<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><style></style></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1>I’m not a fan of turbo wippens if they can be avoided. All of those 1970’s pianos will require a switch to 17 mm knuckles when replacing parts (at least I haven’t met one that didn’t so far). Sometimes a capstan move is required as well. There was a between period after they went to the accelerated action but kept the 16 (or 15.5!) mm knuckle position and it was pretty much a disaster with 7 or 8 leads in the lower part of the piano and high touch weights as you report along with high inertia. Nasty things to play in spite of the adaptability of most pianists. <o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p>Once you are able to determine the match for leverage and hammer weight you’ll likely be able to avoid the turbo wippens. Look for someone who is teaching Stanwood methodology in KC. It’s really the most direct method of analyzing this stuff but a grounding in action analysis the “old” way is also a good foundation as it tells you much about how the action will regulate. <o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p>David Love<o:p></o:p>www.davidlovepianos.com<o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>From: caut-bounces@ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces@ptg.org] On Behalf Of Paul T Williams Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 2:16 PM To: caut@ptg.org Subject: Re: [CAUT] Interesting<o:p></o:p></div><o:p> </o:p>thanks, David.  I'll be taking those classes! Do you like the turbo wips? It helped some on one of the other prof's 70's steinway B....  I just don't like the $850 for them if I can help it. Paul <o:p></o:p><table class=MsoNormalTable border=0 cellpadding=0 width="100%" style='width:100.0%'><tr><td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'>From: <o:p></o:p></td><td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'>"David Love" <davidlovepianos@comcast.net> <o:p></o:p></td></tr><tr><td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'>To: <o:p></o:p></td><td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'><caut@ptg.org> <o:p></o:p></td></tr><tr><td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'>Date: <o:p></o:p></td><td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'>06/22/2011 03:55 PM <o:p></o:p></td></tr><tr><td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'>Subject: <o:p></o:p></td><td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'>Re: [CAUT] Interesting<o:p></o:p></td></tr></table><o:p> </o:p><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><hr size=2 width="100%" noshade style='color:#ACA899' align=center></div> You can’t make decisions about moving capstans until you know how friction is contributing to your problem.  You shouldn’t make decisions about replacing parts without an analysis of the action leverage and the weight of the component parts.   If the action was heavy with lots of lead before and you use the same specs to replace the parts why would you expect anything different?  DW by itself won’t tell you much, you have to check the upweight as well.  Not sure where to start but I wouldn’t look to center pin lubricants to solve your problems generally.   Kansas City is offering some good classes on this very subject.  Good place to start.     David Love <a href="www.davidlovepianos.com">www.davidlovepianos.com</a>   From: caut-bounces@ptg.org [<a href="mailto:caut-bounces@ptg.org">mailto:caut-bounces@ptg.org</a>] On Behalf Of Paul T Williams Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 1:16 PM To: mick johnson; caut@ptg.org Subject: [CAUT] Interesting   Mick and all. I asked Mick about heavy DW on a '79 Steinway B.  I just replaced all hammers and shanks with S&S parts that weighed out the same as the old ones...just a little heavier since the old ones had been filed a few times. (I call this Ham-shanks when making notes) Before DW was over 60g in the bass, and high 50's in the treble.  Lots of lead in the keys. Ugh! (thinking about moving the capstans) Just for fun, before I left for a couple hours, I McLubed the wippen action centers.  When I came back, the samples I juiced did indeed come down about 10g!!  I'm sure it's just a short term fix, but wondered if yall have tried this? Paul <o:p></o:p></div></body></html>