Realistic Solo 103 Drivers

T

TinCanAlley

Duck, you sucker!
Subscriber
I just got my hands on a nice pair of Realistic Solo 103 speakers that have been tucked away for more than 30 years. I hooked them up and found one speakers to be less than optimal. Under normal bass it rattles, so I figured it was either abused or the cone has separated from the surround. I did some research and found that the driver was (or at least was supposed to have been) a Fostex FE103. I found that I could get a new replacement of the older model the FE103en. So I purchased two.

Now, upon receiving the replacements, I opened the cabinets and found the driver to be a Foster 10T3, not the Fostex FE103. The other difference I noticed is the original driver states a nominal of 30W and a max of 100W. The Foxtex replacement is nominal of 5W with a max of 15W. Not that I would every play these that loud since they are full range singles, but I was wondering why such a difference. Is the Foster full of it, or is the power handling that much better?

Lastly, upon removing the bad speaker, I found that the surround and cone had separated. Is it possible to reattach them? I don't see any damage and I don't know how or what to use to try and reattach them. I've attached a few pictures.

Thanks for any and all input.Foster Driver Solo 103 (1).JPG Foster Driver Solo 103 (2).JPG Foster Driver Solo 103 (2).JPG Foster Driver Solo 103 (3).JPG
 
Register to hide this ad
you should indeed be able to re-attach the cloth surround to the cone using a flexible glue. Aileen's "Tacky Glue" is often employed for attaching/reattaching surrounds. For this application, the Tacky Glue is used like a contact adhesive. Apply to both surfaces and let dry for ca. 30 minutes, then press them together and hold or clamp to ensure a good, tight junction. Some waxed paper may be helpful to keep the surround & cone separate while the glue dries.

Alignment of the voicecoil/cone is important, but shouldn't be hard with such a small speaker.

These drivers are fairly sensitive and definitely not designed for high power handling (old or new) -- use something like a single-ended 2A3 amplifier or a push-pull 6V6 or EL84 amplifier... and enjoy (new or old drivers).
 
Yeah, most probably 3 and 10 watts or 3.0 and 10.0. Does the surrounds look way to stiff to you?.
They sometimes used dope on those textile surrounds, that got stiff with time. If yes, do not bother re-gluing.
 
Maybe I'm not doing something correctly, but I figured if I was to glue them, and they turned out to be bad, I would be wasting my time and money. So I moved the cone back and forth and it made scraping sounds. The one with the surround still attached was smooth and quite. Is this a good test, or without the surround attached, I'm not going to get smooth and quite movement?

Now if I do glue them, how do I make sure I get it attached with the cone in the right position? Do I push the surround down to the cone, or move the cone up to the surround?

Thanks
 
scraping is a bad sign -- if you're sure you're not torquing the cone ;) when you push it in, and it's scraping -- the progonsis isn't good.
 
Having sold those from about '69 through '74, never would have recommended that kind of power...thought the same thing as abovd, maybe three watts to ten watts. We paired them with the lower output receivers, like the Realistic STA-35B...got to look at the Radio Shack catalogs page.

Nice find BTW, I need a single Minimus II and can never seem to find one...

Edit: From the 1967 catalog, these were "15 watts music power, 30-17,000 cps, 8-ohms" They sold for $15.95 each.
 
Last edited:
045.jpg

source: www.radioshackcatalogs.com (1967)
 
Yeah, I tried over and over and couldn't get it to move without scraping. So she is shot. The new FE103en replacements are in and hopefully will break in and reduce the mids a bit. I've been breaking them in with my Pioneer SX-1080 at moderate volume and low bass.

In the cabinet I found these, I also found a mint condition Sherwood S-7100. All controls are clean, not a nick or scratch on it. Not even any oxidization on the connections.
 
S-7100 is a pretty nice piece; much better than average tuner in those ol' Sherwoods, IME.

The unsuffixed version (as opposed to the S-7100A) is interesting in that it uses, if memory serves, interstage coupling transformers. I've only had an "A" variant pass through here, so I am not 100% sure of that. If so, it may have interesting sonic characteristics.

This is the "A" variant, FWIW.

SherwoodS7100A by Mark Hardy, on Flickr

I reckon that an S7100 would be a more enjoyable match with FE103 family members than the aforementioned Pioneer. A single-ended 2A3 amp would be even better -- but i am highly biased.
 
mhardy6647 said:
S-7100 is a pretty nice piece; much better than average tuner in those ol' Sherwoods, IME.

The unsuffixed version (as opposed to the S-7100A) is interesting in that it uses, if memory serves, interstage coupling transformers. I've only had an "A" variant pass through here, so I am not 100% sure of that. If so, it may have interesting sonic characteristics.

This is the "A" variant, FWIW.

SherwoodS7100A by Mark Hardy, on Flickr

I reckon that an S7100 would be a more enjoyable match with FE103 family members than the aforementioned Pioneer. A single-ended 2A3 amp would be even better -- but i am highly biased.
Click to expand...

Isn't the least expensive version of the amp you mention about 600? I looked it up and found 5700 high price and 520 as low price. Have to figure it's the quality of the build.

The only thing I really know about the 7100 and the "A" version is the color of the controls. On the 7100 the tuning and volume are silver and all other knobs are black with a sliver top. On the "A" version, that is reversed. However, on the one I got, all the knobs are black with silver tops. Guess they ran out of all silver when they made this one. They have black where you grasp them. Also, I believe there is 4 channel FM out on the "A" version. Beyond that, I'm not sure. I did find the original owner's manual as well as the full schematics. Maybe I can find the schematics for the "A" and compare.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom