Foreward: What you are about to read is a rant. It is in no way meant to indicate that your fill-in-the-blank item from fill-in-the-blank country is garbage. If you love it, then I am very happy for you!
I have tried to keep this as organized as possible, but it bounces back and forth between guitars, firearms, and tools. If it doesn't make sense, I apologize. If you need clarification or think I am out of line, please let me know. I appreciate all constructive feedback.
<Rant>
Perhaps it is American arrogance or being egocentric, but I have a strong preference for American made products.
I guess I should elaborate on this post more since this blog deals with firearms as well as guitars and both have been made all over the world.
When it comes to guitars, the sad fact is, American guitars just aren't what they used to be. But then again, import guitars aren't really what American guitars used to be either. Due to many regulations, the finishes on guitars have changed, the woods used have changed, etc.
Many of the companies that supply components to guitar makers no longer make their products in the same ways. This can be good or bad. For example, guitar necks used to be uniquely shaped by the builder where now CNC machines can produce near identical replicas time and time again meaning that (love it or hate it) each guitar will be more similar than previously possible.
In contrast, I've seen a few "clever" schemes to save money such as pickups with reduced amounts of copper in them. Copper is expensive and the prices are constantly on the rise. Anybody who shoots can attest to the rising cost of ammunition. One such scheme was a pickup that contained neodymium magnets. The idea was that the stronger magnet could compensate for less copper and thus create a strong output. What they failed to take into account when making this pickup is that the strings are also magnetic and they will be pulled down toward the fingerboard causing buzzing, sharp notes, and ghost tones.
Another thing that is very different about guitars is the quality of the wood used. Some woods aren't even legal to import anymore (Brazilian rosewood comes to mind) and a lot of guitar bodies are just made with 4 or 5 pieces of scrap glued together. Then, because shortcuts were taken in the finishing stage, the finish sinks over the years and you can see distinct lines in the finish where the wood was glued together.
Some finishes are just littered with junk on them as well. White finishes usually show this best. But finishing takes time and time is money so it is acceptable to have a poor quality finish in the name of profit. Profit is ultimately what is driving these negative changes.
White metal, or pot metal as it is sometimes called, has also replaced parts which used to be steel. A good example is the block used on nearly every Strat style bridge. They are almost entirely zinc alloy. The first time I played a guitar with a steel block, it was like taking the blanket off of the guitar and letting it really ring. It was bright with so much more clarity. Personally, I'd rather have a bright sound that I can darken. It is much more difficult to brighten a dark sound.
Sometimes there are surprises though. I remember the first time I received a transistor from South Korea. I was mortified. I was also uneducated on the matter. Turns out South Korea was then the third largest exporter of transistors and integrated circuits. Their quality was top notch as well.
It also turns out that Korean guitars are extremely nice! I'd range them right along side of American and Japanese quality. The Korean stuff used to be a great deal but the costs have gone up on all of it making it not much cheaper than any other guitar on the market. I have the same complaint with Japanese guitars. Well that and I find the electronics to be questionable. The pickups on my Japanese guitars just seem to be more microphonic than any other guitars I own. They also use miniature pots (sometimes of wrong values) in places where I'd like to see a full size pot. I'm sure cost and availability drive this. But larger pots have a longer life expectancy than miniature models (it helps to review the specs from the various manufacturers from time to time).
One term I see used is "Old World". Usually it is in reference to how something is built. I'm sure if you've ever used an old tool versus the modern equivalent, this term makes perfect sense. My grandfather had a shed full of tools meant to last a lifetime and be passed on to sons and son's sons. Now with stores like Harbor Freight, tools are able to be purchased for a fraction of the price that they previously cost. If the tool gets the job done and breaks, it is no great loss.
Don't take this as me bashing Harbor Freight. I am a member of their discount club and buy many tools there every year. With the export of most tool manufacturing to china, the quality of a Harbor Freight tool versus a "name brand" tool isn't much different while the cost is.
Another sad fact is that a lot of name brands are just names now. The quality which built their reputation is no longer in the products. Think of all of the Harmony and Kay guitars which are now being exploited in name and being manufactured in China.
I was reading about Nicholson files exporting their production to Mexico, China, Brazil, etc... and I saw a well put argument against this preference for American made goods being an argument of arrogance. The basics of the argument were that it was experience, not pride, which has lead to the conclusion that some things were simply better when they were manufactured in America. In this case, Nicholson files from Mexico were tested to be considerably softer than they should be which means a much shorter life for the file.
Like those who discovered this a few years ago when the changeover initially happened, I was fortunate enough to find USA made files mixed in with the Mexican files (at the same price no less) hiding in the back of the display. While I wouldn't hesitate to buy a Fender guitar made in Mexico, I
will not be buying Mexican Nicholson files. For that matter, what is up
with Martin moving production to Mexico on all but their top end
guitars?
Again, maybe it is arrogant to think that Mexico cannot produce the same guitars that were once made in my home state of Pennsylvania, but how can Martin put their name on a guitar that is made outside of the Martin factory by people without the same years of experience that Martin has enjoyed? I grant that it is pretty difficult to screw up a solidbody guitar but an acoustic guitar is a different beast.
Despite all of this, most of the guitars in the stores are at the very least somewhat playable or capable of being played. They lack the "fit and finish" of better quality (read more expensive) guitars, but what do you expect when you get a complete electric guitar and amplifier for 99$!? It isn't entirely the manufacturer's fault.
The consumer has demanded more affordable goods and most consumers probably wouldn't notice the difference between an Indonesian and Korean made guitar if they were just the casual player. But it is this catering to the budget minded that has cheapened the entire experience of buying a tool or a guitar.
Strictly my opinion here. The worst guitars I have ever played came from India and China. From best to worst, I'd rank: America, Korea, Japan, Mexico, Indonesia, China, India. Yes I know there are other countries making guitars. For example, I have a Canadian made Seagull guitar. It is great but I haven't played enough of them to comment.
I'm sure others will note that I put Korea before Japan. Honestly, I think the quality of American, Korean, and Japanese guitars are all on par with each other. I'm sure some are better than others of each variety and a Japanese guitar could be better than an American or Korean and every such permutation. The Japanese stuff probably has a slightly better resale value, but I think that is also part of what makes the Korean stuff a good deal.
Mexican guitars are a lot like Indonesian guitars. Some are really great. Some need a lot of help. You'll start to notice a lot more finish issues with guitars from either of these countries, but the prices are also generally lower. If you are less concerned about how the guitar looks, some of these guitars are actually really good deals. But again, it is completely subjective.
Guitars made in China are a mixed bag. I've played everything they have to offer from the lowest end guitars to the "top end". The quality is all over the map. The resale sucks all around though. I also don't appreciate the counterfeit guitars they produce. One place the cost cutting generally shows is the fret work.
China also brings us those Hanah Montana guitars and those Daisy Rock guitars which are just awful. I feel so bad for the little girls who get duped into buying those things. I have literally seen Hanah Montana guitars with strings so high off of the fretboard there is no way the guitar could or would ever play in any manner other than for slide.
Daisy rock guitars are interesting. I bothered to read their mission statement. It all looked really good and made perfect sense. Girls are different anatomically (smaller hands and larger breasts - this is not meant to be a sexist remark but more of a matter of fact - I am sure there are some exceptions - I am so concerned with being politically correct sometimes). The idea was to make smaller guitars that weighed less to be more encouraging for female guitarists. They come in all kinds of girly designs with lots of sparkle finishes. I think I even saw one shaped like a flower.
Ironically every Daisy Rock guitar I have ever picked up (yes I can't help myself - I also really liked the Pink Squier Hello Kitty guitar with the cat shaped pickguard), they are set up terribly (which may be the store goons doing their best with a bad situation or doing their best with their limited abilities) and weigh a ton! How is that supposed to be encouraging for a woman? Or for a man?
A poorly set up instrument is the most discouraging thing for a beginner. If it plays and sounds bad, you probably are not having a fun time which means you will dread practicing instead of look forward to it.
So in the end, a girl would ironically be better off buying a guitar not marketed for women and dealing with a larger fretboard or uncomfortable curves on the guitar digging in than dealing with a completely unplayable piece of crap that looks really pretty. Whatever happened to student models? You know, short scale guitars with 1 pickup.
While it is nearly impossible to avoid buying things made in China, it is actually pretty easy to avoid buying a guitar made in China. As a result, I avoid it. These guitars often look the part, but play them side by side with the guitar they are trying to be like and see the difference. If you have a made in China guitar and it is your favorite guitar, please read the disclaimer at the beginning of this rant.
However, the weirdest and worst experience I have ever had was with an Indian made guitar. It looked right. Well sort of. It was clearly a guitar but there was something about the shape that wasn't quite right. I picked it up and played it anyway. And it felt a lot like it looked. Weird. Something was just all around wrong with it. It played in tune and everything, but I couldn't shake the feeling like something was really off. I had to put it down and I haven't since seen an Indian made guitar.
Firearms, on the other hand, have enjoyed a different experience. With the popularity of surplus military firearms on the rise, it is hard to imagine not owning at least one imported firearm. Even the Chinese Norinco firearms seem to get good reviews. I just can't personally bring myself to owning one. As backward as it seems (from the standpoint of nearly every other industry), the Norinco firearms actually command a premium. This is possibly because of quality and rarity (due to an import ban - for more information on this, read about Operation Dragon Fire in which the Chinese were accused of assisting, what they believed to be, LA street gangs with acquiring fully automatic weapons and more). But you don't typically read about Norinco firearms having catastrophic failures nor do you read about poor quality.
For that matter, I've had just as many problems with modern American made firearms as foreign made. However, I can't complain to Soviet Russia's Izhevsk Arsenal if I have a problem where as Smith and Wesson, Ruger, and Henry have all taken VERY good care of me.
Maybe firearms are built differently because they have a function that needs to be reliable and also safe. Legal action against a firearms manufacturer is bad for business and reputation. And a damaged reputation can be just as bad or worse than making a lousy product.
Some examples, it is not uncommon to hear from people who refuse to buy from Smith and Wesson because they switch to MIM (Metal Injection Molded) parts or because they feel that Smith and Wesson sold out to the government by putting internal keylocks in their revolvers.
1911 enthusiasts will tell you that the Beretta M9/92F's that replaced it as the official sidearm of the military in the 80's is a piece of junk because during testing, a few of the slides cracked and separated from the frames. This was consequently fixed in the Beretta 92FS which is an amazingly reliable pistol!
Some reputations cloud the reality. Many consider the AK-47 to be the ultimate weapon because their favorite video game glorified it or because they saw it on TV. But the reality is, the round that goes into the gun does not have that great a ballistic performance and when fired rapidly, is difficult to control. But the AK-47 was never meant to be the ultimate gun. It was created to arm a military.
People as consumers want it all. We want cheap prices, tack driving guns that will shoot out to 1500 yards with no recoil, be lightweight, have enough stopping power to take out an elephant...blah blah blah.
I don't fault Smith and Wesson. I don't fault Beretta. I don't fault the AK-47.
One thing that I find interesting about firearms is that country of origin seems to matter less than actual product. For example, some guns from a manufacturer are just riddled with issues while another model from the same maker may be considered to reliable.
Taurus guns are a good example. A lot of people rave about the Taurus 1911's while their revolvers are nothing short of a nightmare.
I've have a friend who has a Beretta Tomcat. Those models are best known for frame cracks. Yet Beretta shotguns and the M9/92FS are great!
Walther P22's also had a reputation for cracked slides. Not sure if that was ever fixed completely. They look like neat guns and feature a single/double action trigger which I think is unique for a .22 pistol. Perhaps this isn't quite fair since Smith and Wesson now makes Walther pistols in the US, but even still, Walthers are known for reliability as are Smith and Wesson guns.
Maybe isn't just firearms. Maybe everything is subjective? Afterall, every guitar made in the US isn't good while every guitar made in China isn't unplayable. Maybe. But I'm still not buying any made in Mexico Nicholson files.
</Rant>
Epilogue: I returned to the store where I bought my Nicholson files and managed to find a couple more made in USA files and bought a few more for safe keeping and for the future. I left a few in the store. Hopefully whoever finds them will enjoy the same internal dialogue that I did or at least some similar such line of thought. It was those files that inspired this rant.
Saturday, December 8, 2012
Sunday, November 18, 2012
I always forget how much I love my Beretta 92FS!
I went shooting today for the first time in a few months. I had been meaning to go for those months but things come up.
I brought 5 guns in total; both of my Ruger Mark III's (Target competition and Hunter), Beretta 92FS, CZ 75B (stainless special edition), and my S&W 686 with a 4" barrel.
As I may have mentioned previously, my Ruger Hunter has been nothing but completely reliable and dead accurate. My Competition Target model on the other hand has been back to Ruger to have the grip frame replaced. I'd like to say again, Ruger was exceptionally good about repairing the gun! They have top notch customer service in my book!
The Smith and Wesson also had been back to their facility for a cracked/chipped firing pin bushing. Smith and Wesson was also exceptionally good about taking care of this repair. I hadn't fired the revolver since it had been returned.
The last time I had both of the Rugers taken apart for cleaning, I decided to restake all of the pins (which is what caused the grip frame replacement to begin with). During this process the rear site on the Competition model had come loose. I expected that I'd be sighting in the gun at the range.
I had bought the CZ75B after reading a number of good reviews. I like stainless guns so the Special Edition was right for me. I also liked the sights on it better than the stock models which had some poorly applied paint on the sight blade that was more egg shaped than round.
The Rugers performed exactly as expected. The Hunter is far more accurate than I am and the Competition model needed to be sighted in. Other than that, there were no problems.
The Smith and Wesson performed better than I expected. I fed it the remaining box of American Eagle .38 Special (which is what caused the firing pin bushing to crack) as well as a few rounds of Fiocchi .357 Magnum 142 grain FMJ.
I must say, I REALLY like that Fiocchi ammo! I also have Sellier and Bellot 158 grain FMJ .357 Magnum which I also like. But seeing as I didn't take any with me to compare the two against each other, I can only comment on the Fiocchi through the 4" 686. It didn't add all that much more kick to the gun and it was dead on every shot! Too bad I only have 1 box of it (and it is half gone now).
I spent some time with the CZ75B as well. It is one of my newest guns and I haven't quite bonded with it. I shoot it well enough, but I am not comfortable enough with it to start carrying it over the Beretta 92FS.
The grip on it is much more comfortable than the 92FS and it holds one more round. Despite this, I feel like I shoot the Beretta a lot better. It also weighs more than the Beretta but feels like it kicks more. The Beretta is already pretty heavy to walk around with.
The CZ definitely has an advantage in the trigger pull. I find the double action to be very smooth and comfortable. The single action is probably not much different between the two.
The Beretta on the other hand is kind of big and clumsy but all of my shots stayed in the 10 and X ring at 7-10 yards shooting pretty rapidly while my shots with the CZ were in the 8 and 9 rings as well.
The Beretta was my second gun and my first semi automatic pistol so I guess it is true that you should shoot what you are comfortable with. I'm sure had I bought the CZ before the Beretta, I'd be a much better shot with it. But for now, the Beretta is going to continue to be my primary carry weapon.
I brought 5 guns in total; both of my Ruger Mark III's (Target competition and Hunter), Beretta 92FS, CZ 75B (stainless special edition), and my S&W 686 with a 4" barrel.
As I may have mentioned previously, my Ruger Hunter has been nothing but completely reliable and dead accurate. My Competition Target model on the other hand has been back to Ruger to have the grip frame replaced. I'd like to say again, Ruger was exceptionally good about repairing the gun! They have top notch customer service in my book!
The Smith and Wesson also had been back to their facility for a cracked/chipped firing pin bushing. Smith and Wesson was also exceptionally good about taking care of this repair. I hadn't fired the revolver since it had been returned.
The last time I had both of the Rugers taken apart for cleaning, I decided to restake all of the pins (which is what caused the grip frame replacement to begin with). During this process the rear site on the Competition model had come loose. I expected that I'd be sighting in the gun at the range.
I had bought the CZ75B after reading a number of good reviews. I like stainless guns so the Special Edition was right for me. I also liked the sights on it better than the stock models which had some poorly applied paint on the sight blade that was more egg shaped than round.
The Rugers performed exactly as expected. The Hunter is far more accurate than I am and the Competition model needed to be sighted in. Other than that, there were no problems.
The Smith and Wesson performed better than I expected. I fed it the remaining box of American Eagle .38 Special (which is what caused the firing pin bushing to crack) as well as a few rounds of Fiocchi .357 Magnum 142 grain FMJ.
I must say, I REALLY like that Fiocchi ammo! I also have Sellier and Bellot 158 grain FMJ .357 Magnum which I also like. But seeing as I didn't take any with me to compare the two against each other, I can only comment on the Fiocchi through the 4" 686. It didn't add all that much more kick to the gun and it was dead on every shot! Too bad I only have 1 box of it (and it is half gone now).
I spent some time with the CZ75B as well. It is one of my newest guns and I haven't quite bonded with it. I shoot it well enough, but I am not comfortable enough with it to start carrying it over the Beretta 92FS.
The grip on it is much more comfortable than the 92FS and it holds one more round. Despite this, I feel like I shoot the Beretta a lot better. It also weighs more than the Beretta but feels like it kicks more. The Beretta is already pretty heavy to walk around with.
The CZ definitely has an advantage in the trigger pull. I find the double action to be very smooth and comfortable. The single action is probably not much different between the two.
The Beretta on the other hand is kind of big and clumsy but all of my shots stayed in the 10 and X ring at 7-10 yards shooting pretty rapidly while my shots with the CZ were in the 8 and 9 rings as well.
The Beretta was my second gun and my first semi automatic pistol so I guess it is true that you should shoot what you are comfortable with. I'm sure had I bought the CZ before the Beretta, I'd be a much better shot with it. But for now, the Beretta is going to continue to be my primary carry weapon.
Monday, October 29, 2012
1958 Romanian SKS Rifle
After a lot of careful consideration, I decided to take the plunge into gas operated rifles. In the past, I've traditionally been attracted to bolt action rifles. The only semi-automatic rifles I owned prior to the SKS were Marlin .22 rifles.
Admittedly, my Marlin model 60 is one of my favorite rifles to shoot. But the Marlin model 60 is a completely different beast.
The SKS is a carbine rifle that shoots the 7.62x39 round that has become best known for its use in the AK-47 style of rifles. It has a 10 round internal magazine which can be loaded by stripper clips.
The action works with a gas piston which unlike the AK-47 does not travel the entire way back with the bolt carrier. Instead the gas piston pushes the bolt carrier back and stops allowing inertia and springs to keep the bolt carrier going and return it back into battery.
This also differs from the AR-15 style of direct impingement. This means that the gas pushes the bolt carrier directly without the piston in the system at all. While this has fewer moving parts, it lends itself to fouling its own bolt carrier and bolt with hot gas and burnt powder.
Something about that part of injecting burning gasses and powder residue into the bolt carrier and bolt never appealed to me. I know there are gas piston AR-15 variants on the market.
Anyway, back to the SKS. I opted for a Romanian SKS because they have chromed barrels unlike many of the early Yugo barrels. Supposedly chroming the barrel hurts accuracy, although I doubt it matters much since it is a battle rifle. I'd rather have a rifle that is more resilient to the corrosive ammunition that this rifle is likely to see on the surplus market.
Availability also dictated that I ended up with a Romanian SKS instead of one of the other Com Block country variants.
Most SKS rifles were not fired a whole lot as the AK-47 quickly replaced it as the standard battle rifle. The SKS was relegated to backup status or as a ceremonial weapon.
The gun disassembles pretty easily and also cleans fairly easy once you get the initial load of cosmoline off of the parts. I find the best way to get the cosmoline off is by boiling the parts a few times and dumping the water between boilings.
Water has a relatively low boiling temperature so I doubt the short duration of heating the parts in this manner will cause any change in temperament of the metal.
I literally dropped the entire trigger group right into a boiling pot and then removed it and oiled it.
The stock and barrel will have to be cleaned manually. Expect to go through a lot of rags. I just throw them right into the trash after I removed as much cosmoline as I could with each one. Cleaning up a mess of cosmoline is a right of passage for surplus enthusiasts. All things considered, the SKS was not packed nearly as full as the Romanian TT-33 I had bought (and later sold) years prior.
One thing I noticed about reassembling the rifle was the a lot of people had commented how difficult a time they had getting the trigger group to click back into place. At first I tried a straight downward force and it was extremely difficult. Afterward I tried more of a side to side force while still pushing down slightly. It clicked right into place. So my advice is do not just push straight down. Push down at an angle to force the trigger group to seat easily.
With the weather getting colder here, it could be a while before I get to fire it, but I am really enthusiastic about it despite the poor ballistics of the 7.62x39 round. Is it ever going to be a sniper rifle or ever shoot under 1 MOA? No. But it is an inexpensive rifle with cheap surplus and even cheap factory ammo available. Sounds like the perfect plinking rifle to me.
Admittedly, my Marlin model 60 is one of my favorite rifles to shoot. But the Marlin model 60 is a completely different beast.
The SKS is a carbine rifle that shoots the 7.62x39 round that has become best known for its use in the AK-47 style of rifles. It has a 10 round internal magazine which can be loaded by stripper clips.
The action works with a gas piston which unlike the AK-47 does not travel the entire way back with the bolt carrier. Instead the gas piston pushes the bolt carrier back and stops allowing inertia and springs to keep the bolt carrier going and return it back into battery.
This also differs from the AR-15 style of direct impingement. This means that the gas pushes the bolt carrier directly without the piston in the system at all. While this has fewer moving parts, it lends itself to fouling its own bolt carrier and bolt with hot gas and burnt powder.
Something about that part of injecting burning gasses and powder residue into the bolt carrier and bolt never appealed to me. I know there are gas piston AR-15 variants on the market.
Anyway, back to the SKS. I opted for a Romanian SKS because they have chromed barrels unlike many of the early Yugo barrels. Supposedly chroming the barrel hurts accuracy, although I doubt it matters much since it is a battle rifle. I'd rather have a rifle that is more resilient to the corrosive ammunition that this rifle is likely to see on the surplus market.
Availability also dictated that I ended up with a Romanian SKS instead of one of the other Com Block country variants.
Most SKS rifles were not fired a whole lot as the AK-47 quickly replaced it as the standard battle rifle. The SKS was relegated to backup status or as a ceremonial weapon.
The gun disassembles pretty easily and also cleans fairly easy once you get the initial load of cosmoline off of the parts. I find the best way to get the cosmoline off is by boiling the parts a few times and dumping the water between boilings.
Water has a relatively low boiling temperature so I doubt the short duration of heating the parts in this manner will cause any change in temperament of the metal.
I literally dropped the entire trigger group right into a boiling pot and then removed it and oiled it.
The stock and barrel will have to be cleaned manually. Expect to go through a lot of rags. I just throw them right into the trash after I removed as much cosmoline as I could with each one. Cleaning up a mess of cosmoline is a right of passage for surplus enthusiasts. All things considered, the SKS was not packed nearly as full as the Romanian TT-33 I had bought (and later sold) years prior.
One thing I noticed about reassembling the rifle was the a lot of people had commented how difficult a time they had getting the trigger group to click back into place. At first I tried a straight downward force and it was extremely difficult. Afterward I tried more of a side to side force while still pushing down slightly. It clicked right into place. So my advice is do not just push straight down. Push down at an angle to force the trigger group to seat easily.
With the weather getting colder here, it could be a while before I get to fire it, but I am really enthusiastic about it despite the poor ballistics of the 7.62x39 round. Is it ever going to be a sniper rifle or ever shoot under 1 MOA? No. But it is an inexpensive rifle with cheap surplus and even cheap factory ammo available. Sounds like the perfect plinking rifle to me.
Saturday, August 4, 2012
Japanese Fender Stratocaster Upgrades - Part 2
When I last updated, I had begun to install a Callaham bridge in my 70's Japanese RI Strat when I ran into some problems.
The bridge came with new (and considerably longer) bridge mounting hardware. This meant I was going to have to drill the holes deeper. I used a hand drill and added the extra depth needed for the new longer screws. After the screws were installed, just the tips of them had broken through the finish in the back of the guitar's spring cavity. It doesn't look bad and is covered up by the springs. I could have used the original screws and saved myself some drilling but I didn't. The finish in the spring cavity was already screwed up from the installation and subsequent removal of a Hipshot Tremsetter.
The Tremsetter mostly worked as advertised but to make it most effective you had to make the whammy bar action rather stiff and unresponsive. Additionally, I had to modify the block on the underside of the bridge to get it to accept the Tremsetter without banging into the plastic cover (which also has been removed and possibly lost in a parts bin somewhere).
I didn't install the spring claw that came with the bridge. I may get to that at a later point when I redo the electronics. The pots are 500k and that just isn't strat like now is it?
Another issue I ran into was that I wanted to replace the tuners and found out that the F style tuners with the excessively tall posts had 10mm bushings. My plan was to use a set of staggered Gotoh tuners to eliminate the need for strings trees and to get a useable vintage style tuner on the guitar.
I ordered adapter bushings for this conversion. I actually ordered two different styles from AllParts. They sell a generic and Gotoh branded ones. I ended up using the generic ones which were about 5$ cheaper because they fit and looked better. Plus the Gotoh ones were pretty sloppy with the tuner shaft.
The adapter bushings pressed in rather easily. However, they also pressed out easily. I made a thin bead of super glue around the bushings and pressed them into place and quickly cleaned up any excess with a gun cleaning patch. The bushings were now secure and the headstock is clean without any traces of super glue.
Had I had a super glue accident, I have some Loctite brand X-NMS solvent. However, it is pretty nasty stuff and might eat through the finish had I used it. Should you attempt this, be careful with the super glue. You do not need a lot and have something handy to clean it up quickly. Do not use your fingers. Do not use a paper towel.
This is the point that I ran into further problems. The concept of the Gotoh staggered tuner sounds great until you have them ready to go on your guitar. I had read some reviews of these tuners and it was split down the middle as to whether or not you could install them and eliminate string trees. The general consensus was that while they helped, you still needed string trees.
I would love to chime in with my personal findings on the matter, but I probably will never get that chance. The problem is that, the tallest of the staggered tuners is still considerably shorter than the standard vintage style tuner. I had a set of normal vintage style gotoh tuners on a 60's Japanese RI Telecaster to compare to.
As the tuner shafts became shorter and shorter, the tuner was barely sticking out of the headstock. Basically, they are for very thin style headstocks. I threw them back into the parts bin with the original F style tuners and opted to cannibalize the tuners off of the 60's RI. I will just order a new set in the future to replace the set I "borrowed".
I didn't bother filling in the holes from the original tuners. I probably should have as it would look a lot nicer, but I wasn't feeling particularly motivated. I placed the tuners on the guitar and lined them up with a short ruler. I marked the two outside holes and drew a line in pencil connecting them. Then I used the tuners to mark the holes and made sure each mark was on the line.
I drill out the holes with a 1/16" bit. I did this by hand although a drill press would have been ideal. I began to screw the tuners in and felt some resistance. I've unfortunately had to deal with sheared off screws in headstocks too many times in the past. I back out the screws and enlarged the holes with a 3/32" bit. Then I reinstalled the tuners using the straightedge to keep them lined up while I tightened the screws.
The tuners are pretty straight and I am sure that if I loosened them up and used the straight edge to align them again they would come out absolutely perfect. All of the tuners except one show a high resistance to turning. I don't know if this is part of the tuners or if they are binding a bit on the bushings.
Nothing feels like it is grinding or getting stuck and all tuner movement is smooth so I am not going to worry about it. The tuners hold tune as they should.
I removed the original string trees and installed a single roller string tree on the B and E strings.
I strung the guitar up and tightened up the trem claw with 4 springs until it was essentially hard tailed. I may decide to float it later. If I do, I will remove one of the springs.
The string heights were all over the place but the intonation was actually dead on without needing to adjust a single screw. I found that to be incredibly weird but convenient.
The guitar sounds great and actually has mellowed out quite a bit. Before it sounded harsh where as now it sounds more organic. I hate describing sound. I suspect a lot of the harsh sounds were coming from the zinc block, diecast saddles, and poor string angle at the nut.
My only complaint with the bridge is that it is a HAIR...and I meant a tiny bit wider string spacing than the original bridge. The high E is sitting at a slight angle on the saddle. I am not worried about it and everything plays fine, but upon close inspection it is plainly visible.
I feel really good about the upgrades and am glad I waited for the right parts to do it correctly. Nothing is worse than having to do the same job multiple times because it wasn't done right.
Now it is time to play and enjoy it!
The bridge came with new (and considerably longer) bridge mounting hardware. This meant I was going to have to drill the holes deeper. I used a hand drill and added the extra depth needed for the new longer screws. After the screws were installed, just the tips of them had broken through the finish in the back of the guitar's spring cavity. It doesn't look bad and is covered up by the springs. I could have used the original screws and saved myself some drilling but I didn't. The finish in the spring cavity was already screwed up from the installation and subsequent removal of a Hipshot Tremsetter.
The Tremsetter mostly worked as advertised but to make it most effective you had to make the whammy bar action rather stiff and unresponsive. Additionally, I had to modify the block on the underside of the bridge to get it to accept the Tremsetter without banging into the plastic cover (which also has been removed and possibly lost in a parts bin somewhere).
I didn't install the spring claw that came with the bridge. I may get to that at a later point when I redo the electronics. The pots are 500k and that just isn't strat like now is it?
Another issue I ran into was that I wanted to replace the tuners and found out that the F style tuners with the excessively tall posts had 10mm bushings. My plan was to use a set of staggered Gotoh tuners to eliminate the need for strings trees and to get a useable vintage style tuner on the guitar.
I ordered adapter bushings for this conversion. I actually ordered two different styles from AllParts. They sell a generic and Gotoh branded ones. I ended up using the generic ones which were about 5$ cheaper because they fit and looked better. Plus the Gotoh ones were pretty sloppy with the tuner shaft.
The adapter bushings pressed in rather easily. However, they also pressed out easily. I made a thin bead of super glue around the bushings and pressed them into place and quickly cleaned up any excess with a gun cleaning patch. The bushings were now secure and the headstock is clean without any traces of super glue.
Had I had a super glue accident, I have some Loctite brand X-NMS solvent. However, it is pretty nasty stuff and might eat through the finish had I used it. Should you attempt this, be careful with the super glue. You do not need a lot and have something handy to clean it up quickly. Do not use your fingers. Do not use a paper towel.
This is the point that I ran into further problems. The concept of the Gotoh staggered tuner sounds great until you have them ready to go on your guitar. I had read some reviews of these tuners and it was split down the middle as to whether or not you could install them and eliminate string trees. The general consensus was that while they helped, you still needed string trees.
I would love to chime in with my personal findings on the matter, but I probably will never get that chance. The problem is that, the tallest of the staggered tuners is still considerably shorter than the standard vintage style tuner. I had a set of normal vintage style gotoh tuners on a 60's Japanese RI Telecaster to compare to.
As the tuner shafts became shorter and shorter, the tuner was barely sticking out of the headstock. Basically, they are for very thin style headstocks. I threw them back into the parts bin with the original F style tuners and opted to cannibalize the tuners off of the 60's RI. I will just order a new set in the future to replace the set I "borrowed".
I didn't bother filling in the holes from the original tuners. I probably should have as it would look a lot nicer, but I wasn't feeling particularly motivated. I placed the tuners on the guitar and lined them up with a short ruler. I marked the two outside holes and drew a line in pencil connecting them. Then I used the tuners to mark the holes and made sure each mark was on the line.
I drill out the holes with a 1/16" bit. I did this by hand although a drill press would have been ideal. I began to screw the tuners in and felt some resistance. I've unfortunately had to deal with sheared off screws in headstocks too many times in the past. I back out the screws and enlarged the holes with a 3/32" bit. Then I reinstalled the tuners using the straightedge to keep them lined up while I tightened the screws.
The tuners are pretty straight and I am sure that if I loosened them up and used the straight edge to align them again they would come out absolutely perfect. All of the tuners except one show a high resistance to turning. I don't know if this is part of the tuners or if they are binding a bit on the bushings.
Nothing feels like it is grinding or getting stuck and all tuner movement is smooth so I am not going to worry about it. The tuners hold tune as they should.
I removed the original string trees and installed a single roller string tree on the B and E strings.
I strung the guitar up and tightened up the trem claw with 4 springs until it was essentially hard tailed. I may decide to float it later. If I do, I will remove one of the springs.
The string heights were all over the place but the intonation was actually dead on without needing to adjust a single screw. I found that to be incredibly weird but convenient.
The guitar sounds great and actually has mellowed out quite a bit. Before it sounded harsh where as now it sounds more organic. I hate describing sound. I suspect a lot of the harsh sounds were coming from the zinc block, diecast saddles, and poor string angle at the nut.
My only complaint with the bridge is that it is a HAIR...and I meant a tiny bit wider string spacing than the original bridge. The high E is sitting at a slight angle on the saddle. I am not worried about it and everything plays fine, but upon close inspection it is plainly visible.
I feel really good about the upgrades and am glad I waited for the right parts to do it correctly. Nothing is worse than having to do the same job multiple times because it wasn't done right.
Now it is time to play and enjoy it!
Friday, July 27, 2012
Callaham upgrades for a Les Paul and a Japanese 70's RI Stratocaster
I've been ogling the products on Callaham's website for some time now and finally I took the plunge.
I bought the ABR-1 conversion for a Nashville bridge, a vintage telecaster bridge (which will find its way onto one of my many telecasters), and a vintage Stratocaster bridge for my 70's RI.
I expected the Gibson conversion to be a bit more involved than the Fender due to the Fender parts being screwed in and the Callaham ABR-1 bushings being 1 piece press in.
However, things aren't always as they seem.
I went online and say a nifty trick for removing the bushings from a Gibson involving a small screw in the bushing hole. However, I also saw some posts about people being able to pull the bushings by hand.
Deciding to test my strength, I attempted to pull the bushings out by hand with the stud screwed in almost all of the way.
Believe it or not, they came out. I'm not going to say it was easy, but I was able to remove them without any sort of mechanical assistance!
The new bushings came with a plastic sleeve that protects the threaded post of the bushing. I tapped the new bushings in with a plastic headed mallet. They went in easily and the new bridge was installed in a matter of moments.
At first I didn't really notice too much of a change in how the guitar felt. And then I started lowering the tailpiece which previously was up pretty high due to the wider Nashville bridge. That made a huge difference!
Now the guitar really just resonates in an amazing way!
While I was taking apart the Gibson, I also replaced the cheap locking strap buttons on it with some smaller Gibson style buttons. They aren't for gigging, but they will keep the strap on for recording and casual playing.
I expected things to go just as easily with the Strat. I had some big plans for it. I was going to replace the 70's style F tuners with modern vintage style tuners from Gotoh, replace the string tree with a modern roller string tree, and replace the entire bridge assembly with the new Callaham bridge.
The pickups had already been changed out for a set of Angeltone pickups and the nut is brass. Another thing on the list of things to do was to replace the electronics with the correct value pots. The current pots are 500k miniature pots. I'd like to install 250k pots, perhaps a .1 uf no load tone control, and MAYBE a varitone. Anyway, that is a bit further down the road.
I should have known things weren't going to go as planned when the new screws for the bridge were about 1/4 to 1/2" longer than the original screws. Sure I could use the original hardware, but that hardly seems like fun. Now I need to drill the holes a bit deeper into the body for the bridge mounting.
Additionally, when I went to install the replacement tuners, the old bushings didn't fit and the new bushings were too small. I ordered conversion bushings and am currently awaiting their arrival.
One thing that did work out really nicely is that I had a caliper handy to measure the bushing holes to verify their diameter as well as a screwdriver which conveniently had a 10mm shaft which made knocking out the current bushings super easy!
Now the waiting game, but at least I have a really great playing Gibson to keep me company!
I bought the ABR-1 conversion for a Nashville bridge, a vintage telecaster bridge (which will find its way onto one of my many telecasters), and a vintage Stratocaster bridge for my 70's RI.
I expected the Gibson conversion to be a bit more involved than the Fender due to the Fender parts being screwed in and the Callaham ABR-1 bushings being 1 piece press in.
However, things aren't always as they seem.
I went online and say a nifty trick for removing the bushings from a Gibson involving a small screw in the bushing hole. However, I also saw some posts about people being able to pull the bushings by hand.
Deciding to test my strength, I attempted to pull the bushings out by hand with the stud screwed in almost all of the way.
Believe it or not, they came out. I'm not going to say it was easy, but I was able to remove them without any sort of mechanical assistance!
The new bushings came with a plastic sleeve that protects the threaded post of the bushing. I tapped the new bushings in with a plastic headed mallet. They went in easily and the new bridge was installed in a matter of moments.
At first I didn't really notice too much of a change in how the guitar felt. And then I started lowering the tailpiece which previously was up pretty high due to the wider Nashville bridge. That made a huge difference!
Now the guitar really just resonates in an amazing way!
While I was taking apart the Gibson, I also replaced the cheap locking strap buttons on it with some smaller Gibson style buttons. They aren't for gigging, but they will keep the strap on for recording and casual playing.
I expected things to go just as easily with the Strat. I had some big plans for it. I was going to replace the 70's style F tuners with modern vintage style tuners from Gotoh, replace the string tree with a modern roller string tree, and replace the entire bridge assembly with the new Callaham bridge.
The pickups had already been changed out for a set of Angeltone pickups and the nut is brass. Another thing on the list of things to do was to replace the electronics with the correct value pots. The current pots are 500k miniature pots. I'd like to install 250k pots, perhaps a .1 uf no load tone control, and MAYBE a varitone. Anyway, that is a bit further down the road.
I should have known things weren't going to go as planned when the new screws for the bridge were about 1/4 to 1/2" longer than the original screws. Sure I could use the original hardware, but that hardly seems like fun. Now I need to drill the holes a bit deeper into the body for the bridge mounting.
Additionally, when I went to install the replacement tuners, the old bushings didn't fit and the new bushings were too small. I ordered conversion bushings and am currently awaiting their arrival.
One thing that did work out really nicely is that I had a caliper handy to measure the bushing holes to verify their diameter as well as a screwdriver which conveniently had a 10mm shaft which made knocking out the current bushings super easy!
Now the waiting game, but at least I have a really great playing Gibson to keep me company!
Companies to do business with and to avoid
I will update this list as I deal with more companies and I will try to specify my reasoning for placing them in whatever list I do.
The Good companies to deal with:
Morley Effects - They went above and beyond to keep my 70's Tel-Ray effects working by sending me LDR's for FREE when I was willing to pay!
Antique Electronic Supply - I had a problem with a tube socket in the past which I broke when I attempted to bend the solder tabs (like the old sockets allow for). I called explaining that they should warn that the new sockets were incapable of having the solder tabs bent as the material was brittle. They called me back and told me they were shipping me a new socket at no charge and that they would try and get better quality sockets. Additionally, there is always a person there who you can call and get a real update about what is in stock and not.
Warmoth Guitar Parts - Pleasant to deal with on the phone! Real people and real pictures of the actual product you are buying!
Acme Guitar Works - Very fast shipping and an excellent website which lets you know what is actually in stock.
Specialty Guitars - They have the fastest shipping I have ever experienced. I ordered on a weekend and 10 minutes later, I had a shipping confirmation. Their website also lets you know exactly what is in stock which I appreciate. Additionally, they give you a heavy pick taped to your sales order. Sure I don't use heavy picks, but it is just a nice gesture!
Line 6 - I had repaired a friends rack mounted pod some years back. They sent me a free replacement part.
Ruger - I had sent back my Ruger Mark III Competition Target model due to a pin in the mainspring housing shifting into the grip frame. They took the pistol back on their dime and replaced the grip frame. Additionally, they sent back all of my aftermarket parts in a bag as requested. They were unable to be removed as the gun was stuck together.
Smith and Wesson - I had a model 686 .357 magnum which had a chipped firing pin bushing. They returned the revolver on their dime and replaced the bushing in less than a week.
Henry Firearms - Knowing I was not the original owner of the gun, they returned my AR-7 Survival Rifle on their dime and had it back to me in under a week. I had offered to pay for replacement parts. They insisted I sent it back.
Mouser Electronics - Prompt shipping, good product visibility on their website. Additionally, they upgraded my shipping from ground to 2 day air for no good reason over a weekend once just for the sake of it.
Stew Mac - Very fast shipping, lots of free infomation on their website, items are as described or have good user reviews which allow both the good and bad to exist (as in they don't remove the negative comments - you know, being honest), competitive pricing, many guitar specific and exclusive products.
The SHIT list:
Guitar Parts Plus - Short shipped me for under 10$ in parts - but didn't respond to 2 emails or a phone call. Will never order from them again.
Futurlec - Held my order for over a month with no notification. When they finally told me why the order was delayed (a backorder), they asked that I pay additional shipping above what I had already paid. I cancelled the entire order. They refunded me all but 15$ and change. I asked for the remainder to be refunded. They said all of my money had been refunded. This is of course in addition to the 7$ currency conversion fee I was charged by the bank because they didn't charge me in American money (which I think is the root of the entire problem). A week later and a claim with my bank and I was at least reimbursed the 15$ and change. Will never order from them again.
EMG Pickups - Zero response to an aftermarket support problem. Potted electronics make troubleshooting absolutely impossible as well. Will absolutely never deal with them or install one of their products in anything for anybody for any amount of money again.
The Good companies to deal with:
Morley Effects - They went above and beyond to keep my 70's Tel-Ray effects working by sending me LDR's for FREE when I was willing to pay!
Antique Electronic Supply - I had a problem with a tube socket in the past which I broke when I attempted to bend the solder tabs (like the old sockets allow for). I called explaining that they should warn that the new sockets were incapable of having the solder tabs bent as the material was brittle. They called me back and told me they were shipping me a new socket at no charge and that they would try and get better quality sockets. Additionally, there is always a person there who you can call and get a real update about what is in stock and not.
Warmoth Guitar Parts - Pleasant to deal with on the phone! Real people and real pictures of the actual product you are buying!
Acme Guitar Works - Very fast shipping and an excellent website which lets you know what is actually in stock.
Specialty Guitars - They have the fastest shipping I have ever experienced. I ordered on a weekend and 10 minutes later, I had a shipping confirmation. Their website also lets you know exactly what is in stock which I appreciate. Additionally, they give you a heavy pick taped to your sales order. Sure I don't use heavy picks, but it is just a nice gesture!
Line 6 - I had repaired a friends rack mounted pod some years back. They sent me a free replacement part.
Ruger - I had sent back my Ruger Mark III Competition Target model due to a pin in the mainspring housing shifting into the grip frame. They took the pistol back on their dime and replaced the grip frame. Additionally, they sent back all of my aftermarket parts in a bag as requested. They were unable to be removed as the gun was stuck together.
Smith and Wesson - I had a model 686 .357 magnum which had a chipped firing pin bushing. They returned the revolver on their dime and replaced the bushing in less than a week.
Henry Firearms - Knowing I was not the original owner of the gun, they returned my AR-7 Survival Rifle on their dime and had it back to me in under a week. I had offered to pay for replacement parts. They insisted I sent it back.
Mouser Electronics - Prompt shipping, good product visibility on their website. Additionally, they upgraded my shipping from ground to 2 day air for no good reason over a weekend once just for the sake of it.
Stew Mac - Very fast shipping, lots of free infomation on their website, items are as described or have good user reviews which allow both the good and bad to exist (as in they don't remove the negative comments - you know, being honest), competitive pricing, many guitar specific and exclusive products.
The SHIT list:
Guitar Parts Plus - Short shipped me for under 10$ in parts - but didn't respond to 2 emails or a phone call. Will never order from them again.
Futurlec - Held my order for over a month with no notification. When they finally told me why the order was delayed (a backorder), they asked that I pay additional shipping above what I had already paid. I cancelled the entire order. They refunded me all but 15$ and change. I asked for the remainder to be refunded. They said all of my money had been refunded. This is of course in addition to the 7$ currency conversion fee I was charged by the bank because they didn't charge me in American money (which I think is the root of the entire problem). A week later and a claim with my bank and I was at least reimbursed the 15$ and change. Will never order from them again.
EMG Pickups - Zero response to an aftermarket support problem. Potted electronics make troubleshooting absolutely impossible as well. Will absolutely never deal with them or install one of their products in anything for anybody for any amount of money again.
Scored a Fender Jag-Stang
I received a pretty good coupon from Sam Ash a few weeks back. It was good on new AND used gear!
I went to the local store and checked out their used inventory. I didn't really see anything and was about to leave when I spotted a Fender Jag-Stang in Fiesta Red on the wall toward a corner. How had I missed that with my first pass!?
I used to have a Jag-Stang years ago. Honestly, I hated it. I didn't understand it. I tinkered with it and more or less screwed it up. Finally frustrated with it, I gave it away to a friend.
Now being older (and hopefully a little wiser), I decided to play it and embrace it for what it is (an incomplete concept guitar).
Firstly, I plugged into a nice tube amp. I only own tube amps now. I didn't own any tube amps when I owned my original Jag-Stang. It sounded surprisingly good! I really love the out of phase single coil neck pickup with the bridge pickup on. It gives the guitar a unique voice! But each pickup also sounded pretty good on its own. I'm not sure if they are the same pickups as the older Jag-Stangs but I was happy. I wish I would have known better when I was younger (read that as stupider). I had replaced the pickups in the guitar thinking it was going to make the guitar into something better.
I also didn't understand the floating bridge. Now, having owned a Jazzmaster for some time, I not only understand it but love it! It is why the Jazzmaster is capable of returning to pitch when you use the whammy bar. The entire bridge moves back and forth so the strings don't bind on the saddles.
Two things the guitar was missing when I bought it were the correct knobs and the whammy bar.
I purchased the whammy bar and re-educated myself on american fine spline split shaft knobs versus metric coarse spline knobs.
Ordering the knobs wasn't as easy as it should have been as I was short shipped on my first order. That reminds me to put together a list of companies I have dealt with and had positive experience as well as a shit list for companies who have screwed me in some way.
I went to the local store and checked out their used inventory. I didn't really see anything and was about to leave when I spotted a Fender Jag-Stang in Fiesta Red on the wall toward a corner. How had I missed that with my first pass!?
I used to have a Jag-Stang years ago. Honestly, I hated it. I didn't understand it. I tinkered with it and more or less screwed it up. Finally frustrated with it, I gave it away to a friend.
Now being older (and hopefully a little wiser), I decided to play it and embrace it for what it is (an incomplete concept guitar).
Firstly, I plugged into a nice tube amp. I only own tube amps now. I didn't own any tube amps when I owned my original Jag-Stang. It sounded surprisingly good! I really love the out of phase single coil neck pickup with the bridge pickup on. It gives the guitar a unique voice! But each pickup also sounded pretty good on its own. I'm not sure if they are the same pickups as the older Jag-Stangs but I was happy. I wish I would have known better when I was younger (read that as stupider). I had replaced the pickups in the guitar thinking it was going to make the guitar into something better.
I also didn't understand the floating bridge. Now, having owned a Jazzmaster for some time, I not only understand it but love it! It is why the Jazzmaster is capable of returning to pitch when you use the whammy bar. The entire bridge moves back and forth so the strings don't bind on the saddles.
Two things the guitar was missing when I bought it were the correct knobs and the whammy bar.
I purchased the whammy bar and re-educated myself on american fine spline split shaft knobs versus metric coarse spline knobs.
Ordering the knobs wasn't as easy as it should have been as I was short shipped on my first order. That reminds me to put together a list of companies I have dealt with and had positive experience as well as a shit list for companies who have screwed me in some way.
General Rant
I am currently working on a few amplifiers for a friend to clean out my work shop before I begin working on my own projects.
In the course of researching one of the amplifiers (trying to find schematics or any other repair notes that might be helpful), I came across a forum thread which really frustrated me. I try and remember that forums are largely unmoderated and that everybody is entitled to their opinion. I found this post a bit difficult to swallow.
A major boutique manufacturer of pedals and amps suggested that a good tech shouldn't need a schematic to repair an amplifier.
General misinformation on the web...What makes me different? Nothing. Take everything with a grain of salt. Do your research and make your own conclusions.
In the course of researching one of the amplifiers (trying to find schematics or any other repair notes that might be helpful), I came across a forum thread which really frustrated me. I try and remember that forums are largely unmoderated and that everybody is entitled to their opinion. I found this post a bit difficult to swallow.
A major boutique manufacturer of pedals and amps suggested that a good tech shouldn't need a schematic to repair an amplifier.
General misinformation on the web...What makes me different? Nothing. Take everything with a grain of salt. Do your research and make your own conclusions.
Sometimes NOTHING is what's wrong!
Been working on a friend's VHT Two/Fifty/Two amplifier.
The amplifier had been blowing the HT fuses immediately upon power up. This occurred with or without the tubes in the amplifier.
I was honestly kind of puzzled by the entire thing. Both channels had the exact same symptoms. While one channel might have had a set of filter caps go, I refused to believe that both channels had them go at the same time.
I decided to email the VHT/Fryette and try and get some help.
They were very friendly and explained that the fuses in the amplifier are purposely rated conservatively. Most people do not experience a problem but some people with abnormal power conditions may.
They suggested replacing the .5 Amp fast blow fuses with .75 Amp fuses.
Success!
So, I replaced the tubes and reassembled the amplifier.
The moral of the story is that sometimes there is nothing wrong. Had I not contacted the company, I'd still be dickering about with the amplifier and never any closer to finding out the real problem.
The amplifier had been blowing the HT fuses immediately upon power up. This occurred with or without the tubes in the amplifier.
I was honestly kind of puzzled by the entire thing. Both channels had the exact same symptoms. While one channel might have had a set of filter caps go, I refused to believe that both channels had them go at the same time.
I decided to email the VHT/Fryette and try and get some help.
They were very friendly and explained that the fuses in the amplifier are purposely rated conservatively. Most people do not experience a problem but some people with abnormal power conditions may.
They suggested replacing the .5 Amp fast blow fuses with .75 Amp fuses.
Success!
So, I replaced the tubes and reassembled the amplifier.
The moral of the story is that sometimes there is nothing wrong. Had I not contacted the company, I'd still be dickering about with the amplifier and never any closer to finding out the real problem.
Shooting update
I went shooting a couple of weeks ago. The trip was cut short when the pin that holds my Ruger Mark III Competition Target model sight together started to work its way out of the sight. It is generally held in place by the friction of the sight assembly.
This is the same gun that previously had a pin work itself out of the mainspring assembly which prevented the gun from being disassembled and required it to go back to Ruger for a replacement grip frame.
I decided not to take any chances and stakes not only the pin for the sight in place, but also the pins that are in the mainspring housing on both my Competition Target model and my Hunter model.
The Hunter model has given me absolutely no issue (with the exception of the Loaded Chamber Indicator getting clogged up and causing jams - removal of this part has since solved the problem for thousands of rounds without a single malfunction).
The real test however will be shooting the gun for a few hundred rounds and seeing that everything doesn't go flying apart.
I have read posts from people in the past which talk about how some people never take apart their Ruger Mark III pistols or even some other guns and just spray cleaner inside of them and blow them out with compressed air.
I think it is really important to take apart any firearm that is in regular use and inspect for any worn or damaged parts.
While at the shooting range, I also spotted a new (well new to me) Ruger 10/22 Takedown model. I used to have one of those Henry AR-7 survival rifles and while the concept was really solid, I felt like the rifle was made to be cheap.
Henry is a great company! Don't get me wrong. They stand by their product and I have had excellent customer service interaction with them, but I just didn't like how cheap that rifle felt.
The 10/22 TD (as it will be henceforth referred) on the other hand looked like a real rifle and the best part is, it is compatible with a multitude of aftermarket parts for the normal 10/22. Additionally, it accepts 25 round magazines!
I may have to look into getting one in the future, but I think I might have to thin the heard of Marlin .22 rifles I have first.
I also went to a gun show at the beginning of the month. I picked up some cleaning patches and a plastic magazine for my Ruger Gunsite Scout rifle. I'm starting to feel like a Ruger salesman. At about half the price of the normal steel magazine, I felt it was a good deal. I can't justify 70$ on a magazine! Even 30$ seems a bit much.
I also looked at Ruger's 1911. It looked nice and felt like it had some real heft to it, but I don't need another 1911.
Ruger sent me a survey which I have yet to complete. It asked for gun suggestions. Here are 2:
9mm Revolver - I know the idea is not new, but nobody (at least to my knowledge) is currently making an affordable and quality variant of this. It'd be nice if it had a medium or large frame. I am tired of all of these small frame revolvers. Sure they have their place in self defense, but they are miserable to shoot for fun.
9mm 1911 - Again, I know this isn't an original idea, but all of the ones on the current market are quite expensive and I don't feel like they have the quality behind them that justifies their prices.
Anyway, the gunshow was a bit of a waste of time. A lot of paranoids spouting off political agendas and people of questionable sanity (and hygiene) cheering them on. I hate to say it, but these are the people that give gun owners a bad image. No wonder I've been way more involved in the guitar lately.
This is the same gun that previously had a pin work itself out of the mainspring assembly which prevented the gun from being disassembled and required it to go back to Ruger for a replacement grip frame.
I decided not to take any chances and stakes not only the pin for the sight in place, but also the pins that are in the mainspring housing on both my Competition Target model and my Hunter model.
The Hunter model has given me absolutely no issue (with the exception of the Loaded Chamber Indicator getting clogged up and causing jams - removal of this part has since solved the problem for thousands of rounds without a single malfunction).
The real test however will be shooting the gun for a few hundred rounds and seeing that everything doesn't go flying apart.
I have read posts from people in the past which talk about how some people never take apart their Ruger Mark III pistols or even some other guns and just spray cleaner inside of them and blow them out with compressed air.
I think it is really important to take apart any firearm that is in regular use and inspect for any worn or damaged parts.
While at the shooting range, I also spotted a new (well new to me) Ruger 10/22 Takedown model. I used to have one of those Henry AR-7 survival rifles and while the concept was really solid, I felt like the rifle was made to be cheap.
Henry is a great company! Don't get me wrong. They stand by their product and I have had excellent customer service interaction with them, but I just didn't like how cheap that rifle felt.
The 10/22 TD (as it will be henceforth referred) on the other hand looked like a real rifle and the best part is, it is compatible with a multitude of aftermarket parts for the normal 10/22. Additionally, it accepts 25 round magazines!
I may have to look into getting one in the future, but I think I might have to thin the heard of Marlin .22 rifles I have first.
I also went to a gun show at the beginning of the month. I picked up some cleaning patches and a plastic magazine for my Ruger Gunsite Scout rifle. I'm starting to feel like a Ruger salesman. At about half the price of the normal steel magazine, I felt it was a good deal. I can't justify 70$ on a magazine! Even 30$ seems a bit much.
I also looked at Ruger's 1911. It looked nice and felt like it had some real heft to it, but I don't need another 1911.
Ruger sent me a survey which I have yet to complete. It asked for gun suggestions. Here are 2:
9mm Revolver - I know the idea is not new, but nobody (at least to my knowledge) is currently making an affordable and quality variant of this. It'd be nice if it had a medium or large frame. I am tired of all of these small frame revolvers. Sure they have their place in self defense, but they are miserable to shoot for fun.
9mm 1911 - Again, I know this isn't an original idea, but all of the ones on the current market are quite expensive and I don't feel like they have the quality behind them that justifies their prices.
Anyway, the gunshow was a bit of a waste of time. A lot of paranoids spouting off political agendas and people of questionable sanity (and hygiene) cheering them on. I hate to say it, but these are the people that give gun owners a bad image. No wonder I've been way more involved in the guitar lately.
Wednesday, June 13, 2012
Futurlec could learn a few lessons from Mouser
What separates a company that is good to do business with from one that is unpleasant isn't how they treat the customer when everything goes right but how they handle mistakes and keeping the customer happy.
I don't think I am a difficult customer. I have dealt with many companies for various reasons and in the end, the outcome was almost always one that kept me as a satisfied customer. In some cases the companies went above and beyond and now when I discuss companies such as Morley or Antique Electronic Supply, I always tell of their amazing customer service! Other companies (like EMG) have left me soured and I will never do business with them again.
I had ordered electronic components for my up and coming business from Futurlec. In the past I had never had any issues. It took some time for the items to arrive but the prices were good enough to justify the wait. My most recent and final order was placed at the beginning of April 2012. I waited roughly 45 days before contacting them asking if my order had shipped and why it had not.
I was told it had not shipped as 3 items were back ordered and they were having difficulty securing those items. I told them to cancel those items and to ship the remainder of the order.
I get another response from them saying that due to the weight of my package, they would need to charge my card an additional fee on top of the shipping fee I had already paid. I told them to cancel the entire order.
Their shipping is set up where you pay a shipping price based on how much you spend rather than how much the item weighs. That is their system. Not mine.
I waited a few days and checked my bank. They had issued me a credit...but it came up $15.82 short from what I had originally been charged. This of course doesn't include the $7.05 exchange rate charge that my bank hit me with because they didn't ring in my order in US currency.
I asked them to refund the remainder of the money I was owed. They said they had issued me a full refund but would leave $15.82 on my account as a credit anyway.
I will NEVER order from them again so what good does a 15$ credit do me!?
I have since contacted my bank to have the money recovered through their fraud protection/merchant dispute. While this has been an inconvenience for me and the amount of money isn't the issue, it is the principle that is important.
Do your customers right and they will continue to patronize your service.
Following the cancellation of my order with Futurlec, I spent a few hours on Mouser's website trying to recreate a similar order. I got the important things ordered and paid for the most basic shipping on the Friday Night of Memorial Day Weekend.
I get a confirmation email saying that my order was received. Then I got another email on Saturday saying my order shipping had been upgraded from UPS ground to UPS 2 Day Air.
Following that, I had another email saying my shipping had once again been upgraded for free from UPS 2 Day Air to UPS Overnight Air.
I had my parts on Thursday. I was more than pleasantly surprised by this. I have made orders with Mouser before but this was going above and beyond. One of the emails said something to the effect of me being a valued customer and how they understood that having my components was important. It made me feel important and from now on, I will order from Mouser and not screw around with cut rate companies with cut rate customer service.
I don't think I am a difficult customer. I have dealt with many companies for various reasons and in the end, the outcome was almost always one that kept me as a satisfied customer. In some cases the companies went above and beyond and now when I discuss companies such as Morley or Antique Electronic Supply, I always tell of their amazing customer service! Other companies (like EMG) have left me soured and I will never do business with them again.
I had ordered electronic components for my up and coming business from Futurlec. In the past I had never had any issues. It took some time for the items to arrive but the prices were good enough to justify the wait. My most recent and final order was placed at the beginning of April 2012. I waited roughly 45 days before contacting them asking if my order had shipped and why it had not.
I was told it had not shipped as 3 items were back ordered and they were having difficulty securing those items. I told them to cancel those items and to ship the remainder of the order.
I get another response from them saying that due to the weight of my package, they would need to charge my card an additional fee on top of the shipping fee I had already paid. I told them to cancel the entire order.
Their shipping is set up where you pay a shipping price based on how much you spend rather than how much the item weighs. That is their system. Not mine.
I waited a few days and checked my bank. They had issued me a credit...but it came up $15.82 short from what I had originally been charged. This of course doesn't include the $7.05 exchange rate charge that my bank hit me with because they didn't ring in my order in US currency.
I asked them to refund the remainder of the money I was owed. They said they had issued me a full refund but would leave $15.82 on my account as a credit anyway.
I will NEVER order from them again so what good does a 15$ credit do me!?
I have since contacted my bank to have the money recovered through their fraud protection/merchant dispute. While this has been an inconvenience for me and the amount of money isn't the issue, it is the principle that is important.
Do your customers right and they will continue to patronize your service.
Following the cancellation of my order with Futurlec, I spent a few hours on Mouser's website trying to recreate a similar order. I got the important things ordered and paid for the most basic shipping on the Friday Night of Memorial Day Weekend.
I get a confirmation email saying that my order was received. Then I got another email on Saturday saying my order shipping had been upgraded from UPS ground to UPS 2 Day Air.
Following that, I had another email saying my shipping had once again been upgraded for free from UPS 2 Day Air to UPS Overnight Air.
I had my parts on Thursday. I was more than pleasantly surprised by this. I have made orders with Mouser before but this was going above and beyond. One of the emails said something to the effect of me being a valued customer and how they understood that having my components was important. It made me feel important and from now on, I will order from Mouser and not screw around with cut rate companies with cut rate customer service.
Fixing a Fender Frontman 15B
I was given a Fender Frontman 15B amplifier to repair.
For as long as I've been fixing equipment, I've been fascinated by how people describe problems and what they assume the fix to be. I'm sure we've all seen the ads on many popular sites about how they are selling an amplifier that just needs one "easy" fix. And somehow, despite this fix being so easy, it is never done. I've gone off on a bit of a tangent.
The amplifier was given to me with the problem description being that the input jack is bad and you need to wiggle the cord to get it to make sound. Truly an easy repair!
I disassembled the amplifier which is the bass variant of the Frontman amps (hence the B designation). It comes apart pretty easily. There are 6 screws on the back which remove the back panel. The back panel also has the power jack on it. I removed the terminal connections from the power jack. There are 2 screws inside on the under side of the chassis which hold it in place as well as the 2 screws which hold the handle. I disconnected the terminals from the speaker and carefully slid the chassis out of the box.
The board is mounted in such a way where you can see the trace side of the PCB. It was clear that the input jack was free to move. Additionally, I spotted a broken solder joint on the volume pot. Worse than the input jack being broken, the threads for the plastic nut were also stripped and I do not have any spare Fender style jacks. I did have some Marshall style jacks though from when I was working on a friend's plexi RI.
I decided that it would be a good replacement jack. I soldered it in and fixed the bad solder joint on the volume pot and reassembled ready to pat myself on the back for a job well done.
Only problem is, the amp was motorboating now. Admittedly, that was a step forward for this amp which had previously been dead quiet, but not the end result I had been shooting for. I had to reassemble it and take a closer look.
While I had the amp disassembled I turned it on with the speaker disconnected. The output IC is a TDA2050 (just like I put in my Marshall VS15R!) so I know it can handle no load. However R22 (a 5.6 ohm resistor) could not handle the load and promptly began to smoke. I turned off the amp and decided to just kind of replace everything quickly.
R22 was replaced with 2 10 ohm resistors in parallel giving me 5 ohms which is close enough. I probably could have picked different values to get closer to the original 5.6 ohm load, but the value hardly seemed critical.
I also replaced U1 and U2 which are the input IC and post gain/eq buffer/driver IC (respectively). U3 is the output ic. U4 and U5 drive some sort of compression circuit.
I reassembled and crossed my fingers. Powered the amp on and was now ready to pat myself on the back! Success!
I'd like to take a moment to talk about some of the pros and cons of working on this amp.
Pros:
-Fender provides the schematic for this amp free of charge on their website! All companies should do this and most used to. Now schematics are like secrets from most companies.
-The circuit was fairly straight forward with the only complicated part going to the compression circuit.
-It came apart extremely easily.
Cons:
-The board had traces which were very easy to damage. I managed to break the LED trace off of the board entirely just by touching the LED in the wrong way.
-The schematic provided was close but had a couple of glaring and major differences from the actual unit. Most striking was the speaker output on the schematic instead of a CD player input.
-While the amplifier came apart easily, I had to do it multiple times as the tolex managed to get in the way a couple of times during reassembly and I don't like sloppy tolex.
-And finally, I didn't get paid for this amp at all because it was a favor.
Because I was not getting paid for my work, I did make a few parts substitutions with what I had on hand. For example, the 5.6 ohm resistor that burnt up was replaced with 2 10 ohm resistors in parallel for 5 ohms. U1 and U2 were TL072 op amps which I replaced with MC4558 op amps. They will sound close enough but they are not the same. I just didn't have any TL072 op amps around. And the input jack was replaced with a marshall style jack (which is a much nicer jack anyway!).
I know a lot of people might not waste their time repairing an amp like this when the used value is probably worth less than the time I put into it, but I have the time and the grand total in parts was well under 5$ to repair the amp.
Another thing I'd like to note about the amp is how much additional circuitry Fender put into the amp than is absolutely necessary for a bare bones amplifier. U4 and U5 could be eliminated entirely and the amplifier would probably sound pretty close at lower volumes and would distort at higher volumes a bit more. But for a practice amp, I am actually impressed with how much engineering they put into it.
For as long as I've been fixing equipment, I've been fascinated by how people describe problems and what they assume the fix to be. I'm sure we've all seen the ads on many popular sites about how they are selling an amplifier that just needs one "easy" fix. And somehow, despite this fix being so easy, it is never done. I've gone off on a bit of a tangent.
The amplifier was given to me with the problem description being that the input jack is bad and you need to wiggle the cord to get it to make sound. Truly an easy repair!
I disassembled the amplifier which is the bass variant of the Frontman amps (hence the B designation). It comes apart pretty easily. There are 6 screws on the back which remove the back panel. The back panel also has the power jack on it. I removed the terminal connections from the power jack. There are 2 screws inside on the under side of the chassis which hold it in place as well as the 2 screws which hold the handle. I disconnected the terminals from the speaker and carefully slid the chassis out of the box.
The board is mounted in such a way where you can see the trace side of the PCB. It was clear that the input jack was free to move. Additionally, I spotted a broken solder joint on the volume pot. Worse than the input jack being broken, the threads for the plastic nut were also stripped and I do not have any spare Fender style jacks. I did have some Marshall style jacks though from when I was working on a friend's plexi RI.
I decided that it would be a good replacement jack. I soldered it in and fixed the bad solder joint on the volume pot and reassembled ready to pat myself on the back for a job well done.
Only problem is, the amp was motorboating now. Admittedly, that was a step forward for this amp which had previously been dead quiet, but not the end result I had been shooting for. I had to reassemble it and take a closer look.
While I had the amp disassembled I turned it on with the speaker disconnected. The output IC is a TDA2050 (just like I put in my Marshall VS15R!) so I know it can handle no load. However R22 (a 5.6 ohm resistor) could not handle the load and promptly began to smoke. I turned off the amp and decided to just kind of replace everything quickly.
R22 was replaced with 2 10 ohm resistors in parallel giving me 5 ohms which is close enough. I probably could have picked different values to get closer to the original 5.6 ohm load, but the value hardly seemed critical.
I also replaced U1 and U2 which are the input IC and post gain/eq buffer/driver IC (respectively). U3 is the output ic. U4 and U5 drive some sort of compression circuit.
I reassembled and crossed my fingers. Powered the amp on and was now ready to pat myself on the back! Success!
I'd like to take a moment to talk about some of the pros and cons of working on this amp.
Pros:
-Fender provides the schematic for this amp free of charge on their website! All companies should do this and most used to. Now schematics are like secrets from most companies.
-The circuit was fairly straight forward with the only complicated part going to the compression circuit.
-It came apart extremely easily.
Cons:
-The board had traces which were very easy to damage. I managed to break the LED trace off of the board entirely just by touching the LED in the wrong way.
-The schematic provided was close but had a couple of glaring and major differences from the actual unit. Most striking was the speaker output on the schematic instead of a CD player input.
-While the amplifier came apart easily, I had to do it multiple times as the tolex managed to get in the way a couple of times during reassembly and I don't like sloppy tolex.
-And finally, I didn't get paid for this amp at all because it was a favor.
Because I was not getting paid for my work, I did make a few parts substitutions with what I had on hand. For example, the 5.6 ohm resistor that burnt up was replaced with 2 10 ohm resistors in parallel for 5 ohms. U1 and U2 were TL072 op amps which I replaced with MC4558 op amps. They will sound close enough but they are not the same. I just didn't have any TL072 op amps around. And the input jack was replaced with a marshall style jack (which is a much nicer jack anyway!).
I know a lot of people might not waste their time repairing an amp like this when the used value is probably worth less than the time I put into it, but I have the time and the grand total in parts was well under 5$ to repair the amp.
Another thing I'd like to note about the amp is how much additional circuitry Fender put into the amp than is absolutely necessary for a bare bones amplifier. U4 and U5 could be eliminated entirely and the amplifier would probably sound pretty close at lower volumes and would distort at higher volumes a bit more. But for a practice amp, I am actually impressed with how much engineering they put into it.
Thursday, May 24, 2012
The Marshall amplifier that stopped a crime ring!
Before I really knew much about amplifiers or even guitars, I was highly suggestible to the imagery that is presented in all of the common guitar literature. The kind of material that costs thousands of dollars in ad campaigns.
I wanted to sound my best like any guitarist naturally would want. I believed the weak link in my sound at the time was my amplifier (instead of my playing which still could use some help). I had been playing through a Dean Markley amplifier and while it got the job done and had served me for years, I was searching for something of an icon!
Around that time, the second series Marshall Valvestate amplifiers were being released. They bear almost no resemblance in sound or design to their namesake. The older Plexi style and non master volume JMP Marshalls are based around a modified Fender Bassman circuit while the master volume JMP and early JCM800 amps are based on a modified Plexi/JMP style amp.
Now having a lot more experience, I find it difficult to get anything I like out of a non master volume Marshall. The controls are somewhat unresponsive and the amp piercingly bright or exceptionally dull depending on the channel and tube set. I've heard others use these amplifiers in ways that I only dreamed of, but much like the Big Muff, I decided that it is best to leave these non master Marshalls in the hands of serious players who demonstrate that tone is in the fingers and not the amp.
After the single channel JCM800 amplifier, I pretty much lose all interest in Marshall amps. The circuitry becomes way too convoluted.
Anyway, the Valvestate amplifiers share zero ancestry with these notorious Marshall amps. In fact the only real connection is that the amplifier says Marshall on it and has similar cosmetics. But I didn't know any better.
I bought the smallest model in the line. The VS15R. There was also a non reverb variant made. The VS15 and VS15R have the distinction of being the only valvestate models NOT to feature a tube of any sort. All of the other models had a 12ax7 in the preamp somewhere. I don't remember those amps sounding particularly good, but hybrid amps were a big deal at the time. Some companies like Music Man had tried solid state preamps with tube driver and output stages. Nearly every other company tried a tube preamp with a solid state output.
The VS15R featured a nominal 15 watt output into an 8" speaker and had a simple set of controls. It actually sounds pretty good for a cheap practice amp. I've heard cheap tube amps which sound much worse as well as more expensive solid state which sounds far worse.
The amplifier is actually pretty simple inside. It features a set of 4558 chips for the preamp, a 1458 on the reverb, and a TDA2030A on the output.
After becoming a bit wiser to amps, my Marshall began to see less and less use as I had gotten into vintage Blackface Fender, Ampeg, and Gibson amps from the 50's and 60's. I eventually gave the amplifier (box, warranty card, and manual!) to my brother who was learning to play guitar.
He tinkered with it and enjoyed it....Until...
His house was burglarized. His guitars and amplifier were amongst the stolen items. This sort of burglary had been going on in his Florida community alongside of neighboring communities. The thieves would break in and take what they wanted and pawn it through a series of friends and acquaintances. They had gotten away with it for some time as nobody ever had serial numbers for stolen items to pin them to the crime.
That is until they stole the Marshall VS15R without taking the box which has the serial number marked on it.
The amplifier turned up in a local pawn shop. Florida has some very unfair rules regarding victims having to buy back their equipment, but I suppose it is in return for their full cooperation. My brother was forced to buy back this amplifier for the original pawned price.
I'm sure he slept a little easier on that injustice knowing that the person who pawned it was sitting in a police station for questioning. Turns out it was a woman who pawned it for her boyfriend who happened to be the one who stole the amplifier. The police were able to take finger prints off of the amplifier and match it to the suspect. The amplifier had finger print dust on it for years almost as a trophy that my brother would show off.
Fast forward a few years, my brother was playing through the amplifier. Took a break. Came back to play some more and the amp no longer worked. It made an awful steady tone which was not sensitive to the volume or tone controls.
I recall in my younger curiosity opening the amplifier. All of the parts laid out looked like Greek to me. Not this time. I had scored some time at the bench while working for Ibanez. I have always been naturally pretty good at troubleshooting things and this was no different than any other amplifier I had worked on...except I didn't have a schematic nor could I find one online.
I probed around and took some voltage readings. I noticed the power rail for the output IC was 21.2 Volts which is just .8 volts shy of the absolute maximum for the TDA2030A chip. I took some readings on the chip and got all kinds of screwball numbers. I removed the chip and researched it a bit.
I learned that the TDA2030 is a popular choice for small amplifiers because it requires very little support circuitry. Countless examples were shown. One thing they all had in common was how sensitive the chip was to exceeding the voltage rating.
I figure a power surge probably did the amp in. And being that this amp was a hero (even though many will never know it!), it was not fitting that it end up in a landfill!
I replaced the TDA2030A with a TDA2050 which has a slightly higher voltage rating and a higher wattage rating but left the rest of the circuitry alone.
Reassembled. Crossed my fingers and turned the amplifier on for the first time in years.
Fired right up! The hero has been resurrected!
And that is the story of how a Marshall amplifier stopped a crime ring...with a lot of tangents and technical information thrown in.
I wanted to sound my best like any guitarist naturally would want. I believed the weak link in my sound at the time was my amplifier (instead of my playing which still could use some help). I had been playing through a Dean Markley amplifier and while it got the job done and had served me for years, I was searching for something of an icon!
Around that time, the second series Marshall Valvestate amplifiers were being released. They bear almost no resemblance in sound or design to their namesake. The older Plexi style and non master volume JMP Marshalls are based around a modified Fender Bassman circuit while the master volume JMP and early JCM800 amps are based on a modified Plexi/JMP style amp.
Now having a lot more experience, I find it difficult to get anything I like out of a non master volume Marshall. The controls are somewhat unresponsive and the amp piercingly bright or exceptionally dull depending on the channel and tube set. I've heard others use these amplifiers in ways that I only dreamed of, but much like the Big Muff, I decided that it is best to leave these non master Marshalls in the hands of serious players who demonstrate that tone is in the fingers and not the amp.
After the single channel JCM800 amplifier, I pretty much lose all interest in Marshall amps. The circuitry becomes way too convoluted.
Anyway, the Valvestate amplifiers share zero ancestry with these notorious Marshall amps. In fact the only real connection is that the amplifier says Marshall on it and has similar cosmetics. But I didn't know any better.
I bought the smallest model in the line. The VS15R. There was also a non reverb variant made. The VS15 and VS15R have the distinction of being the only valvestate models NOT to feature a tube of any sort. All of the other models had a 12ax7 in the preamp somewhere. I don't remember those amps sounding particularly good, but hybrid amps were a big deal at the time. Some companies like Music Man had tried solid state preamps with tube driver and output stages. Nearly every other company tried a tube preamp with a solid state output.
The VS15R featured a nominal 15 watt output into an 8" speaker and had a simple set of controls. It actually sounds pretty good for a cheap practice amp. I've heard cheap tube amps which sound much worse as well as more expensive solid state which sounds far worse.
The amplifier is actually pretty simple inside. It features a set of 4558 chips for the preamp, a 1458 on the reverb, and a TDA2030A on the output.
After becoming a bit wiser to amps, my Marshall began to see less and less use as I had gotten into vintage Blackface Fender, Ampeg, and Gibson amps from the 50's and 60's. I eventually gave the amplifier (box, warranty card, and manual!) to my brother who was learning to play guitar.
He tinkered with it and enjoyed it....Until...
His house was burglarized. His guitars and amplifier were amongst the stolen items. This sort of burglary had been going on in his Florida community alongside of neighboring communities. The thieves would break in and take what they wanted and pawn it through a series of friends and acquaintances. They had gotten away with it for some time as nobody ever had serial numbers for stolen items to pin them to the crime.
That is until they stole the Marshall VS15R without taking the box which has the serial number marked on it.
The amplifier turned up in a local pawn shop. Florida has some very unfair rules regarding victims having to buy back their equipment, but I suppose it is in return for their full cooperation. My brother was forced to buy back this amplifier for the original pawned price.
I'm sure he slept a little easier on that injustice knowing that the person who pawned it was sitting in a police station for questioning. Turns out it was a woman who pawned it for her boyfriend who happened to be the one who stole the amplifier. The police were able to take finger prints off of the amplifier and match it to the suspect. The amplifier had finger print dust on it for years almost as a trophy that my brother would show off.
Fast forward a few years, my brother was playing through the amplifier. Took a break. Came back to play some more and the amp no longer worked. It made an awful steady tone which was not sensitive to the volume or tone controls.
I recall in my younger curiosity opening the amplifier. All of the parts laid out looked like Greek to me. Not this time. I had scored some time at the bench while working for Ibanez. I have always been naturally pretty good at troubleshooting things and this was no different than any other amplifier I had worked on...except I didn't have a schematic nor could I find one online.
I probed around and took some voltage readings. I noticed the power rail for the output IC was 21.2 Volts which is just .8 volts shy of the absolute maximum for the TDA2030A chip. I took some readings on the chip and got all kinds of screwball numbers. I removed the chip and researched it a bit.
I learned that the TDA2030 is a popular choice for small amplifiers because it requires very little support circuitry. Countless examples were shown. One thing they all had in common was how sensitive the chip was to exceeding the voltage rating.
I figure a power surge probably did the amp in. And being that this amp was a hero (even though many will never know it!), it was not fitting that it end up in a landfill!
I replaced the TDA2030A with a TDA2050 which has a slightly higher voltage rating and a higher wattage rating but left the rest of the circuitry alone.
Reassembled. Crossed my fingers and turned the amplifier on for the first time in years.
Fired right up! The hero has been resurrected!
And that is the story of how a Marshall amplifier stopped a crime ring...with a lot of tangents and technical information thrown in.
Saturday, April 28, 2012
Gibson Les Paul Special Premium Plus and my New Plan
Since writing last a lot has changed on my end.
I've acquired software to create PCBs, a tank for etching them, miscellaneous tools, and a load of parts are on order for a run of effect units.
I am also hoping to sell some miscellaneous guitar accessories.
Meanwhile I am looking to incorporate and have a website made. I have already purchased a domain and hosting.
I realize how incredibly vague that is, but I don't want to let anything out yet until it is finalized.
I've also censored out a lot of my previous post so if things seem out of context or don't make a whole lot of sense, that is probably why.
Now onto the new guitar!
I purchased a 2008 Les Paul Studio Premium Plus at a local store. It had occurred to me that I didn't own a guitar with humbuckers and that might make testing effects a bit one sided. This is especially true since humbuckers are probably more popular than single coil pickups anymore.
Admittedly I could have bought any number of other guitars that would have satisfied my criteria, but I also wanted something that spoke to me a bit.
I originally started my quest looking for a Les Paul style guitar with a maple cap, humbuckers (no p90's or mini buckers), and a real finish (not a faded or tribute model). The new batch of Studios looked like a good place to start. I wanted to try out the silverburst studio I had seen a few weeks back but by the time I was ready to buy, it had been sold. In the end, I had visited 3 stores and played 3 or 4 different Les Paul Studios.
I found the Les Paul Premium Plus at the last store used but not beat on. Mine has a few small dings in the top and a lot of belt buckle rash on the back but no heavy fret wear and nothing I can't live with.
All of the studios I played sounded pretty good which surprised me. I recall a friend having a studio more than a decade ago and it completely underwhelmed me. That image of the studio stuck with me for a long time and I simply avoided them altogether.
In retrospect, perhaps a good setup was in order as all of my reading indicated that the studios are very close to standards for most years with only a few minor cosmetic differences. Some of those differences are preferences of mine anyway. I was never big on binding.
The newest studios have different pickups than some of the older studios as well as "coil tapped" humbuckers which are activated by push pull volume controls. To my ears, the newer studios are very bright without sounding harsh. This is true even in the neck position. The coil tap sounded good and added an additional sound to an already good sounding guitar.
The newer studios also have speed style knobs while the Premium Plus has bell knobs. Speed knobs are certainly more functional but bell knobs just look great!
The older studios (which includes my Premium Plus) have a 490R neck pickup and a 498T bridge pickup. I thought they were darker all around than the newer studios but that the high end could become a little more harsh if you allowed it. The sound overall embodied what I expected a Les Paul to sound like more so than the newer studio models. Both sounds are good but different enough that it becomes rather easy to tell them apart and to have a preference. In a perfect world, I'd have a newer studio to go with my Premium Plus.
The hardware on the Premium Plus is gold and has covers on the humbuckers which makes me quite happy. I also like that from time and use, the gold color has worn away on the bridge and tailpiece a bit. I think it adds character but I guess it is a warning for those who want the guitar to remain gold forever. I have seen other complaints online about the gold color fading so this is not an unusual occurrence.
Another thing that separates the Premium Plus from other Les Paul Studios is the AAA flame maple. From what I understand, they still offer this option and some come with dyed tops, but mine is the natural top as seen in the pictures below. The top wood is definitely very attractive and even other top end Les Paul Standards don't have AAA grade maple.
One complaint I do have about ALL of the Les Pauls and actually all Gibsons I have played lately (including 3000$+ models is that the paint on the top by the neck always looks terrible. Sometimes it has a nasty texture to it and other times it is missing small patches. I don't know if the problem is in the color coat or the clear coat or maybe both coats, but it detracts from the quality of the finish and in my opinion should never have left the factory looking like that. I think it looks bad on a 500$ guitar...It is inexcusable on a 1500$ guitar.
My last Gibson I owned was a 1998 Les Paul Special with P90's. It was a nice guitar and I picked up a cheap used case. I recall the lock being broken on it. I also recall the lock breaking on my friend's LP special case from the 90's. I was pleasantly surprised that the new cases no longer have that lock on them. What they have done now is put a small hasp on the case so you can use a lock of your own. Personally, I'd go with an Abloy PL-321. I didn't check the size of the hasp, but I'd imagine it should fit and the only way that lock is coming off is with the key or a bolt cutter.
Supposedly the neck shape on the Premium Plus is a 59 shaped neck. I played a bunch of different Gibson necks and from what I read, they are CNC machined into rough shapes and then hand finished creating a unique neck for each instrument. In all, most of the necks felt similar enough to be called a Gibson and none were particularly uncomfortable.
The Premium Plus also supposedly has weight relief routes in the body. It is still heavy when compared to a Swamp Ash Telecaster but weighs just a little less than a normal Les Paul Standard. I can't say it has made the guitar any more resonant but it does keep my back just a little happier.
Another interesting quirk I discovered about this guitar was that Gibson started using circuit boards in the control cavity! When did this start happening? I can see how this would speed up wiring, but I don't like that they used ceramic capacitors nor do I like that replacing a single pot involves removing all of the pots to either service the board or replace them with individual pots. I had been planning on adding the coil tap function that I enjoyed so much on the newer Les Pauls but for now that is going to wait as I don't feel like toying with all of those connectors. I am wondering what is behind curtain number 2 (the switch control cavity) but I haven't been brave enough to look yet.
To complete the review, the Les Paul Studio Premium Plus is a guitar loaded with expensive features on an inexpensive (well compared to a Les Paul Standard anyway) guitar. While I am not totally happy about the circuit board controls or the finish around the neck, these are things I can live with or fix on my own if I am willing to spend the time.
I've acquired software to create PCBs, a tank for etching them, miscellaneous tools, and a load of parts are on order for a run of effect units.
I am also hoping to sell some miscellaneous guitar accessories.
Meanwhile I am looking to incorporate and have a website made. I have already purchased a domain and hosting.
I realize how incredibly vague that is, but I don't want to let anything out yet until it is finalized.
I've also censored out a lot of my previous post so if things seem out of context or don't make a whole lot of sense, that is probably why.
Now onto the new guitar!
I purchased a 2008 Les Paul Studio Premium Plus at a local store. It had occurred to me that I didn't own a guitar with humbuckers and that might make testing effects a bit one sided. This is especially true since humbuckers are probably more popular than single coil pickups anymore.
Admittedly I could have bought any number of other guitars that would have satisfied my criteria, but I also wanted something that spoke to me a bit.
I originally started my quest looking for a Les Paul style guitar with a maple cap, humbuckers (no p90's or mini buckers), and a real finish (not a faded or tribute model). The new batch of Studios looked like a good place to start. I wanted to try out the silverburst studio I had seen a few weeks back but by the time I was ready to buy, it had been sold. In the end, I had visited 3 stores and played 3 or 4 different Les Paul Studios.
I found the Les Paul Premium Plus at the last store used but not beat on. Mine has a few small dings in the top and a lot of belt buckle rash on the back but no heavy fret wear and nothing I can't live with.
All of the studios I played sounded pretty good which surprised me. I recall a friend having a studio more than a decade ago and it completely underwhelmed me. That image of the studio stuck with me for a long time and I simply avoided them altogether.
In retrospect, perhaps a good setup was in order as all of my reading indicated that the studios are very close to standards for most years with only a few minor cosmetic differences. Some of those differences are preferences of mine anyway. I was never big on binding.
The newest studios have different pickups than some of the older studios as well as "coil tapped" humbuckers which are activated by push pull volume controls. To my ears, the newer studios are very bright without sounding harsh. This is true even in the neck position. The coil tap sounded good and added an additional sound to an already good sounding guitar.
The newer studios also have speed style knobs while the Premium Plus has bell knobs. Speed knobs are certainly more functional but bell knobs just look great!
The older studios (which includes my Premium Plus) have a 490R neck pickup and a 498T bridge pickup. I thought they were darker all around than the newer studios but that the high end could become a little more harsh if you allowed it. The sound overall embodied what I expected a Les Paul to sound like more so than the newer studio models. Both sounds are good but different enough that it becomes rather easy to tell them apart and to have a preference. In a perfect world, I'd have a newer studio to go with my Premium Plus.
The hardware on the Premium Plus is gold and has covers on the humbuckers which makes me quite happy. I also like that from time and use, the gold color has worn away on the bridge and tailpiece a bit. I think it adds character but I guess it is a warning for those who want the guitar to remain gold forever. I have seen other complaints online about the gold color fading so this is not an unusual occurrence.
Another thing that separates the Premium Plus from other Les Paul Studios is the AAA flame maple. From what I understand, they still offer this option and some come with dyed tops, but mine is the natural top as seen in the pictures below. The top wood is definitely very attractive and even other top end Les Paul Standards don't have AAA grade maple.
One complaint I do have about ALL of the Les Pauls and actually all Gibsons I have played lately (including 3000$+ models is that the paint on the top by the neck always looks terrible. Sometimes it has a nasty texture to it and other times it is missing small patches. I don't know if the problem is in the color coat or the clear coat or maybe both coats, but it detracts from the quality of the finish and in my opinion should never have left the factory looking like that. I think it looks bad on a 500$ guitar...It is inexcusable on a 1500$ guitar.
My last Gibson I owned was a 1998 Les Paul Special with P90's. It was a nice guitar and I picked up a cheap used case. I recall the lock being broken on it. I also recall the lock breaking on my friend's LP special case from the 90's. I was pleasantly surprised that the new cases no longer have that lock on them. What they have done now is put a small hasp on the case so you can use a lock of your own. Personally, I'd go with an Abloy PL-321. I didn't check the size of the hasp, but I'd imagine it should fit and the only way that lock is coming off is with the key or a bolt cutter.
Supposedly the neck shape on the Premium Plus is a 59 shaped neck. I played a bunch of different Gibson necks and from what I read, they are CNC machined into rough shapes and then hand finished creating a unique neck for each instrument. In all, most of the necks felt similar enough to be called a Gibson and none were particularly uncomfortable.
The Premium Plus also supposedly has weight relief routes in the body. It is still heavy when compared to a Swamp Ash Telecaster but weighs just a little less than a normal Les Paul Standard. I can't say it has made the guitar any more resonant but it does keep my back just a little happier.
Another interesting quirk I discovered about this guitar was that Gibson started using circuit boards in the control cavity! When did this start happening? I can see how this would speed up wiring, but I don't like that they used ceramic capacitors nor do I like that replacing a single pot involves removing all of the pots to either service the board or replace them with individual pots. I had been planning on adding the coil tap function that I enjoyed so much on the newer Les Pauls but for now that is going to wait as I don't feel like toying with all of those connectors. I am wondering what is behind curtain number 2 (the switch control cavity) but I haven't been brave enough to look yet.
To complete the review, the Les Paul Studio Premium Plus is a guitar loaded with expensive features on an inexpensive (well compared to a Les Paul Standard anyway) guitar. While I am not totally happy about the circuit board controls or the finish around the neck, these are things I can live with or fix on my own if I am willing to spend the time.
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Sometimes nothing goes right
There isn't much you can do sometimes except roll with the punches.
I've been sick which makes every little snag seem amplified. All I really want to do is sleep and get better but I have obligations I need to meet. Nothing becomes more frustrating than forcing yourself to work on a project only to run into problem after problem.
Screws. When did screws get so cheap that the heads strip with a properly fitted bit and minimum torquing?
Hardware finishes. What is the point if they have no protective quality?
This all kind of makes me think of a quote Nikola Tesla said of Thomas Edison, "His method was inefficient in the extreme, for an immense ground had to be covered to get anything at all unless blind chance intervened and, at first, I was almost a sorry witness of his doings, knowing that just a little theory and calculation would have saved him 90 percent of the labor."
Lately with nothing going right, I have been thinking of exiting the guitar making business. I can't say that it has brought me any closer to financial bliss. This has never been about the money though. I wanted to do something I enjoy.
However, I am not even close to breaking even on this venture. The cost of tooling up and maintaining equipment has far outweighed any sort of commission I have made.
Additionally, I don't appreciate all of the problems falling into my lap. And worse than having to deal with problems, other than my own, is being treated like I am incompetent. Absolutely no benefit of the doubt has been made.
No confidence in my work. No communication until some arbitrary deadline has been missed.
None of this matters though. It is ultimately all my fault.
I am no longer enjoying this.
Well consider this the straw that broke the camel's back. I am done rolling with the punches. I am done accepting blame for things that are just out of my control.
I guess I have some thinking to do.
I've been sick which makes every little snag seem amplified. All I really want to do is sleep and get better but I have obligations I need to meet. Nothing becomes more frustrating than forcing yourself to work on a project only to run into problem after problem.
Screws. When did screws get so cheap that the heads strip with a properly fitted bit and minimum torquing?
Hardware finishes. What is the point if they have no protective quality?
This all kind of makes me think of a quote Nikola Tesla said of Thomas Edison, "His method was inefficient in the extreme, for an immense ground had to be covered to get anything at all unless blind chance intervened and, at first, I was almost a sorry witness of his doings, knowing that just a little theory and calculation would have saved him 90 percent of the labor."
Lately with nothing going right, I have been thinking of exiting the guitar making business. I can't say that it has brought me any closer to financial bliss. This has never been about the money though. I wanted to do something I enjoy.
However, I am not even close to breaking even on this venture. The cost of tooling up and maintaining equipment has far outweighed any sort of commission I have made.
Additionally, I don't appreciate all of the problems falling into my lap. And worse than having to deal with problems, other than my own, is being treated like I am incompetent. Absolutely no benefit of the doubt has been made.
No confidence in my work. No communication until some arbitrary deadline has been missed.
None of this matters though. It is ultimately all my fault.
I am no longer enjoying this.
Well consider this the straw that broke the camel's back. I am done rolling with the punches. I am done accepting blame for things that are just out of my control.
I guess I have some thinking to do.
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Leap year update...
I have been trying to update once a month and I figured the 29th of February was a special enough occasion to wait for.
I took a friend shooting for the first time last month. We shot a variety of guns including my Walther P38 mentioned in another post. My first impression of the Walther was that it was a very smooth shooting gun. I didn't expect that. I thought it was really going to be nasty. Especially when you see how wimpy the dual recoil springs look when compared to modern firearms.
I also shot my Colt 1991A1 after performing the trigger pull modifications. I was quite pleased with myself! No issues or misfires. I suppose now I can pat myself on the back for a job well done!
Additionally, we shot my Smith and Wesson 686-5 with a 4" barrel. However, when I took it home for cleaning, I was dismayed to see that the firing pin bushing was missing a chunk! I was shooting factory load American Eagle 38 special 130 grain FMJ. I contacted Smith and Wesson and they sent me an RMA. 2 weeks later my gun was back in my hands repaired at no cost! Smith and Wesson has top notch customer service and I want to acknowledge and thank them for that!
If you enlarge the pictures, you can see the firing pin bushing is missing a chunk.
I've been unfortunately too busy lately to get back to the range to test fire the 686 since it has been returned.
I also picked up a CZ75B in some sort of limited stainless finish.
I was looking for a new 9mm pistol (as though I needed one) and had read about how unique the design was. The slide sits in the frame instead of on it. It is a neat gun and a lot of fun to shoot. I liked the regular CZ75B well enough except the sights were kind of junky looking. The photo luminescent dots weren't round so much as blobs put on by some sort of paint brush. Instead I got the nicer model with true night sights.
It was fun to shoot although I think I need to get a feel for it still as I was shooting a bit lower with it than I expected.
From what I can tell, the CZ75B is an all around good deal though if you are looking for a reliable all steel gun in 9mm. Most metal framed 9mm pistols on the market are aluminum alloy.
I have been making a conscious effort to try and play guitar and work on guitars daily and denying myself any sort of reward until I have. This system has definitely been helping. Hopefully this will lead to a resurrection of my SpaceCharge effects and amplification project which has been on hiatus for a very long time now.
Despite the short writing on guitars, I have been in a much more musical space than in a gun space lately.
I took a friend shooting for the first time last month. We shot a variety of guns including my Walther P38 mentioned in another post. My first impression of the Walther was that it was a very smooth shooting gun. I didn't expect that. I thought it was really going to be nasty. Especially when you see how wimpy the dual recoil springs look when compared to modern firearms.
I also shot my Colt 1991A1 after performing the trigger pull modifications. I was quite pleased with myself! No issues or misfires. I suppose now I can pat myself on the back for a job well done!
Additionally, we shot my Smith and Wesson 686-5 with a 4" barrel. However, when I took it home for cleaning, I was dismayed to see that the firing pin bushing was missing a chunk! I was shooting factory load American Eagle 38 special 130 grain FMJ. I contacted Smith and Wesson and they sent me an RMA. 2 weeks later my gun was back in my hands repaired at no cost! Smith and Wesson has top notch customer service and I want to acknowledge and thank them for that!
If you enlarge the pictures, you can see the firing pin bushing is missing a chunk.
I've been unfortunately too busy lately to get back to the range to test fire the 686 since it has been returned.
I also picked up a CZ75B in some sort of limited stainless finish.
It was fun to shoot although I think I need to get a feel for it still as I was shooting a bit lower with it than I expected.
From what I can tell, the CZ75B is an all around good deal though if you are looking for a reliable all steel gun in 9mm. Most metal framed 9mm pistols on the market are aluminum alloy.
I have been making a conscious effort to try and play guitar and work on guitars daily and denying myself any sort of reward until I have. This system has definitely been helping. Hopefully this will lead to a resurrection of my SpaceCharge effects and amplification project which has been on hiatus for a very long time now.
Despite the short writing on guitars, I have been in a much more musical space than in a gun space lately.
Friday, January 6, 2012
Colt 1991A1 Upgrades and Trigger Job
The Colt 1991A1 is at its core a series 80 1911 with a parkerized finish. What separates the series 80 from the series 70 is a firing pin block added to the series 80 models to (hopefully) prevent an accidental discharge should the gun be dropped or the hammer fall without the trigger being pulled.
When I originally purchased my Colt, I was new and very naive to 1911. I had fired a few here and there but didn't really understand what made one different than the others.
I quickly realized that it is the little details that separate one from the next. The gun came with staked mil spec style sights. They were difficult to use. I had my local range mill new sights on the gun. Now it is much more user friendly on the visual end.
However, the trigger was kind of stiff and heavy. Additionally, I didn't care much for the kick. Compared to other 1911s I had fired, it kicked quite a bit. I asked around on one of the gun forums I frequent (I am up to 3 now I believe) about what could be done to remedy these issues.
I was given some really good advice and I followed it as best I could.
