<HTML style="FONT-SIZE: x-small; FONT-FAMILY: MS Sans Serif"><HEAD> <META charset=US-ASCII http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII"> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"> <DIV><FONT face="MS Sans Serif">The issue of how tight the balancier pinning should be has come up in the past but not, to my recollection, been quantified.  The resistance should be greater than the hammer flange and it should not exhibit totally free movement.  An argument can be made that with tighter pinning in the balancier you can increase the tension in the repetition spring and you will get smoother and more predictable return without the hammer jumping.  Some years ago I seem  to recall Rick Baldassin saying that he routinely repinned the balancier on a new wippen with a pin one size larger in order to improve repetition.  Does anyone out there actually measure the resistance on the balancier and repin for a specific target?</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face="MS Sans Serif"></FONT> </DIV> <DIV> <DIV>David Love</DIV> <DIV><A href="mailto:davidlovepianos@earthlink.net">davidlovepianos@earthlink.net</A></DIV> <DIV> </DIV></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid"> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt Arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV> <DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=dlbullock@att.net href="mailto:dlbullock@att.net">D.L. Bullock</A> </DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To: </B><A title=pianotech@ptg.org href="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">PTG</A>;<A title=Topperpiano@aol.com href="mailto:Topperpiano@aol.com">Topperpiano@aol.com</A></DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> 5/13/2004 8:35:32 PM </DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: Renner repetition springs</DIV> <DIV><BR></DIV><FONT size=2> <DIV><SPAN class=194073103-14052004><FONT color=#0000ff>I finally quit miking all the springs as I did for several years.  They are always well numbered and in order in Renner wip sets.</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=194073103-14052004><FONT color=#0000ff></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=194073103-14052004><FONT color=#0000ff>I can't see how pins could be too loose short of wobbling which would not happen in Renner.  It would be a good thing to have them pre broken-in.  But having springs loose on several they were not what I would consider loose....or tight.  Years ago, I did have a couple sets of shanks from Renner that wobbled and needed larger center pins but a mention to Lloyd took care of the problem.</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <P><FONT color=#0000ff><STRONG>D.L. Bullock    St. Louis<BR></STRONG><A href="http://www.thepianoworld.com/"><STRONG>www.thepianoworld.com</STRONG></A><FONT color=#000000><STRONG> </STRONG></FONT></FONT><FONT color=#0000ff><SPAN class=194073103-14052004> </SPAN></FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#0000ff><SPAN class=194073103-14052004> </SPAN></FONT><FONT face=Tahoma>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Topperpiano@aol.com [mailto:Topperpiano@aol.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, May 13, 2004 1:06 PM<BR><B>To:</B> pianotech@ptg.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: Renner repetition springs</P></FONT> <BLOCKQUOTE>Jim was correct in that the whippens could have been packed out of order or put on in the wrong order and the springs of incorrect diameter would be either too strong or too weak, which of course would cause regulation problems.  The pinning could be very loose, primarily on the rep lever causing the regulation of the spring to be too strong.  I have had actions, mostly older, that the combination of pinning problems, all centers way too loose to combine into this problem.  I have generally solved it also with a pre weakening step on brand new parts. TP </BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>