<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN"> <html><head><style type="text/css"></style><title>[CAUT] Shank to Hammer weight spreadsheet</title></head><body> <blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" color="#000000">...Once I'm done with that I simply dry assemble the shanks and hammers and</font></blockquote> <blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" color="#000000">then use the Stanwood scale to weigh the SWs.  I chart those and then figure</font></blockquote> <blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" color="#000000">out where I have to alter them to achieve a smooth curve</font>...</blockquote> <div><br> <br> </div> <div>I seems you are 'final fitting' your SW irrespective of the shank strike weight (SSW).</div> <div>If you initially taper your hammers to a close margin, then you are throwing</div> <div>the curve off with jumbled shanks and changing the mass of the hammer due</div> <div>to shank irregulatities.</div> <div><br></div> <div>It would be more advantageous to match similiar SSW groups to your hammers</div> <div>which have been mass calibrated, thus reducing alteration. Ultimately, this is</div> <div>the most thorough method ineritally speaking.</div> <div><br></div> <div>I simply mate the SSW with hammer weight to target a curve because does it</div> <div>really matter since it is at the end of the compound leverage system.  Are you</div> <div>feeling hammer inertia or weight at the front of the key.  Or what degree is it</div> <div>important (inertia at the end of the system) ans opposed to good inertial</div> <div>effect at the front of the key.</div> <x-sigsep><pre>-- </pre></x-sigsep> <div><br> Regards,<br> <br> Jon Page</div> </body> </html>