relevance of bridge pin spacing

[Gene Nelson]

>You can get better angle control with something like the type 67 groov-pin, 
>or driv-lok type G, if that's bothersome.
Stuck with roll pins this time. The groove-pin and drive-lok are similar to 
what Walter uses - appears the groove reduces the diameter to similar to the 
original hitch pin - looks neater too.
Thanks for the links.
Gene

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ron Nossaman" <rnossaman at cox.net>
To: "Pianotech List" <pianotech at ptg.org>
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2007 1:50 PM
Subject: Re: relevance of bridge pin spacing


>
>> <What's your "ideal" C-8 speaking length?
>>
>> Original for this piano was 53mm. I have looked at 54 and 52 - neither 
>> will work out much more than the top octave. So 53 appears to be ideal 
>> for this piano.
>
> That's what I set mine at - 53.
>
>
>> Possibly the original bridge pin spacing from notes 35 to 66 were not 
>> random afterall. Must look at this more closely.
>
> Yes, look again. The reason may not have been apparent the first time, and 
> may not ever, but they likely had one, whether you might agree with it or 
> not.
>
>
>>This brings up another thought: I also should be looking for more unison 
>>spacing fudge room because I eliminated the original hitch pins and 
>>replaced with verticle. I came as close to original alignment as possible 
>>but I am certain that any errors are waiting to haunt me when I finally do 
>>the bridge pin layout.
>
> You'll always see things you wish you'd noticed and adjusted during the 
> layout before assembly. The vertical hitches, being bigger then the 
> originals, will make for different back scale angles then the original. 
> Can't be helped with roll pins, but hopefully you got close enough that 
> the angles all sort of visually cancel out. You can get better angle 
> control with something like the type 67 groov-pin, or driv-lok type G, if 
> that's bothersome. http://www.groov-pin.com/grooved%20pins/gpins_types.htm 
> http://www.driv-lok.com/groovedpins.asp
>
>
>>The original bridge pin diameters of the top section were .091 (cannnot 
>>find replacements for this size) and I will use .086 - possibly will gain 
>>some small space advantage here as well.
>
> Yes, some.
> Ron N
>
>