my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Simplex E-7 Collectors (Page 3)

This topic comprises 7 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7

Author Topic: Simplex E-7 Collectors Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-10-2014 09:27 AM                     The front shutter was a option on the Super Simplex as well on the brenkert BX60 I once saw the front shutter left in place with the anamorphic in front of it Also the width of the shutter blade had to be set for the focal length of the lens for it to work properly  |  IP: Logged Dick Prather Master Film Handler Posts: 259 From: Portland, OR, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 08-10-2014 09:38 PM                     Hi Gordon, Simplex Standard also had a front shutter add on. I have the front one piece plate to attach the shutter guard bracket to. The front shutter blades I saw were adjustable with no cooling fins. When I was using old style front shutter Standards I had shelves on the front wall with Super Panatars set in alignment bars on the shelves. Not the best lens but it worked. Dick  |  IP: Logged Jim Henk Master Film Handler Posts: 364 From: San Diego, CA Registered: Feb 2006 posted 08-11-2014 03:01 AM                     quote: Dick Prather People I knew loved oh hated the E-7. There was no in between. I don't think that's fair. The Rialto in South Pasadena had a pair in the booth. I loved #1, and hated #2, because #2 ate it's own oblique shutter drive gear about every six months, and had to be replaced. (which took three to four hours, at least) However, projector #1 was a perfect little gentleman, and never ever complained. The tech swore up and down that the shaft on #2 was not warped, by the way...  |  IP: Logged Tony Ratcliff Expert Film Handler Posts: 216 From: Madison, IN, USA Registered: Mar 2002 posted 08-11-2014 10:01 AM                     At my theatre, the E-7 in one house ate up the oblique gear about every 3-4 years. The other house never had a problem. My theory is that the angle of the projector caused it. The one that had no issues is at an pretty good down angle, so the that oblique shaft is about straight up and down. The projector that eats them is horizontal, so the gear shaft is at an angle.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-11-2014 12:38 PM                     quote: and hated #2, because #2 ate it's own oblique shutter drive gear about every six months, and had to [Mad] be replaced. (which took three to four hours, at least) Exactly! I bet the oblique shaft oil tubes were at least partially plugged up and not getting enough lube. Or the bore was scored or there was just not quite the correct oil clearance. Even the slightest drag will cause early gear failure at that point. The horizontal version was just marginally better. The only weak spot in a Super was the G-87 double bevel gear. Easy to replace in under an hour. Dick - Gordon... What projector didn't have a front shutter add on in those days? They all pretty much did either by original manufacturer or after market parts. Mark  |  IP: Logged Charles A. Petty Film Handler Posts: 10 From: Eureka, CA/Humboldt, USA Registered: Nov 2005 posted 08-11-2014 01:57 PM                     Not an E-7, but here is one of those little Ashcraft lamps for sale on ebay. Search for "Antique Motiograph - Simplex 35mm Cinema Projector"  |  IP: Logged Rick Raskin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1100 From: Manassas Virginia Registered: Jan 2003 posted 08-11-2014 05:16 PM                     Only $1999.99 What a bargain. Consider that we have folks here dumpstering the same stuff. I have a Motiograph K that I'd sell for $1999.98 but you gotta pay the shipping.  |  IP: Logged Robert Koch Film Handler Posts: 93 From: Williams Ca USA Registered: Apr 2006 posted 08-11-2014 08:10 PM                     The E7 wAS a great design in many ways, the intermittent movement especially. I used to love working on them. The cam end play adjustment gave you a real tool to make them real quiet, provided there was no slop between the cam pin and star wheel.Great movement. Then the profane oblique gear driving the shutter shaft. If you didnt plACE the framer position every few days you would soon run into an intolerable situation. The vertical shaft modication wasnt much better. Who can say anything bad about a Super, Steve, I enjoyed your picture, and I thought I was old enough[92] to have seen everything, but I dont recognize the lamp.  |  IP: Logged Steve Matz Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 672 From: Billings, Montana, USA Registered: Sep 2003 posted 08-12-2014 12:08 AM                     People have to remember that this model projector 1st appeared 77yrs ago. The amount of Hours they ran Daily/7 Days a Week back in the late 30s,40s,& 50s was staggering compared to what Movie House Projection later became. Remember back in the day they had a Cartoon,NewsReel,Serial,2 Reelers and at least 2 Features. These Projectors in venues where they showed Matinees and Evening Shows 7days a week might see 12hr days/Nights for these units. The Modern Film Projectors that showed one single feature maybe twice Nightly were probably running a 1/3rd of what the Old School was Running Back then.I think the reliability of the Projectors played a big part with the Projectionist. If you had the same caring competent Projectionist in your theater for years than Chances are the projectors will have significantly less problems than the theater that changed Projectionists Frequently and one may have maintained the Equipment better than the Replacement or you got the complete incompetent that was too lazy to do anything but collect his paycheck.Did Simplex make a perfect Projector? HELL NO! Nobody did; But to see some of these Old Relics still churning away with Minimal Replacements Parts available any longer is still a Credit to their Durability. I think it is quite amazing that the Products (not just projection Equipment) made back in the 30's,40's and even 50's was certainly built with a different work philosophy then anything you see made today. Before Corporations became Greedy Money Monsters; The Things you bought back in the day were meant to last decades or even for Life. Now your lucky to get a 90 day Warranty on anything. I would bet the Quality Control (although primitive) back then still had less Failures/Recalls,etc. than what you have today even with the Highest Tech Equipment out there.Although American Worth Ethic has always thought 9 to 5 going back decades.People who were dedicated to their Jobs turned out Quality Products because they were instilled with Work Ethics that have pretty much disappeared from Mfgering. Does a Robot have a Work Ethic? BTW: XENON LAMP is Japanese NIVICO HX...I believe a Division of FUGI at one time...  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-12-2014 10:41 AM                     the only issue that modern theatres a single machine runs the entire print with no duty cycle between reels I never liked the super the E7 projectors just ran and ran When I first joined the union in Toronto the majority of independents were E7 and they caused very little grief  |  IP: Logged Dave Macaulay Film God Posts: 2321 From: Toronto, Canada Registered: Apr 2001 posted 08-12-2014 01:32 PM                     I agree the E7 was an excellent machine, but when platters came in the oiling issue kinda killed them. Too easy to just start it and forget, it and never pump the oil. Tossed out a young ton of E7, Super, lamphouse, platter, etc. parts a couple of years ago.  |  IP: Logged Rick Raskin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1100 From: Manassas Virginia Registered: Jan 2003 posted 08-12-2014 03:10 PM                     I always liked running Supers. Lots of the old houses in DC had them. XLs were popular too. Most E7s were in Virginia houses owned by Neighborhood Theaters. IIRC.  |  IP: Logged Jim Cassedy Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1661 From: San Francisco, CA Registered: Dec 2006 posted 08-12-2014 03:48 PM                     quote: Charles A. Petty here is one of those little Ashcraft lamps for sale on ebay. Well, just for clarification, the "little Ashcraft" lamp pictured in the e-bay listing is not the same type as in the pictures I posted. The lamphouse in my photos were Ashcraft "C7"'s and were perhaps just a bit smaller than a Peerless Magnarc. I don't recall the amperage I ran those lamps at, but I believe we trimmed the lamphouse with 7 & 8mm carbons. WoW ~ Actual Photo! The lamphouse in the e-bay listing is an ashcraft "Cyclex" - - a much smaller lamphouse which operated at 19volts/55amps >> AC << at a frequency of 96hz, which was supplied by a small rotary converter usually mounted in the booth near the projector. Interestingly, the Cyclex lamphouses did not use a "negative" carbon, but instead used a pair of two 7mm "positive" carbons. (For those unfamiliar with running carbon arcs, the tips of "Positive" carbons were manufactured with a 'point' on the end, sort of like a pencil. "Negative" carbon ends were flat, like a stick of new chalk. It was common in "AC" arcs, to use two pointed "positive" carbons in the lamphouse, since the flat end of the 'negative' carbon would only eventually burn to point anyway when used in in an AC lamp) The Cyclex was discussed in another Film Tech thread here recently. BONUS PHOTO: A CYCLEX Lamphouse & 96hz Rotary Converter  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-12-2014 04:11 PM                        So, with the AC lamp, do both positive carbons burn as fast as they do in a DC lamphouse (4" per reel or thereabouts for 8mm positives)? Or does each one burn at half the normal rate? If they both burn quickly, the carbon costs would probably kill most theatres....  |  IP: Logged Jim Cassedy Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1661 From: San Francisco, CA Registered: Dec 2006 posted 08-12-2014 04:45 PM                     Scott, I'm going to guess they burned at half (or less) the normal rate. Ashcraft advertised these lamphouses as being very economical to operate, as you can see from this 1939 advertisement. A chart in the same ad claims the operating cost as being 10cents/hr, as opposed to 24cents & 18cents/hr for hi & low intensity type arcs respectivly  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 7 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.