It doesn't change it a meaningful amount. It's still too strong, but it's no longer psychotic, and can be weakened to the desired level in a much more predictable and consistent manner. Repinning the top post to a higher torque gives you both worlds - a slower rise to the hammer while maintaining a happy, snappy jack. The reality is that (hopefully) it is WNG's future fix. I've talked to tech support and tried to impress upon them the importance of doing that. It's a simple fix to make in production, whether a hard or soft bushing, just size it properly. But how would it be WNG's fix on my behalf? Especially if they do not have anything in stock yet that is properly sized. Will From: pianotech-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:pianotech-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of PAULREVENKOJONES at aol.com Sent: Friday, June 25, 2010 3:12 PM To: pianotech at ptg.org Subject: Re: [pianotech] WNG Parts Question In a message dated 6/24/2010 7:00:31 P.M. Central Daylight Time, ngravagne at gmail.com writes: Now, just to be clear: let's say you applied your "fix" to a whip wherein the hammer rise out of check was much too strong and difficult to regulate. So, applying the '"fix" only, with no other regulation at all, not only slowed down the cranky hammer rise, but at the same time made further adjustment (and hopefully little of that) of the spring more sure and more "normal". Is that right? Because if it is, then the fix also maintains a snappy jack, as well as a properly spring-loaded system from check. Good news! (Uh, except for all the extra work we now have to do on new parts!) Boy, do I agree wholeheartedly! Except that the "extra work" maybe might oughta be WNG's fix? And, as well, with the 4:1 ratio (rep to jack) of spring strength, the jack ought to be consistently snappy now. Paul -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/pianotech.php/attachments/20100625/086304aa/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC