S&S retrofit rails (long)

[Ron Nossaman]

Hi Stephen,

Welcome to the frenzy, interesting stuff. Comments below.

>
>Finally, I took a look at C.F. Theodore Steinway's original patents for the 
>Grand and Upright Tubular Metallic Action Frame.(We actually do know what 
>he was talking about.  In fact he was a very good writer and made his ideas 
>perfectly clear when he set them to paper, which he did prolifically.) 

* So how come your engineers were guessing when you asked them? %-)



>	"In practice I use, by preference, tubular traverses [rails] filled with 
>wood... since metallic tubes, when filled with wood, obtain the required 
>stiffness, and, and the same time, common wood-screws can be used in 
>fastening the various parts of the action to the same.  When solid metal 
>traverses are used the holes for receiving the screws have to be bored and 
>tapped, and the screws have to be manufactured expressly for this purpose. 
> The traverses are provided with flanges...which serve to retain the 
>various parts of the action... firmly in position, and prevent them from 
>getting displaced accidentally, and , at the same time, by the flanges the 
>stiffness and strength of the traverses are materially increased."
>
> - So we see Theodore's main reasons for the rosette and the tubular frame, 
>all in one paragraph.  But keep in mind that the patent was actually for 
>any metallic frame:
>
>	"By the use of my metallic action-frame the chief causes of derangement 
>inherent to the action... as heretofore constructed, are successfully 
>removed."
>
> - He then goes on to list most everything that was wrong with the other 
>actions being built at the time.
>
--------------------------
>
>So, there you have it - why we made them in the first place, and why we 
>like them today.   You may have a different preference, and nothing is 
>without fault, but we honestly believe our system works as well as, if not 
>better than, anything else out there.
>
>Stephen Dove
>Steinway & Sons
>New York
>

* Fair enough, within the given self imposed limitation that it must be a
metallic rail, but that rail configuration was what the initial post spoke
to in the first place. I have run across more stripped screws, by far, in
these rails than in any other type. The only stripped screws (very few) I've
seen in aluminum rails were the result of pilot error as some tech who never
learned how to start a screw powered it in crooked and cross threaded. That
could also have been the case with the dowel rail, but the occurrence rate
should be similar if that is the case. The screws in the dowel rail tend to
be shorter than in a conventional wood rail because the diameter of the
dowel defines the limit of screw length. In a conventional system, there's
more rail depth to accommodate a longer screw, so I tend to see fewer
stripped screws in this type of rail, at least that is my assumption as to
why. Since the flanges screwed to the dowel rails account for a lot of the
assembly's stiffness, the rails will get springier as the seasonal humidity
swings 'loosen' the screws. A conventional wood rail will be stiffer in the
first place, and won't become more flexible as the parts loosen. 

My thoughts in all this are that a tech will tend not to criticize anything
associated with an industry Icon because he/she is, after all, just one
person of limited experience and knowledge and the Icon is (collectively),
after all, a thousand man years ahead of the individual tech in experience
and, it is therefor presumed, knowledge. The tech figures that if the Icon
became an Icon in the first place, any problems the tech is having must be
due to a deficiency in the tech. There have been times when the Icon has
encouraged this attitude as well. The Icon, on the other hand, has little
incentive to support R&D to make substantial improvements to existing
designs because they don't get, or acknowledge the complaints that would
indicate that any changes were desirable. So I guess the bottom line is that
you folks make a pretty darn good action, but it could be better. You make a
pretty darn good piano, but it could be better. I think I'm a pretty darn
good tech, and I know beyond a doubt that I could be better. All of these
can be improved by the process of critique, assessment, reevaluation, and
corrective action where necessary. 

Thanks for your time, I hope we'll be hearing more from you.

Regards,
 Ron