This is topic Going from Simplex E7 to Simplex PR-1014? 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=010250

---

Posted by Celine Negrete (Member # 5531) on 01-03-2010, 04:46 PM:
 
We have a Simplex E7. Our supplier is offering a PR-1014 (sorry...don't know the details about the Simplex projectors...maybe this is also called an XL?) from a recently closed theatre in Alameda, CA.

We only run the projector for seven screenings a week, so it doesn't get much work. The E7 has been pretty good for us. But, I am new to the job (two months...manager/projectionsist) so, I don't know a lot about it's history.

Any opinions about switching projectors? Pros? Cons?
Thanks!


 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 01-03-2010, 05:21 PM:
 
Of all the simplexes the E7 had the best steady image of any of them
but they are a pain to repair
 

---

Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 01-03-2010, 05:34 PM:
 
If the price is right, I would suggest you buy it as a spare, If your projector breaks down or if you move, then install it. If you do move and have space for a second screen etc It may come in handy. Murphys Law sometimes means that when a projector breaks down or needs rare parts a bargain is not usually around when you need it.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 01-03-2010, 05:49 PM:
 
I have one E-7 and a gob of Supers still running that I service. Never bothered to change them out because they just keep on ticking like the Everredy Bunny does. The location with the E-7 has a complete spare head for when that one craps out... The one head has been running for 12 years though and is still in excellent shape, they run from a platter... Just keep em clean and well oiled and make sure you also oil the main drive gear and what ever sound head you happen to have there, probably at least SAE 30 weight in the gear box, preferably SAE 40 weight if you can find it or use 90 weight synthetic gear lube.

As to the X-L... if you can get it for 500 bucks then go for it but I seriously doubt it'll put out as nice of picture or say any better one than the E-7 does...
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 01-03-2010, 06:31 PM:
 
But it has no unobtainable parts like the E-7. Louis
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 01-03-2010, 06:37 PM:
 
lol..why you go find Simplex E-7 graveyards to snag parts from.

True, the only gimper is that obique shaft in those things where the pain comes from, but agree with others: E-7's can do pictures right!

Big question? is he trying to sell you something that you don't need, or is it something that he wants you to have? Bottom line: is it something you want and/or really need?

I can see his point due to the PR-1014 has parts that are still made, plus available whereas the E-7 is a dinosaur.

I look at it this way: if it ain't broke, leave it alone.

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Celine Negrete (Member # 5531) on 01-03-2010, 06:49 PM:
 
Well, we may need a 2nd projector in a year or so (or sooner), if we find the right location for a twin theatre.

So, it sounds like there are good reasons to consider it. But, hanging on to the E7 also sounds like a good idea.

I have kind of grown 'attached' to the E7...so old and sturdy! But, we have not had to replace any parts recently so I have not had to deal with that potential issue.

Thanks for the comments!
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 01-03-2010, 06:57 PM:
 
Personally, I'd ditch the E-7 and jump at the XL opportunity...unless it is dog XL.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Celine Negrete (Member # 5531) on 01-03-2010, 07:04 PM:
 
Steve,

Is that because of the difficulty in getting parts? Or, some other reason?
 

---

Posted by Robert Koch (Member # 3728) on 01-03-2010, 07:16 PM:
 
One thing that has`nt been mentioned is the increased screen illumination you1l get with the XL, due to the conical shutter close to the aperture,. As Steve says,"go for it".
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 01-03-2010, 11:19 PM:
 
I don't have the romantic involvement with the Supers and E7s that others have. Parts are harder to get, they use straight gates, most every one I come across is wasted and they inherently leak oil all over the place.

And yes, you'll get more light on the XL...hence the name Xtra Light.
 

---

Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 01-04-2010, 02:43 AM:
 

quote: Robert Koch

---

is the increased screen illumination you1l get with the XL

---

I'm not sure if that would be a big issue with what looks to be a 16 ft (?) screen . Celine is your screen equipped with masking or is it one size fits all? If it is does move does it go out sidewards or up?
 

---

Posted by Celine Negrete (Member # 5531) on 01-04-2010, 12:50 PM:
 
Yes, you are about right there, Cameron in terms of screen size. And, we do change the masking for scope...the bottom masking comes up.

