porcelain, it seems to me that there’s a potential for clogging in an inaccessible area. Of course, you can probably clean them by pouring in toxic chemicals, but if the whole point of this exercise was to “go green,” that doesn’t seem like a good alternative. And if you have to eventually replace the toilet, sending the old one off to the landfill doesn’t sound like a particularly environmentally sound thing to do.

Another issue is washing your hands other than after using the toilet. The only way to get the water to flow is by flushing the toilet. So whenever you want to wash your hands for any reason, you must either find another sink, or else send 2.5 gallons of water literally down the drain. Also, if you are in the middle of washing your hands, but you didn’t quite finish rinsing, you have no choice but to send another 2.5 gallons of perfectly good water into the septic system.

The final issue is that the tank isn’t located very conveniently for washing your hands.

Despite these issues, this is actually a rather good idea, as long as you understand these limitations. If you can live with these downsides, you’ll be glad to know that the Big Toilet Companies are not suppressing this invention. Indeed, like anything else, you can get them at Amazon.

There are a few different brands.  Some are plastic, and some are ceramic.  And more importantly, they come in different sizes, so find the one that fits your tank.  You can find them at this Amazon search result.

 



Some links on this site are affiliate links, meaning that this site earns a small commission if you make a purchase after clicking the link.