<HTML><BODY style="word-wrap: break-word; -khtml-nbsp-mode: space; -khtml-line-break: after-white-space; ">Interesting this came up after my experience with a new hammer yesterday.<DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV><BR><DIV><DIV>On Jan 12, 2007, at 9:20 AM, David Skolnik 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; ">My overall questions remain:<SPAN class="Apple-converted-space"> </SPAN><BR><BR>what would be ideal?<SPAN class="Apple-converted-space"> </SPAN><BR></SPAN></BLOCKQUOTE><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>The #2 tip I got on my tuning hammer from APSCO in about 1992, and a second one I purchased not long afterward for a 6" hammer I made. Also, when I ordered it, I called myself ordering a short 15 degree head. But compared to more recent 15 degree heads, which I find uncomfortable, I think it easily could have been a 10 degree that had gotten mixed in with the 15 degree bin. I like it much better than either 5 or 15 degree heads I've tried since. I don't think Schaff offers a 10 degree head. They should.</DIV><BR><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; ">how are the pin taper and tip tapers determined and how executed?<BR>how much variation exists from one manufacturer to another in measurement, process and materials?<BR><BR>Is there some existing documentation in PTG literature or other source which addresses these questions?<BR><BR>With regard to the contact distance from the becket, your preference is mine.<BR><BR>Thanks<BR><BR>David Skolnik<BR></SPAN></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR><DIV>As you may remember, there was some discussion about this two or three years back when a young tuner introduced the question after purchasing a new Schaff hammer that rocked on the pins. I know I posted quite a bit then. It is very frustrating.</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>There was a Journal article about tuning pin fit along about the same time or perhaps a little earlier. Was it Charles Ball who wrote that article?</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>My current assistant recently purchased a new rosewood extension hammer from Schaff. Yesterday, I tried it for the first time. The fit of his #2 tip on the pins was AWFUL. He was tuning a Yamaha U3. He said it does fit a little better on the Baldwin pins. But I don't know how on earth one could have any control with that tip. They don't deserve the Hale name Schaff is stamping on them.</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>I know different pins have slightly different tapers. But the Schaff tips have far too much taper in the socket. The tip goes down so far on the pin and the tip of the pin lodges somewhere in the middle of the socket and the hammer rocks on the pins. It makes more sense to me that the #1 size would be a better fit if the rim of the tip will come in contact with the pin rather than the tip of the pin coming in contact first. I think some people choose the #3 because there is the sense that the tip is fitting down further on the pin and the rim of the tip comes in contact somewhere down where the pin is round, but it is still coming in contact with the tip of the pin.</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>The APSCO #2 tips I have are less tapered and the socket is smaller at the rim - actually exactly the same as other #1 tips. The rim is also flat rather than flared, but I don't know if that's important. The rim of the socket makes contact with the pin lower - closer to the becket and the lower taper keeps it from having too much play up inside. Wish I could draw a picture. The 8 points of the socket are also turned at closer to a perfect 45 degrees so that all 8 points contact the pin closer to simultaneously. I understand that aligning the broaches for this milling is difficult. When the two drillings miss the 45 degree turn, you can see it and feel it on the pin.</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>I've talked to them at Schaff and written letters and their response is that the pins are to blame.</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>I've NEVER had a poor fit with my old APSCO #2 tips. I've NEVER had a good fit with a Schaff tip of any size. The later Hale tips produced by APSCO seem to be somewhere in between.</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>I hear the Wattanabe tips fit better, but so far I haven't needed to spend the twice as much money to find out. Back when we had 3 domestic manufacturers making tuning tips, we didn't have to pay 2 prices to import quality.</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>You get better control when the point of contact is closer to the becket. When the tuning tip is only contacting the tip of the pin, more twist and bend is introduced. </DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>Also, when you have a better fit, the tips don't wear out.</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>My thoughts,</DIV><DIV>Jeff</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></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>