Seiler Job

[Richard Brekne]

Thanks Bill and Jim, I understand and was (am) tempted to install assists for
the rest of the action and go that way instead. One big thing makes me back off
at first glance... and that is the fellow who uses this grand likes it heavy to
the touch. I figure probably going with a BW spec of 40. At least I doubt I
should get under 52 grams down weight with this fellow. I interpret that out of
his declaration that he want to leave the weight as it is, and a look at the
data shows both heavy touch and a deal of friction (sluggishness to be read in
here ??)

Anyways with that heavy a touchweight, and hammers starting off at around 12
grams and curving down to about 5.8 grams I wont really need all that much lead
to begin with ??. Whadya think ?. I am guessing without really looking closely
at my sample data yet so maybe I am off the go in the wrong direction.

Bill Shull wrote :

Being so close to being able to do a support spring retrofit, I would be
inclined to put springs in the rest of the whips, giving me the opportunity
to get rid of excess key lead mass, be able to put the mass where I want it
(the hammer), and get more control of balance weight (this before studying
your spreadsheet...).  I am guessing the whips are ready, just need the
springs and flanges/cord, which Renner might be talked out of, especially if
you need several sets.

Bill Shull


JIMRPT@AOL.COM wrote:

> Richard;
>  The operative word here should be "whippen *assist* springs". It is when
> these thingees are used for 'crutches' that problems stick out such as your
> "abrut" (sic: abrupt) shift in weights.  Just go ahead and address all the
> friction  issues first before you make any decision on disconnecting these
> puppies. Adjusted correctly they can be of significant benefit in an
> intrinsically heavy bass section.
> My view.
> Jim Bryant (FL)

--
Richard Brekne
RPT, N.P.T.F.
Bergen, Norway
mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no