Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: New Christie P-35GP Pulley Kit

This is topic New Christie P-35GP Pulley Kit 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=008954

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-13-2007, 08:55 PM:

I installed one of these kits (a pre-production sample) just a couple of days ago and man what a difference. The new system lowers flutter to unbeliveably low levels. This would also mean that older machines retrofitted with the new kit will actually play back SRD tracks at low error rates where before many would not play back at all because jitter was just way too high.

The new pulleys are made of injection molded composite material of some sort also it has some sort of lubricant in it which should make the belt drive system run very clean. These pulleys and the round tooth timming belts make for one heck of a smooth machine. Because we switch to round tooth timming belts every pulley in the P-35 gets replaced with these new pulleys. Christie spent a small fortune developing these pulleys because of all the molds needed and these pulleys have already been extensively field tested.

We've had Cine-X 35's in and running for going on three years on the original factory belts... which show no wear at all. This system is just an expanded version of the belt/pulley system in that machine. While I don't have any pricing on the kit yet I was told that it is going to be very inexpensive. All in all if the pulleys hold up well it will be a very good upgrade to any P-35. Install time was just a little over an hour.

The belt kit as supplied.

As installed on a late model P-35C which we had already converted to a P-35GP.

Mark

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 10-13-2007, 09:53 PM:

Cool!! About 20 years too late, though. Louis

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-13-2007, 11:10 PM:

Christie had this in their ShoWest booth last spring. Did nobody else see it then?

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 10-13-2007, 11:37 PM:

Louis, it is actually closer to 30-years too late....and I have zero confidence that they have the solution yet. How many times do they need to reinvent this thing? How many times do they obsolete existing systems?

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 10-14-2007, 07:56 AM:

Does this kit negate the need for belt dressing?

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-14-2007, 09:06 AM:

Ken, Yes! But you mean to say you weren't using Film Guard on your belts?

I agree with you other guys its comming along way too late... Its kinda tounge in cheek for me because I sugested this to Bevan Wright well over a decade ago.

I was told by the guys at Christie when I was out there a couple of of months ago that the technology to mold the parts to this accuracy didn't exist even 5 years ago and that all the metric round tooth belts are now available off the shelf. Had they attempted to produce these parts even 5 years ago the pulleys woulda been metal and the belts woulda been custom stuff. It woulda been just way too expensive to pull off.

Brad,

Yes... I first saw it at Showest 2 years ago and I seem to remember posting pics here. There is also a composite curved runner available and that was also shown back then as well.

Steve,
I will be installing a few more of these where I will be able to take the time do a before and after W&F check. The kit I installed was put in because the machine is in an analog only house and it had audible W&F. The kit took care of the problem. Also another way to tell that it does work is to lightly squeeze the stabilizer dancer rollers together with your fingers. With the old belts you can feel the teeth of the old square tooth belts engaging and disengaging... kinda like alot of sprocket tooth ripple. This problem occured when they went to the double sided belt.... the older gearbox type Christies don't suffer this problem. With the new kit that ripple effect is gone. The projector also ran quite a bit quieter.

Mark

Posted by Phil Ranucci (Member # 3820) on 10-14-2007, 03:05 PM:

And what is the cost of the kit?

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-14-2007, 03:28 PM:

Phil,
I have no idea of cost but I was told it will be very inexpensive to purchase.

On another note at least Christie hasn't stood still on continuing refinement of film products as have other US projector mannufacturers. I think thats something to be said for a company that is way larger in the D-Cinema field than they are in film.

Mark

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 10-14-2007, 06:41 PM:

Oh, give it some time. These will be fluttering, too. [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 10-14-2007, 07:52 PM:

I'm anxious to try one of these kits. Makes me wish I had some Christies in my area.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-21-2007, 01:19 PM:

quote: Tim Reed
Oh, give it some time. These will be fluttering, too.

Oh, you must mean like the 5 star flutter???

According to Jim Dukes the suggested list will be $250.00. Delivery will start in one month. That price is a bargain in and of itself and about 1/4 the price of a new set of alumnium pulley/idler/belt set.

Mark

Posted by Jeremy Weigel (Member # 4208) on 10-21-2007, 06:10 PM:

Are there any modifications that have to be done to a P35C? New holes drilled and tapped? I see in your pics that there are now 3 belts and 3 or 4 tensioners. And does the kit utilize the existing shutter gear box or does it require one to replace it with the newer $900.00+ version?