But, we may be in a larger space sometime in the future. With a bigger screen.
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 01-04-2010, 01:43 PM:
 
The straight gate E7 probably has about the steadiest image of any north american machine hands down
If the machine is in ruff shape replace it but most xl's don't have a stable of image as the E7 did
yes they leak oil too bad but when they run they run very well
 

---

Posted by Dave Macaulay (Member # 813) on 01-04-2010, 01:54 PM:
 
The E7 is a good projector when in good shape (most projectors are, I suppose) but it is obsolete. If you're driving to work in a model T the ride is fine I suppose.
Eventually something is going to break.
Your soundhead is also an antique, but it has few moving parts and most are still readily available. The projector has a lot of parts which are rare to unobtainable, except from a junkyard... and many of those junkyards are scrapping their really ancient stuff.
The PR-1014 shares all internal parts with current production machines. I'm not sure if Ballantyne still sells them as a PR-1014 but the XL is still available in some incarnation. If it breaks you can get it repaired as quickly as is possible: not when and if replacement parts can be found. That's a pretty important consideration for a business.
Like Mark, I still service a few E7 machines. If one breaks, it will go to the junkpile and I'll have to supply a replacement - probably an XL but a Century is a good choice too (I expect Mark would do the same in such a situation).
There's some sense in not fixing what isn't broken, but if the price for the XL is good, what have you lost? The price tends to be higher when you really need something...
 

---

Posted by Gordon Bachlund (Member # 124) on 01-04-2010, 03:55 PM:
 
Celine, I practically grew up with Standard, Super and XL Simplex equipment. Dr. McLeod is correct as to a steady image which is in large part what you are selling your customers. It is true that replacement parts are problematic, but if the XL is properly maintained you should not worry. As to having a spare head available, that is great advice if you can afford it.

Keep your XL if it is fulfilling your needs.
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 01-04-2010, 05:42 PM:
 
If the XL has a curved gate, then buy it. The E7, like all other straight gate machines, "breathes" in the center of the screen. Any curved gate machine will be an improvement!

btw: my last 3 E7s were given away free to the last known E7 user in this area. My last 6 Brenkerts were given away to charity. . . a collector. 85% Century/12% Simplex XL around here; life is good. Louis
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 01-04-2010, 05:47 PM:
 
I have an E7 as a lawn ornament
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 01-04-2010, 06:55 PM:
 
I have never had breathing issues with the E7 just my own shortness of breath when I had to change the drve on the oblique shaft
overall the straight gate in the E7 is still in many ways my reference to image stability
no many preview rooms that use either the E7 or a FP20
the studio gate xl's all went in the bin due to image satability issues
 

---

Posted by Gordon Bachlund (Member # 124) on 01-05-2010, 12:32 PM:
 
I mis-spoke in my reply yesterday. I meant to say "Keep your E-7 if it is fulfilling yout needs."

I must be getting old!
 

---

Posted by Celine Negrete (Member # 5531) on 01-05-2010, 03:17 PM:
 
So, if I may ask....what is a 'reasonable price' for a 1014?

And, can someone explain the difference between a XL and a 1014 so that I can be better informed ;-)
 

---

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 01-05-2010, 08:12 PM:
 
Celine,

The 1014 is just a later version of the XL. Some of the 1014 have a lens turret if that is an issue for you. Since you are running an E7 I doubt it.

I have a few in stock as do others here. Feel free to contact me in Martinez, CA
 

---

Posted by Joshua Waaland (Member # 287) on 01-28-2010, 02:06 PM:
 
Celine,

Most used XL heads go for less than $500 on ebay. There are so many theaters dumping their film projectors right now, you should be able to get one for a good price.
 

---

Posted by Robert E. Allen (Member # 1351) on 01-28-2010, 02:39 PM:
 
You're not going to have trouble finding parts if you need them. Most theatre suppliers have some sitting around. The E-7, which came out in '39, is still running in many locations. But if you can get a good buy on the XL pick it up.

If I recall correctly Celine, the XL was manufactured by the International Projector Corporation which made all Simplex machines until Strong bought the company then Strong/Ballantyne changed the name to 1014.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 01-28-2010, 03:59 PM:
 
You recall incorrectly.

IPC made them up until Singer, then NSS and then Strong.

The PR-1014 goes back to IPC days...all "XL" machines have a PR number..as in PR = projector. SH = soundhead (SH1000, SH-1012...etc).

