<HTML><BODY style="word-wrap: break-word; -khtml-nbsp-mode: space; -khtml-line-break: after-white-space; "><DIV><DIV><BR><DIV><DIV>On Dec 19, 2006, at 10:35 AM, Jon Page wrote:</DIV><BR class="Apple-interchange-newline"><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; border-spacing: 0px 0px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: auto; -khtml-text-decorations-in-effect: none; text-indent: 0px; -apple-text-size-adjust: auto; text-transform: none; orphans: 2; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; "><DIV>><FONT face="Arial" size="-4" color="#000000"><SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 9px; ">any chance of supplying one of the snap ring pliers</SPAN></FONT></DIV><DIV><BR></DIV><DIV>I use the plier type upright hammer head extractor to lift them.</DIV><X-SIGSEP><PRE style="white-space: pre; ">-- </PRE></X-SIGSEP><DIV><BR>Regards,<BR><BR>Jon Page</DIV><BR class="Apple-interchange-newline"></SPAN></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV>Have any of you had any issues with S&S backchecks, once pulled, being driven back down by checking? I'm thinking that once extracted, the grip the backcheck has on the wire would be weakened and the backcheck height would become unstable.<DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>I've done it on one piano that was a real problem, but have no way to measure whether the backchecks have been driven back down. I was not comfortable pulling the backchecks. IMO, backcheck height should be a constant. Once hammers are replaced, the backcheck height would have to be readjusted.</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>By the way, I used small vice grips clamped to the bottom of the wire and a screw type vertical hammershank puller. Rebending and regulation is required. But if you don't use the vice grips it really distorts the backcheck wire bends.</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>Tim Coates wrote:</DIV><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><DIV style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> The shank at rest should dissect the backcheck at the line that separates the top third from the middle third.</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>Wouldn't this "rule" completely depend on the relationship of the tail length to the overall length of the hammer and where the boring on the hammer is in relationship to hammerblow distance?</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>If all the regulation specs (including checking) are "correct" with new hammers, then as hammers are filed, compensations must be made so that hammer shank height remains constant, or proper checking will be an increasing problem with each filing of the hammer.</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>Jeff</DIV><DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV><BR><BR><DIV> <SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; border-spacing: 0px 0px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: auto; -khtml-text-decorations-in-effect: none; text-indent: 0px; -apple-text-size-adjust: auto; text-transform: none; orphans: 2; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; "><DIV>Jeff Tanner, RPT</DIV><DIV>University of South Carolina</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><BR class="Apple-interchange-newline"></SPAN> </DIV><BR></BODY></HTML>