All pull changer

Gil Berry · Post by **Gil Berry** » 2 Apr 2002 8:39 pm

I'm wondering, and asking all you experts out there....Does any manufacturer of today's pedal steel guitars use cam-followers or bearings (needle, ball, roller, whatever) in the changer itself where the "toggle" lever engages the changer bridge? Don't know if I'm coming across with the right terminology, but all the guitars I've ever had had a serious friction point that was metal-to-metal rubbing to raise or lower. Frankly, this is mechanical stupidity....I'm anxious to know if this problem has been addressed, and how. I sure wish manufacturers of steel guitars weren't so da** secretive about the mechanical aspects of their guitars. Ever looked at any SG literature? All kinds of nice pictures, and comments like "all-pull changer", or "your choice of pickups", etc., etc.....but NO real information about the mechanical construction of the guitar. This may be fine for you guys in Nashville or St. Louis who have a dealer handy with every current guitar so you can PLAY them and compare (Even though you STILL may not be able to really KNOW how the guitar is built.) Anyway, it's kind of a pet peave for me. Being an ex-engineer, I want to know all the details before I buy. Now just how good it sounds (which is largely subjective, anyway), but HOW LONG IT'S GONNA LAST, which is mainly a function of engineering design and, of course, care. Would appreciate comments; especially from those currently manufacturing PSG's. Thanks.[This message was edited by Gil Berry on 02 April 2002 at 08:40 PM.][This message was edited by Gil Berry on 02 April 2002 at 08:41 PM.]

Earl Foote · Post by **Earl Foote** » 3 Apr 2002 5:10 am

Carter's web site has a good graphic on how an all pull changer works. In this case a picture is definately worth a thousand words.

I think using rolling element bearings would add a lot to the cost of a changer. Also it would add to the size of the changer. Needle bearings might work but you would have to case carburize (harden) the axle which would then have to be ground to size because of the distortion introduced by the carburization process. All of this would add more to the cost of an instrument that a lot of people feel costs too much to begin with. I don't think adding rolling element bearings would enhance the overall performance that much anyway. Just my .02

Earl

Gil Berry · Post by **Gil Berry** » 3 Apr 2002 6:38 am

Earl, you are no doubt 100% correct when you say it will add to the cost of the guitar. But when you're laying out several thousand for a nice guitar, what can the few hundred more a rolling changer be worth? Especially if it's gonna make the action much smoother, less prone to "hanging up", and LAST MUCH LONGER? Like many others on this forum, I'm an old man and chances are I'll never live long enough for it to matter, anyway (the lasing part), but I'd like the instrument(s) I leave behind me to be something of value to those still here, not worn-out junk. Yes, I have seen the Carter website, and it is a good representation of changer actions. It also illustrates exactly what I'm talking about where "the metal meets the metal"..........

C Dixon · Post by **C Dixon** » 3 Apr 2002 7:43 am

Gil,

This has been approached by more than one steel guitar manufacturer. The late Ron Lashley (former owner of Emmons), and I talked at link about this several times.

There is also a gentleman in the Atlanta area name of Barney Miller who has been working on a "bearing" of some type. I believe it may have been with Jimmy Crawford. Not sure. So the idea has been kicked around a bit.

In fact the Emmons does go a step further than some in that the scissor finger pivots on a dowel pin rather than just being pushed. My present Excel also does this (uses a small pin). But neither of these are bearings in the sense you are talking about.

And the poster discussing "costs" is very correct. Not only cost but space is at a severe premimum. And after years of thinking about it and seeing how good many of the PSG's play after hundreds of thousands of "pulls", I doubt the cost would justify the means.

God bless you,

carl

Larry Bell · Post by **Larry Bell** » 3 Apr 2002 7:59 am

Carl,
It sure is great to have you back.

------------------
Larry Bell - email: larry@larrybell.org - gigs - Home Page
2000 Fessenden S-12 8x8, 1969 Emmons S-12 6x6, 1971 Emmons D-10 9x9, 1971 Dobro

Al Marcus · Post by **Al Marcus** » 3 Apr 2002 8:17 am

"Ditto" Larry........al

C Dixon · Post by **C Dixon** » 4 Apr 2002 8:25 am

Thank you

Erv Niehaus · Post by **Erv Niehaus** » 4 Apr 2002 10:48 am

I don't think this is the proper application for a bearing what with the limited rotation. A bushing is more applicable. I've seen instances where needle bearings were used in a limited rotation application and the needles actually wore grooves in the shaft.
Uff-Da!

ebb · Post by **ebb** » 4 Apr 2002 5:14 pm

this is from fulwakas site
http://www.ambrec.com/fulawka/guitars.html
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>
Rocker Bridge- cammed with ball bearings, triple raise-triple lower. Especially designed and manufactured of the highest quality metal to accent intonation and super sustaining power with no over tones from finger to finger. Self lubricating bearings on bridge, shaft will remain trouble free for a lifetime, with adjustable springs.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
[This message was edited by ebb on 04 April 2002 at 05:16 PM.]

Winnie Winston · Post by **Winnie Winston** » 4 Apr 2002 5:21 pm

bearings are not the answer. There isn't enough movement to justify bearings. After all, NOTHING on a steel is rotating at any RPM.....
The best that can be done to eliminate friction is to minimize the point of contact. This can be done by using a razor edge (Like the old Fender changers used) or my using the smallest axle possible and supporting it by a "comb" between each changer finger.
The best would be a thin shaft of hardened steel, running in a sized bushing.

Winnie

Jerry Roller · Post by **Jerry Roller** » 4 Apr 2002 5:35 pm

Guys, I believe Gil is talking about the friction of the changer finger rubbing against the stop directly under the lowering spring when the changer is activated. An assembly similiar to the roller nut assembly mounted on the stop plate would cut down on that friction but I don't know if the difference would be enough to notice
Jerry.

ebb · Post by **ebb** » 4 Apr 2002 8:26 pm

even tho i posted the link and love ed's guitars i agree with ww and attest to the tonal superiority of my 57 fender 400 with a fixed bridge and nut of very small diameter minimizing contact as the strings are pulled horizontally by a stamped metal changer activated by cables. ralph made it sound good also.