Just acquired this week. 1937 Corona Standard. The owner's dad got it in 1938, used it in college in upstate NY, then the son (the seller) also used it in college in the 1970s. The last time it had been used was 1980. It spent 36 years in the case.

The rubber parts are in excellent condition, even the feet. Types wonderfully, after some servicing of degreasing, cleaning and oiling. To say that I'm thrilled is an understatement.

~Joe

Beautiful typers!

Being a perfectionist by nature, typewriters have taught me to accept their flaws as well as my own flaws. I don't worry so much about typos or perfect sentence structures on drafts. When I first got into using them, I was frustrated but now ... having fun.

Actually, now I'm more comfortable using those "beaters". Those less than perfect ones. The inscriptions, markings from previous owners, repair stickers don't bother me as much as it use to. It's a part of the machines history. The beaters are unique to me although, I certainly can appreciate the ones that have retained their beauty. 

I picked up a couple on the weekend. The photos are of their "as-found" condition, but both will clean up nicely after a few small repairs are made.

First there is this 1931 Woodstock No. 5:


And the second machine a 1934 Corona Junior. The database claims that the Junior was first manufactured in 1935, but this is incorrect. The Junior was one of five models (the 3, 4 and Junior, and the larger Sterling and Silent) in Corona's 1934 model line. Supporting this, the serial number on this Junior pre-dates the 1935 numbers listed in the database, so it must have been manufactured during its first model year.

Spazmelda wrote:

Your Woodstock looks very similar to mine Uwe.  I've got mine dated at 1926-27. N189,126

That serial number makes yours a 1928 model, which pre-dates the changes that were made to the No. 5 type action in 1929. Of interest, my 1931 model has an enclosed case that apparently wasn't actually introduced until 1932 (starting with serial number 324,000); I assume this change was made when the machine was factory rebuilt by Woodstock. I also have a 1932 model, which was also rebuilt, but this more recent acquisition is in much better condition. 

It looks like someone had a number of the carriage parts and the ribbon colour legend on yours re-plated, and maybe it's just the photo, but it looks like they chose chrome plating instead of nickel for some reason. Did you buy yours from a collector? 

It cleaned up extremely well!

Re: plating, do the carriage parts match the key trims? Nickle plating is similar to chromium in its appearance but it has a yellowish tinge and it tarnishes (it's also not as hard). On older models the plating would have been nickel (chromium wasn't widely used until later on), which is why I would use nickle plating when restoring a machine such as the Woodstock.

If you compare the plating on one of your newest typewriters, which will most likely be chromium, to that on your Woodstock it might help to determine what was done to your No. 5. It's also possible that it still has the original plating and it's just the photo (white balance settings) and my monitor that are making it appear to be chromium to me.