<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Times New Roman" LANG="0">In a message dated 11/3/2002 2:17:38 PM Pacific Standard Time, Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no writes:<BR>
<BR>
Richard wrote</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Well, I am the first to applaud well thought out personal preference. But I am a<BR>
bit wary of definitions as to what "hammers whose weights fall outside of the<BR>
boundaries that allow for a good match of weight to leverage" means. Seems very<BR>
important in anycase to be able to provide clear, and concrete rationale that<BR>
holds up to scrutiny if one is truly going to cross the border from "what I<BR>
personally like" to "what is correct or doable"<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
Ric<BR>
I don't think it would be that difficult to compare some hammer weight nos that fall in to some sort of consensus. I stated earlier the idea of using a bit heavier hammer in vintage Stwys with a slight increase in knuckle placement (ie 16.5 mm)<BR>
I realize that as David L pointed out that it's the effect of overall ratios but have found on many occasions this configuration works fairly well so consider this a random sample from one random tech.<BR>
<BR>
Hammer weights for smaller New York Stwys model o-l-m<BR>
note 4------9ishgrams<BR>
16-----8.5ish<BR>
28----8ish<BR>
40-----7.5ish<BR>
52----7.2 ish<BR>
64-----6ish<BR>
76----5.5ish<BR>
88----4.5 ish<BR>
</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="Times New Roman" LANG="0"><BR>
Add 1.4 grams to translate to strike weight for Abel shanks and 1.6 for Renners</FONT></HTML>