> > I can think of two good reasons. Presumably we want tuning pins to be as > narrow in diameter as possible because a) the amount of leverage (torque) > exerted by the string tension increases with each increase in diameter > (radius) and b) the amount of string moved per unit of rotational movement > also increases accordingly. Yo Dale, Wouldn't the torque from string tension relative to the area of pin in contact with the block be pretty much the same regardless of pin diameter? With the moment arm of the string torque being the radius of pin diameter, and the block contact surface area varying with the circumference (pi*D), doesn't this proportion scale? Remember that I'm missing the standard math receptors in my alleged brain, and am prone to orders of magnitude estimation errors in these things. The string movement per degree of pin rotation is shore-nuff smaller with a smaller diameter pin. So with the string tension "holding power" being more or less equivalent, and the "effect per movement" increment being smaller with smaller diameter pins, I'd have to agree that smaller is better - to a degree. With bushings, I'd say 1/0 were quite possibly a better choice than 2/0. Without bushings, I would still consider 2/0 a better choice for the flagpoling thing, unless blessed with an open face block. My take, whatever. Ron N
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC