posted 12-17-2004 06:54 PM                    

quote: Possible New Moderator

---

Could someone post some pics of the Apogee please? k.thx.bye.

---

posted 12-19-2004 08:19 AM                    

quote: Steve Guttag

---

I'll take an oil bath machine over a belt drive any day and twice on Sunday....and yes you can keep your Ernemann things too. Another lousy design.

---

posted 12-19-2004 04:48 PM                    

quote: Steve Guttag

---

The only belt I'll tolerate is the motor to projector OR Soundhead

---

Steve, thats a load of crap! Belts are more efficient if utilized properly and completely eliminate the need for a messy oil bath which I guess you love so much. There is only one more belt in the Christie than on a Mellennuim. Big wah who. All belts should get replaced yearly no matter the make of machine so whats one more belt.... its no big deal. All belt drive machines generate some mess form the belts wearing but the Simplex holds top honors in that catagory with the oil mixing with the belt compound on the 5 stars. I don't have much belt shedding in any of the Christies that I service. I use Film-Guard on them before they get installed .

quote: Steve Guttag

---

Mark, I'm surprised at your endorsement of Christie's projector

---

In spite of Strongs improvements(and unimprovements)I've still never been a big fan of the Simplex X-L. Its an OK projector and there are certainly a large number of them in the field that can't and never will perform within SMPTE specs over the long haul. The quality just has never been there from the first machine! Those cheesy cast alumnium sprocket assys that are a pain in the ass to clean and still use bronze bushings that over time chew up the sprocket shafts..... yea, really great design! Even the Century with its sprocket shaft bushings was better in this regard. The tiny Simplex star and cam that cannot maintain accuracy over only 5 years time in normal multiplex environments, the tiny cam pin that wears flat faster than a hen can peck.... they sure sound like a hen pecking. I can go on and on about the literal hundreds of them which I have worked on and or overhauled.... should I bring up the huge variances that are in all the main castings wall thickness over the years, some of the older black ones are as thin as 3/32" up front? Ok, Strong did fix the casting dilemma....well done too.

Yes, the Christie right now is a far superior machine belts or not over the long haul and for less money too. Its performance on screen even through all its different gestations has always been consistant and much better than the X-L. There is one Christie S/N 23 thats on one of my routes.... sounds like hell but puts out an excellent ultra steady picture. This machine has only broken down once since it was first installed... lets see.... over 15 years ago and probably closer to 20.

The Christie has a better movement, better turrett, better sprocket assembly, and a far sturdier main frame made from 1/2" thick alumnium plate. OK, the change-over sucks to have to work on it. The fit and finish is second to none, makes Strong products look and feel cheap because Strong products are cheaply made.

As for checking sound heads, of course its always done... how else would I know that 99% of the time everyting at the factory is being done correctly......

P.S. The DP-70's that leave our shop ARE direct drive . The motors also automatically jog to the thread position.



Mark

posted 12-19-2004 06:04 PM                    

quote:

---

teve, thats a load of crap! Belts are more efficient if utilized properly and completely eliminate the need for a messy oil bath which I guess you love so much.

---

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen

---

In spite of Strongs improvements(and unimprovements)I've still never been a big fan of the Simplex X-L.

---

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen

---

Its an OK projector and there are certainly a large number of them in the field that can't and never will perform within SMPTE specs over the long haul.

---

quote:

---

Those cheesy cast alumnium sprocket assys that are a pain in the ass to clean and still use bronze bushings that over time chew up the sprocket shafts..... yea, really great design!

---

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen

---

Even the Century with its sprocket shaft bushings was better in this regard.

---

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen

---

Simplex star and cam that cannot maintain accuracy over only 5 years time in normal multiplex environments, the tiny cam pin that wears flat faster than a hen can peck.... they sure sound like a hen pecking

---

And yet, Century intermittent rebuilds consistantly for the last 25-years I've been involved with both are 10:1...more century intermittents gone bad. Is the Century intermittent more robust...absolutely...does it get oiled properly...many times not...it is typical to find orange residue once the case is cracked. If the Century intermittent was used in an oil bath machine...it would be near indestructable.

Ya know, if Christie made their projector with gears and an oil bath...it would have been a much better machine. Their precision is there but their dive system is not. I've had too many Ultramittent failures as well.

Help yourself to your belt-drive machines...I'm sticking with my oil-bath Simplexes. Look on the bright side...we won't deplete each other's equipment supply.

Steve