<html> <body> Jon- You're pretty handy with a camera.  Any chance of including some pictures illustrating your points, below? David Skolnik At 06:48 PM 12/27/2006, you wrote: <blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">>there are a few good principles: smoothly curved profile of the tail, no >?bump?; there is a limit to how high the check can be relative to the shank >at rest, and this varies a bit with tail length; angle of check needs to be >within fairly tight parameters, I generally use a 3" arc on the tails. Due to the degree of coving, anything shorter leaves too thin of a tail section. I order hammers un-coved and find the coving process unnecessary. It removes such a minute amount of weight which has a negligible effect on touch weight (certainly not worth the effort). I also ease the 'square' end with a rough file and fine-file the tapered edges to remove 'hairs'. Tail length 1 1/16", shorter lengths brings the check closer and the tops of the back checks can hit the shoulders of the hammers.  I order hammers with a molding 1/8" longer than my longest bore. I then sand all tails to even length after hanging.  Why have varying tail lengths as a result of a tapered bore? Back check height, I have not gone wrong with setting the height to even-with or 2 mm below the tail at drop position. Angle, 72 degrees from key stick. That's the leather face, not the wood rear profile. That's my recipe for success. <pre>-- </pre> Regards, Jon Page</blockquote></body> </html>