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-21-2007, 07:00 PM:

quote: Steve Guttag
How many times do they need to reinvent this thing? How many times do they obsolete existing systems?

In response to Steves comments which I missed: They haven't obsoleted the present P-35GP design at all.. it is indeed the exact same belt paths, number of pulleys and idlers... just made from a different material, and better metric round tooth belts... longer lasting and at a huge savings. One of the rare cases where cheaper can be better. The same style round tooth metric belts and alumnium pulleys somewhat cured the 5-Star of the exact same flutter problem and very short pulley and belt life!

To answer Jeremy's questions...

This kit won't work on the 35C with the shutter gearbox as-is, that projector main frame would require extensive mods... which all though expensive is not an impossibility, a new motor mount also needs to be fitted as well because the 35GP motor is mounted much lower than the 35C motor. The 35C's that I did were actually very early or first generation 35GP's that were belt drive shutter but still had the gear drive intermittent. I had converted them to the current version of the 35GP about a year ago when the original pulleys finally entered oblivion and they basically couldn't run any longer... then we did the new pulley kit on the sole analog house at this location to get rid of all existing flutter which was somewhat audible... not any more though.

Generally converting your 35C's to the GP version gets pretty expensive but the new belt kit might help keep the costs a bit more in line. I could put together a price based on the new kit and necessary machining but keep in mind that you'd also need the jack shaft and shutter drive assemblies, the new curved trap assy is also preferable to do at the same time.
Mark

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 10-21-2007, 08:38 PM:

After much thought, the fact that they CHARGE anything for this is insulting. I cannot even count how many penthouse readers I had to sell to those who had Christie basement readers. They have more than paid for their (partially) non functional digital sound projectors.

This should be available INSTALLED at no charge. Louis

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-21-2007, 09:31 PM:

Louis,

Most of the SRD basement readers that I know of... Edwards had the most... were all taken back by Christie a very long time ago and credit or compensation issued... I know Monte can verfy this as happenning. Not sure what happened at your end.

Mark

Posted by Tim Lewis (Member # 4110) on 10-22-2007, 05:43 AM:

Mark, am i correct in the assumption that the P35GP is essentially the same machine as a P35GPS? are there any major differences?

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 10-22-2007, 11:39 AM:

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Oh, you must mean like the 5 star flutter???

Christie is in a flutter class all by itself. [Razz]

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 10-22-2007, 11:41 AM:

FWIW, when I did service Christies, I never had any digital basement readers, so I can't comment on them, but I never noticed any audible flutter in the analog sound. What would cause that?

Regarding the new pulley kit, does each pulley use the same bearing as the old version? I remember I was changing out bearings like crazy on those machines. Are the bearings still expected to wear like that with this new kit?

[ 10-22-2007, 01:38 PM: Message edited by: Ken Lackner ]

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-22-2007, 06:32 PM:

quote: Ken Lackner
Regarding the new pulley kit, does each pulley use the same bearing as the old version? I remember I was changing out bearings like crazy on those machines. Are the bearings still expected to wear like that with this new kit?

Looks to be the same bearings. You can go through bearings for several reasons... 1. Belts are too tight, 2. Pulleys are worn and you're generating alot of belt particles. These particles get into the bearings and wear em out in a hurry... just like on a 5-Star. Out here where its very dry bearings with rubber seals are just about mandatory or the grease in the bearing drys up in a short time, even sitting in stock on the parts shelves. If use bearings with rubber seals you take care of at least two of those problems above right off the bat.... Bearings with rubber seals also works well on Tims favorite 5 Star Flutter reproducer but just don't use them on the sound drum on any reproducer for that matter.

I also forgot to mention that this pulley kit is also available in 50 hz and that each individual pulley is also sold seperately.

Mark

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 10-22-2007, 07:06 PM:

Hey, I'm an old DeVry suitcase man, all the way!

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-22-2007, 07:58 PM:

Ok, I will confess to owning an XD.... and a couple of Phillips FP56, and a couple of Super Simplex's... some Western Electric stuff... really way way too much stuff around here!

Mark

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 10-22-2007, 08:22 PM:

I've never used anything but rubber sealed bearings on a Christie.

I use sheilded (not sealed) bearings on the sound drum in a 5 Star, but just out of curiosity, why should you not use sealed?

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 10-22-2007, 08:38 PM:

Funny that ernamann and cinemecanica hasn't had belt and pulley issues

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-22-2007, 08:44 PM:

quote: Ken Lackner
I use sheilded (not sealed) bearings on the sound drum in a 5 Star, but just out of curiosity, why should you not use sealed?

The sealed bearings can place a drag on the drum and it generally won't get to freewheeling speed.

quote: Gordon McLeod
Funny that ernamann and cinemecanica hasn't had belt and pulley issues

Neither of those brands used a double sided belt but they sure had their share of other problems.

Mark

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 10-23-2007, 12:25 AM:

(yea, did that once: did a 5 star rebuild with the shields on...didn't work too well since the drum had serious drag and the drag on the film would cause the lower snubber roller to pull up tight-and with it tight, started to seriously put base side scratches on the film. Found out to take the inside shields off, and wash out the grease inside the bearings with a solvent, then relubed the bearings with a synthetic oil so they'd spin a lot more free'er)

I remember V5's having doozie sorts of problems with the main belt loving to break when wanting to. But, I do think it had to do with the rollers that surrounded the INT assembly drive sprocket and the cheap aluminum sprocket wheels that would make the belts fail on a regular basis.

Yet, once in a while a motor drive belt would give out, but not as frequent as the main belt.

Why at first, I'd shy away from a belt driven machine compared to a gear driven like Simplex or Century..until I began to work with the P35 units and found that their belt path stucture was better to work with - just had to get used to the shutter drive belt.

-Monte

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 10-23-2007, 08:23 PM:

actually the ernaman 12 has a double sided belt
as to the vic 5 we have no breakage or pulley problems the belts get changed once a year

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 10-24-2007, 07:17 AM:

The Ernamann 15 is also a double-sided belt setup.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-24-2007, 09:37 AM:

All the Ernemnns I've seen use whats closer to an L size but metric belt and on those models if the double sided belt is driving soundhead sprockets as the Christie is and you measured for flutter you'd probably find it at a much lower frequency. The XL sized belts like Christie used for years generated their flutter frequency in the midrange (dialog) or most audible part of the spectrum.

Mark

Posted by Frank Dubrois (Member # 3042) on 10-28-2007, 01:37 AM:

Will this set work for the M35 as well?

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 10-28-2007, 09:37 AM:

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
On another note at least Christie hasn't stood still on continuing refinement of film products as have other US projector mannufacturers. I think thats something to be said for a company that is way larger in the D-Cinema field than they are in film.

Ah and here it is...you seem to like to see continual improvement...very admirable, for sure. So because a manufacturer makes a product SO bad, it has to continually be improved to make it start to come up to par with other products.

Just what hasen't that projector hasn't be changed due to poor design? Seriously...what is original on that thing since the the P-35? What is the upgrade path? How expensive is it for an end user to have upgrading right along to keep it current.

Certainly the Simplex and Century projectors did evolve...over 50-100 years and changed models along the way...not just nudge it a bit here, a bit there.

They've changed most every part on the thing...a virtue to some...an admission of guilt to others. How many times have they fooled with something so simple as the changeover douser?...How many times have they fooled with the soundhead? Christ the Simplex 5-star....nobody's "proud" product designed in an era of mono sound (for optical) out tracked the Christie until maybe this generation some 30-years later...note, the 5-Star used the dreaded XL, "I'll pluck you a tune", belt style too.

The shutter...yes they improved it...20-years after the problem was identified. If a chain bought this machine (in quantity) with the bowtie blade...how much would they need to invest to correct such a glaring mistake?

Have the other US manufacturers put as much time and effort into improving their designs? Well no...they didn't NEED to...they did evolve them a bit...sometimes for better, sometimes for worse. Strong did bring out the Apogee...an evolution of the Simplex...with mixed results...the picture is darn steady on the ones I've seen. The sound portion still needs improvement. If film is still major player in exhibition in 20-30 years, then they'll have as much time as Christie to iron those kinks out.

If you want to talk about constantly advancing a machine...you really need to look at Kinoton...the FP20-FP30 line has constantly improved...from a very high starting point. They certainly are not perfect in all respects (I'm no fan of their turrets)...but in the actual presentation of the movie...everything seems to keep getting better. Their soundheads have improved too. But not from apologetic, "oops we screwed up" standpoints but from "we have something good, now we have something better."

It is no small wander you like the DCinema machines...they constantly need more $$$$ to improve them from their not-good-enough beginings. Except those will come with hefty price tags as new projectors replace old ones...not just blade kits or belt kits or pulley kits or soundhead kits or changeover kits or motor mount kits or....we you get the picture.

Steve

Posted by Frank Dubrois (Member # 3042) on 11-01-2007, 02:49 PM:

bump Mark....BUMP.

Will this work on the M35GPS as well? The configuration looks a little on the P35, so will this set work or did Christie make another set for the M35?

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 11-01-2007, 10:09 PM:

Frank,

I'm not familiar with the M35... what is the basic diffrerence or please post pics of the belt side and I can tell you yes or no.

Mark

Posted by Tristan Lane (Member # 1169) on 11-03-2007, 05:22 AM:

Frank is referring to this fabulous piece of machinery:

Cast-in sprocket assemblies, and an "economical" trap/gate assembly. Commonly used by Carmike Theaters. Christie took the worst aspects of a Century projector, and combined them with a P35 to get this low-priced unit. The one benefit of this thing is that it's easy to attach a Kelmar changeover to the top of it. The rest of it............well.......is a little shameful and sad.

I'm pretty sure the kit will work, since the the belt path is the same.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 11-03-2007, 10:34 AM:

Thats definately not what Carmike uses around this neck of the woods. Thats also a Kelmar turret and gate assy. on there... not necessarily inexpensive either.

Mark

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 11-03-2007, 10:35 AM:

Many Carmikes did use those, including my theatre theatre before the digital conversion.

Posted by Andres Briano (Member # 4621) on 02-23-2008, 06:21 PM:

I service 24 Christie heads in Chile and 62 in Argentina. The first ones installed in 1996 and the last ones in 2005. There´s not much that remains the same between those first ones and the last ones installed. Let me put it this way: I have had to do different training manuals for those different theatres, because not much applied to both!
This whole thread makes me think a lot about computers and the number one software developer: Mr.Gates´ company. It´s like capitalism in it´s finest expression. "We make a bad product. We put it out on the market before it´s ready and well after we have plans for a new retrofit that will render this one obsolete".
I agree with Louis. They should be free. Keep in mind that between air shipping and customs duties of banana republics such as ours, we at least duplicate the price tag on the retrofits. [sex]

I do find comfort, however, in the fact that this is nothing compared to the constant upgrading that D-Cinema is going to make us victims of.

Long Live Film!
Andrés

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-01-2008, 10:53 AM:

Feb. 29: The good news is that the belt kits are now shipping, our order for some 20 of them has already been shipped out. I will be installing 4 more of them next week and I will post pictures and such of the conversion process. The projectors I will be converting have seen over 12 years of service... still have the original imtermittents too! Lets see a late production Century or Simplex go that long... good luck finding one [uhoh]

.

Contact your Christie Dealer for more information if you need any of these new belt/pulley kits.

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 03-01-2008, 01:27 PM:

The better challenge would be to see ANY Christie projector go more than a few weeks without *something* happening.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-01-2008, 02:30 PM:

quote: Tim Reed
The better challenge would be to see ANY Christie projector go more than a few weeks without *something* happening.

P-35's that rarely get service are all over the place in this neck of the woods. I've had machines go as long as 5 years without a belt change(Go BYU!). The round tooth belts in the Cine X-35's in St. George are now going on 3-1/2 years in a grind situation too... I suspect we will get 5 years out of a set. Should be similar with the new pulley kit and round tooth belts on the P-35.

Mark

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 03-01-2008, 03:25 PM:

I inherited 10 of these POS last year, and they are nothing but trouble. Belts are a given, but there's always a shutter bearing, or pulley, or changeover douser, or lateral guide, or sound drum bearing, or aperture motor crapping out on these things. I've offered to pull 10 Centurys out of closed locations and replace the P-35s FOR FREE, just to get rid of them! [Mad]

To be absolutely honest, I have had less trouble out of 8, 30 year-old, PRO-35's that I service in this area!

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 03-01-2008, 07:19 PM:

These days Mark is defending these Dresden Dolls at the drop of a hat.

Like Tim, I'm not a believer although I've gone to some Century/Cinemark screens recently and the picture was still enough I kept thinking they upgraded to D-Cinema.

It's ironic if they finally got the film projector to work flawlessly just in time to replace it with another Christie device. Hopefully this time, it won't be another 28 year cycle to perfection.

[ 03-02-2008, 11:55 AM: Message edited by: Sam D. Chavez ]

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-01-2008, 07:32 PM:

While I've yet to pitch a Simplex XL/35 or its varients, nor a Century C, H or SA...NONE of the P35s installed in this area, by any theatre chain early, mid 80s are still running. And I mean they were literally thrown away and replaced by Century or Simplex, depending on the exhibitor.

The P-35 remains a throw away projector....look at all of the things you can throw away on it to keep it current. Don't get me wrong. I applaud the continual improvement but it HAS needed continual improvement.

Posted by Danial Simmonds (Member # 4638) on 03-03-2008, 05:25 AM:

Im shocked! A remarkable change... Ive tried the upgrade kit too! it really makes a difference.. Still cant wait to install a digital cinema haha...

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-03-2008, 10:41 AM:

quote: Steve Guttag
The P-35 remains a throw away projector....

In all fairness lets not leave out all the X-L's that have warped main castings because they've been subjected to the heat from a big arc lamp for too many years... and the improperly machined Century SA's that I have tossed in the junk bin all to be scrapped out.

quote: Danial Simmonds
Im shocked! A remarkable change...

Yup! Works really good doesn't it.... All of our customers machines wil be getting them over the next few months. Do you have basement SRD readers? If so what improvement did you see in error rate? One person told me the error rate is cut in half. I so do agree with Sam however... its about time the P-35 is perfected.

BTW: Part number is GT-2 and the List price is just under $300.00. Of course we sell it for much less than that....

Mark

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 03-03-2008, 02:07 PM:

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
lets not leave out all the X-L's that have warped main castings because they've been subjected to the heat from a big arc lamp for too many years... and the improperly machined Century SA's that I have tossed

Yes, let's leave them out. This thread is about Christie P-35s. FWIW, those of which you speak are but a handful. Christie's involve each and every unit.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-03-2008, 04:58 PM:

quote: Tim Reed
Christie's involve each and every unit.

Tim... hardly... now as a tech thats working for one of the larger repair companies(?) you also don't want to be misleading regarding any brand of equipment... In reality the only P-35's that cannot be easily repaired are the straight gate versions of which no spare gate parts exist at Christie. Although those of us who are a bit more resourceful than the larger repair companies are still able to maintain them with little trouble.

Now in all fairness and since I like to discuss all brands...I'll mention all the goofy versions of X-L straight gates... mainly the Cineplex Version and several others that Strong built whose parts are also NLA.... Again being resoursful pays off on these too! Tim... no brand is foolproof my friend!

At least we all have to hand it to Christie for not going to sleep on the P-35 as other companies have on their slow selling projecton products.

Mark

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 03-04-2008, 09:03 AM:

No, I wouldn't want to mislead anyone. That's why I wouldn't give a P-35 to my worst enemy! You're the only one who's misleading people, pal, and nearly everyone knows it.

Are you trying to apply for a job with Christie or something? FWIW, I give credit where credit's due. And I've been in this business a lot longer than you have, so don't tell me how to do my job. I know you think you're the greatest tech to come down the pike and what you say - regardless of whether it's right or wrong - must be taken as gospel, but there are many minds here greater than thou, and they seem to disagree with your assessment.

So, if you can depart from your ego for a moment, please tell me where I've given the impression that I think certain lines of projectors are the best ever? Hummmm? I don't think I've stated anything to that effect. I've always said Christie has winners with AW-3R platters and SLC consoles, but that's the extent of it. I wouldn't give two hoots for the rest of their film equipment. Further, I've always loved Centurys and Super Lumexes, so that transcends the circumstances of my employment. Neither do I make or design them.

You have a lot of room to talk about being forthright and resourceful. How about misleading people on, oh... let's say shipping practices or lack thereof? That's a woefully poor use of ones resources. I'll just leave this part at that. Feel free to PM me for details. If you need reminding, I still have all the emails.

Regardless, why don't you just start another thread about how much you hate Strong, and stop the drivel and whining in all the other posts? You keep directing your anger towards me like I run the company or something. I'm just a tech in the field.

[edit: spelling correction]

[ 03-04-2008, 01:52 PM: Message edited by: Tim Reed ]

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-04-2008, 05:17 PM:

Tim,

You can think what you like... I really could care less. But we do agree on two things... Century and Super Lumex's. I also happen to like Strong Switchers.. excellent product if properly implemented at install! Beyond that stuff not much else they make though... Do I hate Strong... absolutely not. Strong has been a big help on many things over the years, especially when I was doing dailies... but they have also dropped the ball way too many times over the years with theor parts department being the worst of the worst for shipping you the wrong parts(not that Christie hasn't either). Since Christie did some "house cleaning" a few years back the company overall has improved incredibly well and I have yet to see the ball dropped... I think Brad would agree! Strong could use a good jolt of the same "house cleaning" plan in certain areas.

Overall Christie is just the more responsive of the companies for me which is why I side more with them. Their present product is not only well performing but its reasonably priced and well supported if the need does arise. Reasonably priced is ery important since we will be taking most film projectors to the scrap yard in a few years time.
Would I like to work for Christie... possibly... but I'm not vieing for a job there... They do represent to me the more professionally run of all the projector manufacturers comparing them to other large corporations I've worked for in past years.

Mark

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 03-04-2008, 07:24 PM:

So what we have established in the last couple of days is there are several opinionated guys on this post, Steve, Mark, Tim, and of course, me.

We need to cut each other some slack. This is supposed to be fun first otherwise it's too much like work.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-04-2008, 10:53 PM:

Well guys for what it's worth I can offer the following input.

*The Christie machines of the late 90s were shit. Utter, pure shit. I detest them.

*The Christie machines coming out of the factory over the last few years are FANTASTIC!!! Seriously, I'll put them up against a Kinoton...and that's a bold statement. (Plus I haven't even had the chance yet to install one of their new belt kits and I am still telling you the picture is amazingly rock steady, plus their turrets have so much fine tuning adjustments available to them that you can get the image alignment simply perfect.)

*I was in a Christie booth I had installed 3 days ago and walked by and noticed the CP650 doing something odd that you don't see every day. The error rate was reading "0". Not "0.", not "1", but "0", and holding! (Sure it was on a BACP penthouse reader, but still. [Razz]

)

So to conclude, what have we learned here from my post?

*Old Christies are shit. Tim and Steve are right.
*Current and recent Christies are amazing. Mark is right.
*BACP readers kick ass. Sam is awesome.

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 03-04-2008, 10:59 PM:

Well, what can one say after that? Thank you, the checks in the mail, etc...

What film was playing?

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-05-2008, 12:08 AM:

It was Spiderwick Chronicles, but seeing that prompted me to take a look at the other screens and "2" was the highest error rate in the entire building.

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 03-05-2008, 09:20 PM:

I apologize for going off the deep end, guys. Mark's "pot-calling-the-kettle-black" allusion to me misleading people was the last straw. It's the Irish in me. [Wink]

So, if this Christie kit is a "fix" (though I'm not holding my breath), I would be completely open to trying it on the ten units I have -- but who will pay for it? Someone mentioned Christie buying back their DD basement readers? Is this still a going thing? All of the readers in this plex are useless.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-05-2008, 09:57 PM:

Tim.... I'm not pointing my finger at you in the least... we are like Sam says both very opinionated... I've never known a tech or dealer in this biz that wasn't very opinionated... even the quite ones like my boss are opinionated.... probably even more so.

Anyway I reccomend that you wait about a month before ordering the kits. I was installing four of them today and I discovered that the toothed idler's bearing was too loose in its bore. Christie(or actually Gates who makes them)does a test where they apply 10 pounds of force to the bearing after its pressed in and it should hold... Well I could push these out with my thumb and about a pound of force... Two of the kits are in and running ok with the loose bearings till tommrrow and a check of the other kits we had in stock back at the shop showed that some were loose and some not... So the idlers that are ok will be here tommrrow and I can replace the idlers in the two machines I did today and then do the other two. Jim G. said it'll take them about a month to work this out through Gates... with Showorst comming up and all. All in all though the two that I did finish up run very smoothly. When you do them don't over-tension these belts... they should run sort of loose, the correct mount of tension being just enough to keep the belt teeth from riding up on the intermittent pulley. Allow two hours to do the first kit install.. then about an hour for each after that... oh and have a gear puller of the correct size available to pull the sprocket timming pulleys off... these machines were about 12 years old and they didn't let go very easily!

Mark