I had asked about changing out the recoil spring for a heavier recoil spring in an effort to reduce the recoil. I was informed that this would actually increase the perceived recoil and also open the gun up to cylcling issues as well as possibly limp wristing issues. Additionally, full size guide rods were deemed to be only beneficial if they were substantial in weight and even then it was arguable as to how much good they did.
I decided to avoid this dillemma by replacing the recoil spring with a stock Colt 16 lb spring. This way I know I am using what was intended.
I was also advised that I could replace the mainspring with a 19 lb spring for a reduced trigger pull. While a heavier mainspring will slow the slide down a bit and reduce felt recoil, I opted for this as the trigger pull was pretty high. I unfortunately did not measure it before I began my work.
The subject of firing pin stops also came up. The firing pin stop is not to be confused with the firing pin block. The stop is the part that holds the firing pin in the back of the slide. The original Browning design called for a squared firing pin block but for some reason or another, a bevelled firing pin block eventually found its way onto the gun and most guns to date have this bevelled style. This changes where the slide contacts the hammer. A higher point on the hammer axis/pivot gives more leverage and makes the job easier. The squared firing pin stop lowers this contact point and reduces the slide velocity by making the slide work harder to reset the trigger.
I purchased an EGW oversized firing pin stop and carefully fitted it and put an ever so slight break in the sharp 90 degree angle of the firing pin stop to prevent it from destroying the hammer. I was actually surprised at how easy the slide was to rack despite this upgrade. This part required a lot of fitting. In the end, I took my time and used a medium stone and was very pleased with how it came out although I did end up removing a lot of the finish from it while fitting it.
While I had the firing pin stop off of the gun, I also took the firing pin, the firing pin block, and extractor out of the gun and replaced the firing pin block with one coated in titanium nitride from Cylinder & Slide as part of their series 80 trigger pull reduction kit. This kit included 5 parts all coated in titanium nitride. Those are the gold parts you see on the gun. I was not trying to be fashionable. Although I do think it looks good on the gun.
I replaced the hammer pin and the sear pin as well as they were a part of the kit. The other two parts replaced from the kit were the two levers which disengage the firing pin block and allow the firing pin to move forward. This was a very easy kit to install and everything was drop in.
I also took it upon myself to replace the trigger which was a plastic trigger with a Cylinder & Slide "Videki" trigger. The videki trigger is a long style trigger with a serrated front and 3 holes. It is made out of aluminum and required fitting. Again I used a medium stone and took my time stoning each side of the trigger shoe until it slid into the frame. There is now no vertical play like there was with the factory trigger.
When holding the pistol, I always noticed that the sights naturally sat to the side instead of dead on like my Beretta 92FS does. It was then that I realized how important an arched mainspring housing was. Some people like them and some don't. I am a part of the definitely like them group.
The mainspring housing was replaced with an arched model. I went cheap on this and bought a no name part from CDNN and another no name part from Midway USA. One had a serrated back and the other checkered. Both were made out of steel and both required more fitting than I expected or would have liked. The problem was that the hole that holds the mainspring housing into the frame at the bottom wasn't quite lining up with my gun. I am going to blame the parts and not the gun. I drilled the holes ever so slightly larger and managed to get the checkered mainspring housing in. I like how it looks and feels. It also brings the sights right up to my eyes just like my Beretta 92FS does! I wish I would have known all of this prior to buying!
Lastly I replaced the grips with a cheap set from CDNN. I like how they look and feel but I do not like how they fit the gun. They do not fit the bushings that came on it very well and required some fitting. I don't like fitting grips. I don't know why, but I'd rather fit metal parts all day instead of grips. I got them onto the gun, but I may end up replacing them later with real Colt brand grips just to avoid any issues in the future. I will determine that later though after I have shot the gun some.
I didn't actually mind the original rubber grips either. They were black and looked kind of cool. But I am a big fan of wood so I figured why not? When I removed the rubber grips, they were stuck to the frame from what appeared to be dried solvent/lube. It was quite sticky.
All of the previous was primarily cosmetic or ergonomic. The trigger job was what really set the gun apart from its former self. I suppose trigger job is a bit of a misnomer. I didn't sand or polish any internals on the gun. There were no burrs to begin with and I felt that without a jig of some nature, I was bound to do more harm than good toying with stones and hardened parts.
The only part I adjusted was the sear spring. The sear spring is a cool part. It is just a leaf spring with 3 leafs on it. One controls the grip safety, another for the disconnector/trigger reset, and the last for the sear.
Looking at the back of the gun with the grip safety removed and the hammer strut out of the way, the grip safety leaf is the one on the right.
The one in the middle is the disconnector and trigger reset.
The one on the left is the sear leaf.
With a trigger pull gauge, I slowly bent the middle leaf until I obtained just a little over 16 oz (1 lb) on the trigger pull before the sear leaf was engaged. This was surprisingly harder than it seems. The spring is thick and quite difficult to bend. I tried to maintain the same natural curve as best I could and just reduce the tension on the trigger and disconnector. This took a few attempts and finally I got it.
Then I did the same thing on the sear leaf. This time I was shooting for a combined total of 32 oz (2 lb) from both the disconnector/trigger leaf and the sear leaf being engaged at the same time. I came up a little high and decided to leave it at that. Going too low can cause a lot of safety issues so I errored on the side of safe.
While bending the sear leaf, I did change its angle a little as the mainspring housing interfered with where I was bending and basically negated any adjustment I was making. That is a good design for a safe stock gun, but not so good for tweakers like myself. In the end, I bent just above the mainspring housing on the sear leaf. Again, it took a few tries to get it right.
I reassembled the entire pistol and checked my trigger pull. 3 lb 10 oz.
I am very pleased. The trigger is quite nice. I'm sure it could be nicer if I had polished all of the internals and set up the overtravel screw, but I am just taking baby steps.
One thing that is important to note is that I also did a preliminary safety check on the gun. I made sure the grip safety as well as the manual safety still worked. I also rack the slide on an empty chamber a few times and checked to make sure the hammer didn't follow the slide or that the trigger didn't bound causing the hammer to fall. I also dropped the slide with the slide release the same way.
I haven't taken it to the range yet, but when I do, I will start with 1 round in the magazine and fire. Then if all is well, I will put 2 in the magazine and continue slowly working more rounds in until I am certain that the gun is safe.
Another important thing I should mention is that I will never ever carry this gun. I have no doubt about its internal safety, but having a reduce trigger isn't necessarily a good thing for a carry/defense weapon. And I am not just talking about legal liabilities should somebody get wind of a modified weapon being used in a defense shoot. You don't need a hair trigger on a gun like that.
Honestly, if the trigger were much less than it is now, I don't even think I would like it. Right now it is at the bottom of what I'd consider to be comfortable.
When I originally purchased my Colt, I was new and very naive to 1911. I had fired a few here and there but didn't really understand what made one different than the others.
I quickly realized that it is the little details that separate one from the next. The gun came with staked mil spec style sights. They were difficult to use. I had my local range mill new sights on the gun. Now it is much more user friendly on the visual end.
However, the trigger was kind of stiff and heavy. Additionally, I didn't care much for the kick. Compared to other 1911s I had fired, it kicked quite a bit. I asked around on one of the gun forums I frequent (I am up to 3 now I believe) about what could be done to remedy these issues.
I was given some really good advice and I followed it as best I could.
I had asked about changing out the recoil spring for a heavier recoil spring in an effort to reduce the recoil. I was informed that this would actually increase the perceived recoil and also open the gun up to cylcling issues as well as possibly limp wristing issues. Additionally, full size guide rods were deemed to be only beneficial if they were substantial in weight and even then it was arguable as to how much good they did.
I decided to avoid this dillemma by replacing the recoil spring with a stock Colt 16 lb spring. This way I know I am using what was intended.
I was also advised that I could replace the mainspring with a 19 lb spring for a reduced trigger pull. While a heavier mainspring will slow the slide down a bit and reduce felt recoil, I opted for this as the trigger pull was pretty high. I unfortunately did not measure it before I began my work.
The subject of firing pin stops also came up. The firing pin stop is not to be confused with the firing pin block. The stop is the part that holds the firing pin in the back of the slide. The original Browning design called for a squared firing pin block but for some reason or another, a bevelled firing pin block eventually found its way onto the gun and most guns to date have this bevelled style. This changes where the slide contacts the hammer. A higher point on the hammer axis/pivot gives more leverage and makes the job easier. The squared firing pin stop lowers this contact point and reduces the slide velocity by making the slide work harder to reset the trigger.
I purchased an EGW oversized firing pin stop and carefully fitted it and put an ever so slight break in the sharp 90 degree angle of the firing pin stop to prevent it from destroying the hammer. I was actually surprised at how easy the slide was to rack despite this upgrade. This part required a lot of fitting. In the end, I took my time and used a medium stone and was very pleased with how it came out although I did end up removing a lot of the finish from it while fitting it.
While I had the firing pin stop off of the gun, I also took the firing pin, the firing pin block, and extractor out of the gun and replaced the firing pin block with one coated in titanium nitride from Cylinder & Slide as part of their series 80 trigger pull reduction kit. This kit included 5 parts all coated in titanium nitride. Those are the gold parts you see on the gun. I was not trying to be fashionable. Although I do think it looks good on the gun.
I replaced the hammer pin and the sear pin as well as they were a part of the kit. The other two parts replaced from the kit were the two levers which disengage the firing pin block and allow the firing pin to move forward. This was a very easy kit to install and everything was drop in.
I also took it upon myself to replace the trigger which was a plastic trigger with a Cylinder & Slide "Videki" trigger. The videki trigger is a long style trigger with a serrated front and 3 holes. It is made out of aluminum and required fitting. Again I used a medium stone and took my time stoning each side of the trigger shoe until it slid into the frame. There is now no vertical play like there was with the factory trigger.
When holding the pistol, I always noticed that the sights naturally sat to the side instead of dead on like my Beretta 92FS does. It was then that I realized how important an arched mainspring housing was. Some people like them and some don't. I am a part of the definitely like them group.
The mainspring housing was replaced with an arched model. I went cheap on this and bought a no name part from CDNN and another no name part from Midway USA. One had a serrated back and the other checkered. Both were made out of steel and both required more fitting than I expected or would have liked. The problem was that the hole that holds the mainspring housing into the frame at the bottom wasn't quite lining up with my gun. I am going to blame the parts and not the gun. I drilled the holes ever so slightly larger and managed to get the checkered mainspring housing in. I like how it looks and feels. It also brings the sights right up to my eyes just like my Beretta 92FS does! I wish I would have known all of this prior to buying!
Lastly I replaced the grips with a cheap set from CDNN. I like how they look and feel but I do not like how they fit the gun. They do not fit the bushings that came on it very well and required some fitting. I don't like fitting grips. I don't know why, but I'd rather fit metal parts all day instead of grips. I got them onto the gun, but I may end up replacing them later with real Colt brand grips just to avoid any issues in the future. I will determine that later though after I have shot the gun some.
I didn't actually mind the original rubber grips either. They were black and looked kind of cool. But I am a big fan of wood so I figured why not? When I removed the rubber grips, they were stuck to the frame from what appeared to be dried solvent/lube. It was quite sticky.
All of the previous was primarily cosmetic or ergonomic. The trigger job was what really set the gun apart from its former self. I suppose trigger job is a bit of a misnomer. I didn't sand or polish any internals on the gun. There were no burrs to begin with and I felt that without a jig of some nature, I was bound to do more harm than good toying with stones and hardened parts.
The only part I adjusted was the sear spring. The sear spring is a cool part. It is just a leaf spring with 3 leafs on it. One controls the grip safety, another for the disconnector/trigger reset, and the last for the sear.
Looking at the back of the gun with the grip safety removed and the hammer strut out of the way, the grip safety leaf is the one on the right.
The one in the middle is the disconnector and trigger reset.
The one on the left is the sear leaf.
With a trigger pull gauge, I slowly bent the middle leaf until I obtained just a little over 16 oz (1 lb) on the trigger pull before the sear leaf was engaged. This was surprisingly harder than it seems. The spring is thick and quite difficult to bend. I tried to maintain the same natural curve as best I could and just reduce the tension on the trigger and disconnector. This took a few attempts and finally I got it.
Then I did the same thing on the sear leaf. This time I was shooting for a combined total of 32 oz (2 lb) from both the disconnector/trigger leaf and the sear leaf being engaged at the same time. I came up a little high and decided to leave it at that. Going too low can cause a lot of safety issues so I errored on the side of safe.
While bending the sear leaf, I did change its angle a little as the mainspring housing interfered with where I was bending and basically negated any adjustment I was making. That is a good design for a safe stock gun, but not so good for tweakers like myself. In the end, I bent just above the mainspring housing on the sear leaf. Again, it took a few tries to get it right.
I reassembled the entire pistol and checked my trigger pull. 3 lb 10 oz.
I am very pleased. The trigger is quite nice. I'm sure it could be nicer if I had polished all of the internals and set up the overtravel screw, but I am just taking baby steps.
One thing that is important to note is that I also did a preliminary safety check on the gun. I made sure the grip safety as well as the manual safety still worked. I also rack the slide on an empty chamber a few times and checked to make sure the hammer didn't follow the slide or that the trigger didn't bound causing the hammer to fall. I also dropped the slide with the slide release the same way.
I haven't taken it to the range yet, but when I do, I will start with 1 round in the magazine and fire. Then if all is well, I will put 2 in the magazine and continue slowly working more rounds in until I am certain that the gun is safe.
Another important thing I should mention is that I will never ever carry this gun. I have no doubt about its internal safety, but having a reduce trigger isn't necessarily a good thing for a carry/defense weapon. And I am not just talking about legal liabilities should somebody get wind of a modified weapon being used in a defense shoot. You don't need a hair trigger on a gun like that.
Honestly, if the trigger were much less than it is now, I don't even think I would like it. Right now it is at the bottom of what I'd consider to be comfortable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)