Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: comments about the speco makeup table reviews.

This is topic comments about the speco makeup table reviews. in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=002161

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 04-15-2001, 11:31 AM:

Just read the reviews and wanted to make some comments. I like both tables for their own reasons. The wooden ones I like to use to break down films with because while the film is pulling off I can be wrapping the head back around the other reel using the makeup spindal. Saves a little time that way. If I remember right the spindle on the makeup is spring loaded and can be adjusted for tension. When I came to this theater we had four of those tables now we have two after I stripped them and made two fully working ones.

The metal table, ours is grey, we got when our company built a new theater here. I use this one for making films up on platters off of 6000 ft reels. Like that much better than trying to use the wooden ones. Breaking down on them is a little annoying especialy if you are using 6000 ft reels. The thing will start slipping as the reel fills up. supposedly the newer ones have been remedied of this problem by changing the pully design. Need to look in to getting that for mine.

Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 04-15-2001, 01:13 PM:

I dunno, the new SPECO MUT looks a lot like a Christie MUT to me. Maybe its just the picture but it looks the same to me. I have no problem with the Christie MUTso its not a bad thing, I just think they could have come up with an origional design.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 04-15-2001, 03:24 PM:

I have used both and (not picking on you Sean) as for an original design, just look how many platters all have the same basic design in general. The old standard Christie MUT (they have a new one now) is very simple, reliable and there isn't much of anything I would change if it was my call. SPECO has done an excellent job with their new table, as it performs just like the Christie does...and I like that!

My major beef with the old SPECO MUTs was the fact that I never saw one with keeper rollers. No way in hell would I run film over them at varying twists and turns without those keepers! Fortunately, the district manager at the time (about 12 years ago) was officed in the booth and saw my concern and generously ordered them. I then no longer had any real issues with the older style MUTs. However, a vertical design is MUCH more desirable for many reasons. Most importantly, the film barely twists at all, you can put an overloaded reel of film on the spindle and not worry about having 4 hands as Ian pointed out and you can even use 16,000 foot reels on them (load only, never for breakdown). In a pinch, paying out to a sold out house direct off of the MUT to save the half hour or so of loading time saved me many times.

Posted by George Roher (Member # 91) on 04-15-2001, 09:56 PM:

I don't care for the old Speco MUTs at all. I hate not being able to adjust the height of the rollers. I've had to adjust the height of the table whenever moving it from one platter to another. This involved getting down on the floor and either screwing the feet all the way in or all the way out. And for one platter in particular, the table is not high enough even with the feet all the way out, so it must be propped up with something. The ones I've worked with don't have keepers either, which is another big annoyance. The new ones look much better.

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 04-16-2001, 12:15 AM:

I prefer using the bones of the old CFS tables. They are a pile of crap, this is true. But I have modified some of ours by building a new table top, and re-locating the spindles so it makes a nice portable film building bench, as well as being capable of handling 2 each 6,000 foot reels.

I also made them electrically compatible to the platters they were being used with.

After the projectionists used them, they liked them so well that they put the remaining tables (SPECO, XETRON, and STRONG) behind the screen somewhere to collect cobwebs.

Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 04-24-2001, 04:36 PM:

I received this via email. It concerns the LP270 Old review.

Ian

fair enough, it totally sucks. But there is tension on the payout spindle.
The mechanism is not brilliant but it does work if adjusted correctly.
I repaired a pair about 2 months ago. both payouts were, like the review one
I expect, totally freewheeling. This is not good when combined with the
horizontal reel. It's not good with a vertical reel either, but spinning
back from the floor is better than dealing with a ring of film on the table.
I had never seen one before, and just got curious about the spring on the
payout shaft assembly. Designed by someone apparently unfamiliar with
friction, it isn't immediately obvious how it should work.
Anyway, just to be fair it does have a (poor) tension system. Still crap
though.

1) One needs to remove the takeup drive thingy (plate? shaft?) to remove the
top and change the light bulb, clean the powerstat, or access contraband
stored inside.
2) The drive thingy is not keyed to the stub shaft, so skill is required
when attaching it so as to avoid eventually sawing through the motor stub
shaft with the setscrew. (see #1) The setscrew must also be regularly
tightened or it will cut a ring sooner or later.
3) The feed spindle tension is poorly designed and cannot be adjusted during
use.
4) The fuseholder is a piece of crap and luckily is also used on some old
crap in the back so I don't have to try and find new caps yet when they
break.

DW Macaulay dwmacaulay@home.com

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 04-25-2001, 02:30 AM:

Just clarifying here, but DW Macaulay did give you permission to post a private email on a public site...right Ian?