It is very unusual, but there do seem to be a fair number of sofas from the 1930s still around, at least if our craigslist is any indication. So unusual doesn't always equate to valuable. And value depends a lot on where you are... if you can access a couple of million buyers, you can probably price it higher than if you have just a few hundred at a rural used furniture store. I don't see the urgent need for reupholstery either, though it would be a fun project. I don't know where you've looked online, but I would check craigslists of some of the bigger cities, search for words that someone might use to sell their grandparents' couch. Google won't always find ads as well as you can by going to the individual city sites. Around here (Vancouver, BC, Canada), I'd probably list it for $700 and see what happens. Maybe even a bit more. You can always drop the price; it's tough to raise it! If it doesn't move for a while, say "OBO." KarinL

We just installed the Miele! I'm pretty excited to have *something*, anything, move in our wayward "project" here. I can report that it's majorly confusing and the manual is zero help. Isn't Miele German? Wouldn't you think they could conjure an operable users' manual? It's worse than dollar-store stuff. So, I can't report any facility with the thing but it worked just fine so far. We chose the Miele for one important reason: the Advantium 240 can't go under-counter; the Miele is designed to be OK there. The Advantium reportedly releases too much hot air so there is a scalding danger. The Advantium is 24" but it's been reported here that the interior space is not as much smaller as the 3" difference exteriorly would imply. I don't think I actually ever really measured it carefully but took that person's word for it -- I did note, though, that the interiors were very similar in size. I prefer the look of the Advantium, not to mention the price. The Miele's come in two flavors: expensive and more-so with much faniciness thrown in. We took the expensive (the lesser version) that I think does not have a raft of pre-programmed settings. Given how complicated it is to work this thing out and the complete absence of written help, I am wondering a little bit whether it was the right choice. But I'm confident it'll all come clear with time. Someone noted the risk one takes in purchasing a 24" oven. If/when it dies there may be trouble replacing that size oven. I like that the 24" Miele doesn't require any expensive trim package for the cabinet. If you buy a MW/convection oven, know that it will come with metal and glass racks for its different functions that you will have to change out. It was suggested here (thanks, plllog!) to design a storage place for the trays very, very close to the source to avoid this becoming a nuisance and unused dead-weight (and it *is* heavy!). This seems very wise advice to me. The trays don't take much room, but are large and awkward and in the case of the glass, breakable, so facilitating their exchange would seem important. Someone also mentioned that there is another MW/convection out there but I don't remember the brand - 'elux' perhaps? Check out the subject over in the appliances forum. Much has been written about these monsters over there!

Terribletom, I appreciate your caution in responding, and I thank you for your diplomatic concern for my feelings. I certainly can understand your fear that I might rip haphazardly into wiring I don't fully comprehend, then go about my business till the house burns down. But I've come here to learn, and my skin is thick, so forgive me if I press ahead. "I (or others) could shoot from the hip about some of your specific questions." And I thank you for your interpretation of the cut red wire. You apparently are right about the PO using a piece of 14-3 when he actually needed 14-2; had I noticed that the red wire was clipped on the switch box side as well, I would have realized the red was just a short span of dead wire--and that would have answered my question about why it was cut short instead of being capped off like the white wire. And I suspect at some point somebody would have suggested that my confusion about why the PO used a single-pole switch (note my question mark in my initial description) might be because it isn't a single-pole, that perhaps 3-way switches in the 1980s looked like single-pole switches with a wire coming out of their backsides. So that clears up THAT question. "Without fully mapping out the circuitry and assessing the whole situation, any answer or set of answers would be pure conjecture--potentially dangerous guesswork." I understand that. And I realize that by describing the circuitry rather than posting my diagram of it I managed to scare and confuse people, possibly making my wiring project sound more complicated than it is. I HAVE mapped out the circuitry and have presented it all here as concisely as I could so that more knowledgeable heads than mine could assess it. The only piece I've left out is the origin of the 12-2 from Junction box 2. I know the wire to the basement has to connect back to the circuit box, but I assume that it also connects to the switch by the front doorway (the one inside the wall that I'm leaving alone)--because it HAS to. For one thing, in order for all 3 switches to work together, that front switch cannot be an island; for another, that switch has to connect to the second light source (whether it be the overhead or the side lights), because I only have 1 set of K&T wiring exposed, and clearly the overhead functions independently from the side lights. I can (and should) go down to the basement and trace that connection. But it has to be there. Otherwise, why involve junction box 2 in this at all? "Moreover, your description of the problem(s) betrays a lack of understanding of the basics of house wiring." Could you please elaborate? If it is because I used the terms "positive" and "negative" instead of hot and neutral, I apologize. I'm also aware that I used "beam" instead of "stud" at one point. And, having had my "eureka" moment, I am relieved to realize there are no single-pole switches involved here. I've tried very hard to be clear but know that precise vocabulary is important in technical explanations. I need to know what I'm missing, because I'm obviously not explaining myself adequately. "you're planning to move some switch boxes and rework what they control. That raises the issue of 'abandonment'." I am planning to move 2 switches, but I'm not sure I have the wherewithal to rework what they control, nor is that my goal. There will be no abandonment here. I'm not moving either junction box 1 or 2 (nor do I really want to fiddle with their contents)--just including them in my explanation in order to present "the whole situation." I need to place a switch by the door to the outside, connect it to another switch 3 feet away on the same wall (by the door to the back hall), move the 14-3 coming thru the floor from its current location to the new wall, extend the new wiring around the corner back to the 2 junction boxes, insulate the wall with the new switches before the carpenter (he didn't get to that wall last Sunday) drywalls that short section. No drywalling is being done at this time on the wall with the junction boxes. "And make no mistake about it: that's exactly what is at issue--a rewiring of the room and, perhaps, adjacent dependencies." But if I don't alter the contents of the junction boxes, I can't affect dependencies, right? The only function coming thru junction box 1 is some of the overhead lighting. I don't believe any of the outlets or the back hall light would be affected by moving the 12-2 out of junction box 2 (which might well be the most sensible thing to do, given how crammed that box is), but right now we intend to leave that box alone--just lengthen the run of 12-2 so it can reach the new switch. "But re-routing and re-working K&T is a perilous business at best." I've noticed that mentioning K&T does seem to make folks nervous. I would LOVE to get rid of the K&T in this room, but that's a much bigger project than we can manage at this time. All I want to do is to confine the K&T in junction box 1. And in order to do that, I have to understand what's going on with the "white wire" leg of this circuit. What I want more than anything is to replace the existing mess coming out of the bottom of junction box 1 with a single 14-2 (or 12-2, if that is the better option) and feed it, along with the 12-2 from junction box 2 thru the holes in my studs over to the new switch box locations. But I can't do that until I make sense of the current configuration. I don't own a camera. My DS took the pictures of the existing wiring. Would it help if I asked him to take a picture of the diagram I made in order to explain all this? Would you feel more comfortable if I went down into the basement and traced the path of the 12-2 back to the switch by the front doorway (yes, I know I need to do this anyway--and yes, I KNOW it would make you most comfortable if I said "I'm hiring a licensed electrician")?

"Are you sure all these receptacles are not chained off the first GFCI? If you push the test button on the GFCI do the other receptacles stop working? " Positive. They're on totally separate circuits, for one thing. If testing the GFCI on one circuit causes outlets on totally different circuits to stop working, there is a big, big problem somewhere. "There's nothing wrong with all the bathroom receptacles on a single circuit with one GFCI as long as there's nothing else on that circuit. " No, but it is weird. I've not seen that before, ever. However I am unused to some of the shoddy things I've seen in newer tract housing. That's as opposed to some of the things I've seen in much older homes - such as wiring so old that it was still legal when the wiring was put in to have in-line fuses. My guess is that wiring it this way was a way to save money on having to put in another GFCI for the 2nd bathroom. Not putting one on the washing machine outlet was just sheer incompetence. But its still shoddy because now if someone in each bathroom switches on a hair dryer, you risk overloading that circuit. A hair dryer can draw 12.5A - and 2 of them on the same 15A circuit (and lets hope Dad isn't shaving at the other sink at the same time - or, come to think of it, running his OWN hair dryer, in this day of equal opportunity primping) is not something you want to do on a regular basis. "There's nothing wrong with the refrigerator being shared with a dining room receptacle if it is a 20A circuit (and it feeds nothing other than receptacles in the kitchen and dining room and like areas). " There most certainly is. There are power spikes on lines running something with a motor like a refrigerator. Plug your computer into a line on the same circuit as the refrigerator, and see how far you get. (Well, actually, the microwave would be worse, but it still wouldn't be that great). It's not even in the same room - there would be no reason for anyone to suspect that that outlet is not on the same circuit as all the other outlets in the room. This is not an attached dining "area". It is a totally separate room that is listed on the floor plans as "home office/formal dining". The dining "area" is on the other side of the kitchen, congruent with the living room. I doubt that you can lump THREE areas - kitchen, "dining area", and a "dual-use" office/formal dining room all into one under building codes. Also, it is a 15A circuit. Given that there is an outlet in the hallway that is closer to it than is the line for the fridge, I fail to see any advantage to hooking that one circuit in to the kitchen, fridge or no fridge. For all I know - I haven't checked yet - the microwave could be on the same circuit. I kind of doubt it, but at this point I have no idea what circuit the microwave is on (its built in) which raises the potential for problems should I find out the hard way that my Vita-mix is on the same circuit as the microwave. If for no other reason than I end up having to run out in the snow and switch the breaker back. The microwave also ought to be on a dedicated circuit - but it clearly is not. My guess is that it is on the same circuit as the rest of the outlets on that side of the room, which puts anything you have plugged into those other outlets at risk when the microwave comes on. And before you scoff at the idea of a dedicated circuit for the microwave - a 1200W microwave draws 10A to 11A (depending on how close your supply voltage is to 120V). It should be on a 15A circuit to account for the spike it causes when it comes on. That leaves little or no room for other things on the same circuit. Some fluorescent lighting - probably OK. Other high-draw appliances, such as food processors or powerful blenders or mixers - not OK. The microwave should be on its own circuit. Oh, and here's another Really Stupid Way To Wire Your House - the hall lights are on a 3 way switch. There is a switch over by the living room. A switch outside the doors to the Master bedroom and the bedroom next to it. And the 3rd switch is outside the bathroom door. Which means the 3rd bedroom has no switch within reach. Which means when you get up in the middle of the night, you either risk breaking your neck getting to the bathroom, or you take a flashlight with you. Having a switch next to the bathroom, and none within reach of the 3rd bedroom, is sheer stupidity. Outside of TV shows about teenage cyborgs, nobody sleeps in the bathroom. And if you did - you wouldn't need access to the hall lights to get there. "Prewiring for an electric cooktop even when a gas is installed is quite commonly done for practical reasons" Well yes, it is. I mentioned it because I see the breaker in the box, but I can't see the outlet for it. I ASSUME it is wired to an outlet behind the current gas stove, but I have no way to test or check that without removing the stove, which I am not about to do. Another weirdness is where they mounted the breaker box. The breaker box is mounted on the OUTSIDE WALL of the garage, IN FRONT of the backyard fence to boot. It has to be locked - which is actually no protection from meddling because the only kind of lock you can put on it (because the place for it will only accept a small hasp) is easily snipped off. There is just no reason that couldn't have been mounted inside the garage or elsewhere inside the house. In addition, having to lock the box (and then having to keep track of the keys for it) means an extra thing you have to fiddle around with in the cold/dark/snow/rain/ice or whatever. I'm no spring chicken any more and I don't relish having to find the keys (possibly in the dark) go outside and fiddle with my breaker box in the rain (which raises potential safety issues on top of everything else) because my VitaMix blew the circuit breaker when my housemate unknowingly turns on the microwave at the same time. Or whatever other circuit gets unknowingly overloaded because things are not as they should be. Which is why I always map the breakers in a new place - hence this recent exercise. "There's absolutely no requirement that each bedroom be on it's own circuit, and in fact, many designs specifically don't do that. " If there isn't, there ought to be. Now instead of having 15A for each bedroom, the 2 rooms have to share 15A. It is bad design, whether or not "many designs specifically don't do that", especially in the era of a computer and TV in practically every room. Keep in mind, its not just the lights or just the outlets that are all on the same circuit - it is ALL the lights AND outlets in both rooms. In the meantime, there is a 15A circuit in the laundry that has only that one outlet on it (and maybe the lights in there, I forgot to write that down). Then there is ANOTHER outlet on the other side of that room that is on the same circuit as some of the garage outlets. And no real use for either outlet as the room is way too small to try to iron in there, not to mention how inaccessible the one behind the dryer is anyway. I'm sure its not against code. It's just against common sense. "Frankly other than the fact your panel is mislabeled, nothing seems out of code or even contrary to normal practice. " The only thing I said was against code - except possibly the refrigerator situation, which, if it isn't against code, certainly OUGHT to be - is the fact that the outlet the washing machine is plugged in to is not GFCI. Frankly, if you think that isn't against code, I hope you're not a professional electrician - or an amateur one either, for that matter. The rest of it is just sheer stupid design, and - as I said - I strongly doubt the inspection for this place was done properly, looking at the situation in the "laundry room" with the washing machine plugged in to a dedicated circuit (good) but without GFCI (bad). There was another thread where people were jumping all over a guy who was trying to get a layout from his electrical contractor, because some folks felt that the consumer/customer has NO RIGHT to have things done his/her way. This sort of stupidity is EXACTLY why anybody with any common sense gets a layout before allowing the electrician (or plumber, or the guy who is going to put in the interior walls, or anything else) to go to work. Otherwise you end up with all sorts of stupidity - like a shortfall of amperage in 2 of the bedrooms, one of which is supposed, after all, to be the MASTER bedroom, and outlets in a room the size of a closet that will never ever be used. And fridges on a circuit that feeds an outlet in a totally separate room, and god knows where the microwave is drawing power. And the panel being improperly labeled at the time of installation, by the guy who actually did the wiring, IS a big deal. That's just another indicator of shoddy work. The information should have been on the plans - and if the plans were not followed, then that's yet another sign of crappy work.