Steve
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 01-28-2010, 04:21 PM:
 

quote: Steve Guttag

---

until Singer, then NSS

---

quote: John Eickhof

---

backlash properly between the two gears with the necessary shims

---

..and how do I remember going through the pile of shims to get the right one for that right clearance on that "acorn" gear replacement...that is what really slows down the install..

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 02-01-2010, 12:18 PM:
 
For me, this would all boil down to: A. What's the likelihood of an E7 going down in the middle of a show, compared to a newer machine and, B. What would that breakdown mean to your bottom line or reputation.

I feel the same way about the E7 that many here do. It's a rock solid machine that puts out a very steady picture. When I bought my place, I put Brenkert heads in... also very reliable and steady.

The problem with the Brenkerts was that, like the E7, (new) parts were becoming hard to get, most notably the fiber shutter gear. In my case, a shutdown could mean the loss of many thousands of dollars... more, if I couldn't get the machine fixed overnight.

If a shutdown wasn't such a big deal, I would have stayed with the Brenkerts & scrounged parts, like some have suggested here. But that wouldn't work for me, so I have XL-series machines now. They work fine and parts are available.
 

---

Posted by Celine Negrete (Member # 5531) on 02-01-2010, 06:17 PM:
 
Hey John, come on by anytime! Some things have changed, some have not!

And Jack, agreed...that is what it comes down to. I want a machine I can really rely on. Especially out here in the 'boonies'!

~Celine
 

---

Posted by John Eickhof (Member # 323) on 02-01-2010, 07:02 PM:
 
Thanks Celine, One other advantage to the XL is the use of 24 tooth feed sprockets, especially when running on reels like you are, they have more contact with the film and are less likely to have problems near the end of the reel if the reel tension is too great. Plus the XL is self oiling, eliminating the need to oil daily and the associated mess that occurs on the film, machine and floor! Please email fone numbers and contact info.. I'd love to see the place again! John
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 02-01-2010, 08:00 PM:
 
I agree with John on all points except you WILL still have an oil mess on the floor... not right away but you will eventually. X-Ls, especially the older black wrinkle ones have very porus(and very poorly made) main castings. Those old main castings were never heat treated!!! Strong has since rectified the casting issue with their version of the 1014.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 02-01-2010, 08:16 PM:
 
..why you don't want to have too much oil in them,esp when running them level.

Just enough oil in there to work the pump and that's about it on those black wrinkle walled XL's..

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 02-02-2010, 03:36 PM:
 
Monte,

With the old ones you need to keep making sure there IS oil in them... The few onces normally put in will leak out of some of them in fairly short order... especially if the projector sits idle. The Strong PR-1014's are by far the best of the bunch and hardly leak a drop...

Mark
 

---

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 02-02-2010, 04:49 PM:
 
Markie-poo, you need to see first hand my old Simplex XL serial #128..it doesn't leak and suffer from the porous casting issue you always bring up. It has sat idle for over five years and still has all it's oil.

Now the SH-1000 is another story..it is missing a few bearing retainer gaskets and it tends to leave it's mark all the time. I just haven't gotten around to installing those gaskets.
 

---

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 02-02-2010, 07:14 PM:
 
I have three different XL's of varying years all built around the 70's to 80's and all are sitting there completely leak free for years as I have not been able to sell them.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 02-02-2010, 08:56 PM:
 

quote: Tony Bandiera Jr

---

my old Simplex XL serial #128

---

Dang, that has to be from the 1949-50 era being of that early number.

That one XL projector in No.1 at the Magna, UT 5plex had a serial number of #1567..thus not too far ahead of Tony's..

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 02-02-2010, 09:34 PM:
 
Tony,

My observations of the many X-Ls that I have turrettized and stripped to bare metal and rebuilt over the years... probably around 80 or so machines... starting at SN 108(Still running in a Janesville, WI theater to this day) and up trough the Singer built machines are as follows.

The IPC built machines all had non-heat treated castings. When you machine those castings the alumnium turns to more of a powder with chips in it than it does just to chips as it should. I've also run into more then my share of stripped out gate mechanism holes in these castings. Early X-Ls main castings and shutter guards that had big arc lamps behind them actually became warped from the excessive heat. Several castings I turretized had front walls only about 1/16th of an inch thick! Another interesting thing is that when you strip one of these older machines down to bare metal for refinish the alumnium bleeds oil. Castings have to be either heated to get the oil to bleed out or soaked in solvent to dissolve the oil before finishing them. The best way I've found to really seal up these old castings is to Powder Coat them. There is also available a pressure treatment done by Loc-Tite that would work even better but is quite expensive.

The Singer built machines had much thicker walled castings, especially the front wall of the main casting... probably three to four times as thick as the IPC castings or up to 1/4" thick. These machines had much higher quality castings that machined perfectly normal and just generated the usual metal chips. They generally don't bleed any oil when striped. Strong has gone further to improve the casting and has made the best castings of the bunch by far, much heavier than even the Singer produced X-Ls and they have the correct heat treatment resulting in a much harder metal and stronger structure. The alumnium of the Strong castings is very similar in appearance and hardness to the DP-70 lens bushings that I made... from heat treated spin poured castings.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Jon Miller (Member # 163) on 02-02-2010, 09:35 PM:
 
Another thing that will keep an X-L from being Xtra Leaky is a Seal Kit, consisting of an improved main drive seal and appropriate main drive gear or pulley.

Older X-Ls and Simplex 35s (I don't know when Strong made the revised seal and main drive standard) leaked a lot through the main drive seal, something I found out quite messily on a 1955 X-L I once christened the Simplex Valdez for its tendency to leave a large oil slick. The seal kit not only stopped the leak; it also allowed more oil to be added for improved lubrication. Definitely a worthwhile upgrade for an older leaker!
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 02-02-2010, 09:40 PM:
 
I completely agree Jon! The seal kit is one of the best additions for any X-L. More oil where there was never quite enough oil in the first place. Compare the amount of oil in a bRenkert(1 pint) to the mey amount of oil in an X-L. Now the X-L oil system is really just an oil mist for the gears and adding the seal kit doesn't change how that works. The real benefit to the increase in oil in the sump results in the oil staying cleaner much longer and not breaking down. I wasn't going to bring up the whole seal thing because that can turn into another entire thread of it's own. All the X-L's I service have had seal kits installed on them.
 

---

Posted by John Eickhof (Member # 323) on 02-03-2010, 10:20 PM:
 
Geeze... most the xl leaks I ever encountered were either the back cover leaking due to a shot gasket or the cover being warped from overtightening! I stll have 4 xls sitting in the booth of my theatre ( closed since 2001 ) serials 189, 202, 207 & 221 and they have not lost a drop of oil! The other leak point is the main drive shaft that the seal kit remedies quite well! Although, proper setting of the oil pick-up in the sump will allow the oil to be kept at the specified level as set forth in the manual without leakage from the main drive shaft! The worst cause of this is the later oil pickup that runs through a connecting block ( to be reversed for drive-in use ) and not directly into the pump like the early heads. It did not quite set right in the oils sump. Plus the occaisional bad rear cover glass gasket that dries up and shrinks causing leakage around the glass..I used to make a piece for the Army-Airforce XLs that engaged the upper part of the cover and the upper fastening screw thus pulling the cover tight without warping it... the AAFES heads were pretty much leakproof unless an over zealous operator put oil in while the head was running instead of oiling to the ring when idle!! Oh well, in any event, I still think a gear driven machine is far superior to any dry belt drive!! I guess i'm old fashioned!!!
 

---

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 02-04-2010, 09:03 PM:
 
Our XLs, 1003s, s/n 3545 & 3556 leak almost no oil after I switched them to Amsoil synthetic ATF. I anticipated a significant increase in oil loss with the synthetic but have been pleasantly surprised, only have to top them up about every 6 to 8 months. The ATF is viscosity 10, the Simplex brand oil is according to many posts on this site is 9, probably not enough difference to account for the reduced oil loss.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 02-04-2010, 09:50 PM:
 
John,
I pretty much agree with your statements. But in all honesty there are just too many leak spots and too many troublesome areas on the older X-Ls. The new back covers and new red door gaskets take care of that leak problem 100% but at some expense. The seal kit with new gear isn't cheap either. One can easily sink another 500 bucks into an X-L just stopping the leaks. Again, I still like the meachine as a whole... just not the associated oil seepage on the older machines. I wish I had saved some of the fronts I had removed to install turrets. Charlie Wolk happpened by for lunch(and to see what equipment he cold abscond from me) at my shop one day and was completely shocked when he saw the poor quality of the older X-L castings.
 

---