FILE 82/114 |
|
|||
|
File information | |
Filename: | PICT0960.JPG |
Album name: | Dave / Fluorescent fittings |
Filesize: | 2799 KiB |
Date added: | 14 Jan, 2016 |
Dimensions: | 2730 x 2048 pixels |
Displayed: | 67 times |
URL: | http://80.229.24.59:9232/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=2807 |
Favourites: | Add to Favourites |
Comment 1 to 9 of 9 Page: 1 |
|
|||
Superslims always end up painted no matter where they have been used they were fucking popular mind still LOADS about today if you look! A testimony to how well made these were!
|
|
|||
It's come up really well! I notice the lamp holders are all grey, on the 3 super slims I have the front face with the holes for the tube is white.
|
|
|||
Yours will be Ekco in that case. I have one with porcelain inserts which are Ekco. That fittings missing a lamp holder sadly, I wanna restore it so bad cause I have the later (and slightly ugly) Thorn superslim.
|
|
|||
I've seen some all grey lampholders, think they were the later ones used, as had some from a shopping centre dated 1964, they were all grey. The paintwork on these fittings was awful, it was porous, so the slightest bit of damp and they started to rust
|
|
|||
Seems strange how it only seemed to be these that rusted and the pop packs of same age didnt. Its almost as though different whites were used.
|
|
|||
I'm surprised how far down the end the choke is. It would have made it unbalanced and difficult to put up.
|
|
|||
I suppose in a case like that you'd screw the ballast side up first and then manoeuvre it into position.
|
|
|||
Compaired with how your received it you have done a cracking job restoring it - well done!
|
|
|||
Cheers mate. You could easily tell it was used in a shed as it had leaves inside it, god knows how they got there.
|
Comment 1 to 9 of 9 Page: 1 |