<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"> <title></title> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> Hi Kent, others. I'm glad you put this up Jon. I remember 6 years ago when you brought this idea to my attention off list. I still have all that exchange. Good stuff.  The idea of thinking about the whippen needing a <<required travel distance>> struck home a note back then.  I remember thinking immediately that in combination with this the capstan could be fixed and the adjustment between the cap/whip on the whippen.   That way the capstan could always be on the magic line and at the desired angle at half blow (assuming keys are at right heights).  Might be a bit difficult to contrive such an adjustment on the whippen... but if it was done that way and the capstans were accurately placed thus... then it would (me thinks) tend to inhibit some of the er.. more creative combinations of key dip / letoff / blow / one runs into. <blockquote>Since you've already determined your bore length and selected the knuckle radius and key dip, place your temp capstan at this location and depress the key. Is the jack clearance optimal? If the jack is buried into the stop felt the capstan has to move forwards. If not enough clearance, move the capstan back (not every balance rail is in the optimal position either). Locate the capstan for optimal regulation:  sufficient jack clearance effecting minimal after touch. Think of it as the wippen being moved through a  required distance and how where along the levers the lift is provided regulates that distance. Bore the holes at the derived angle. .... snip ....But you need to bear in mind present touchweight. Increasing touchweight bymoving the capstan away from the balance rail for regulation may be counter productive. I get the feeling I'm about to get into a circular predicament. </blockquote> Agreed, yet it seems to me that once you've accepted the basic premise here, touchweight.. or rather the SW ratio is a given along with the capstan placement. Or said another way... turning around this last point you make... changing touchweight by moving the capstan (alone) may be counter productive (to regulation concerns).  Circular it is me thinks.  <blockquote>Jon Page </blockquote> Like I said.  I try and first insure an optimal geometry to whatever changes I decide to make.  THEN I apply Stanwood to whatever resulting/existing ST ratio I end up with. Cheers RicB <blockquote> </blockquote> </body> </html>