charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1"=
>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>These are the Taylor weights of 1922 - one=
of those=20
cases where exact weights really do end in 0 ! Pre turning they were 7-2-19=
,=20
6-0-27, 7-0-2, 6-3-18, 9-2-11, 12-3-3. They're a really good six - on=
e of=20
John Rudhall's mistakes, despite what the irregular weights might=20
suggest</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>CP</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LE=
FT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>Fro=
m:</B>=20
<A title=3Da.bull@s...=20
href=3D"mailto:a.bull@s...>">andrewmbull=20
<a.bull@s...></A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
title=3Dbellhistorians@yahoogroups.com=20
href=3D"mailto:bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com">bellhistorians@yahoogroups=
.com</A>=20
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, December 16, 2002 2:=
32=20
PM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [Bell Historians] Re: Fab=
ricated=20
steel bellframes</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><TT>Very interesting post and picture. I see from the phot=
o=20
that Ripple <BR>bells have all had their canons removed. The weights are =
given=20
on <BR>David Bagley's site as:<BR><BR>1. John Rudhall, Gloucester, 1808, =
7-1-5=20
<BR>2. John Rudhall, Gloucester, 1807, 5-3-21 <BR>3. John Rudhall, Glouce=
ster,=20
1808, 6-2-0 <BR>4. John Rudhall, Gloucester, 1808, 6-2-10 <BR>5. John Rud=
hall,=20
Gloucester, 1808, 9-0-0 <BR>6. John Rudhall, Gloucester, 1808, 12-0-0 in =
F=20
sharp<BR>(Data:Walters 1930, C.J.Pickford 1993)<BR><BR>Can anyone (hopefu=
lly=20
CJP !) say where these weights came from ? Are <BR>they still valid, afte=
r the=20
removal of the canons ?<BR><BR>Andrew Bull<BR><BR><BR><BR>--- In=20
bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com, "Christopher Povey" <BR><cmpovey@3...&=
gt;=20
wrote:<BR>> Like Christopher Dalton, this is my maiden speech, too!<BR=
>>=20
<BR>> Discussion re fabricated steel bellframes<BR>> <BR>> The=20
information on early all-steel bellframes is interesting. Just <BR>in cas=
e it=20
is thought Taylors were too bound up with their superb <BR>cast-iron=20
framesides to consider making a fabricated steel bellframe, <BR>they did=
=20
actually dip their toes into this pool. I came across an <BR>example at R=
ipple=20
in Worcestershire. Taylors rehung the John Rudhall <BR>6 in 1920 and prov=
ided=20
this frame to hang them in. I enclose a photo. <BR>The frame is beautiful=
ly=20
made. Indeed, it was the build-quality that <BR>caused me to think it mus=
t=20
have been made by a company well-versed in <BR>bells and bellframes. But=
=20
Taylors? Surely not! I asked Chris Pickford <BR>if he knew whether Taylor=
s=20
made an all-steel frame and he said he <BR>wasn't aware of anything of th=
is=20
type from Taylors. But he said he <BR>was soon to be checking Taylors' re=
cords=20
on another subject and would <BR>look up Ripple. He rang me after this vi=
sit=20
and said the bellframe <BR>drawings were in the Ripple file. Taylors may =
have=20
constructed it for <BR>experimental purposes and there may be another one=
or=20
two elsewhere.<BR>> <BR>> The existence of other early fabricated s=
teel=20
bellframes does beg <BR>the question about whether these frames should be=
=20
accorded some sort <BR>of special recognition, on account of their rarity=
. If=20
English <BR>Heritage is currently objecting to the possible removal of a =
(poor=20
<BR>example of a) Taylor 'tall A' frame of 1887, because there are only=20
<BR>about 80 left, then a Taylor fabricated steel frame must be <BR>price=
less;=20
similarly G&J and M&S frames of that type, particularly if <BR>th=
ey=20
are well-designed and well-constructed. If there were to be a <BR>proposa=
l to=20
remove the Ripple frame for something else, then this <BR>might go throug=
h=20
without objections. Until recently, its manufacturer <BR>wasn't known (or=
had=20
been forgotten); not even the DAC Bells Advisor <BR>was aware. Would EH g=
o out=20
of its way to investigate its pedigree? <BR>There are lots of older and=20
more-easily identified items around and <BR>there is only so much time in=
the=20
working week. While these frames <BR>probably take on the listing of the=
=20
building to which they are <BR>attached, by virtue of them being fixtures=
,=20
they don't have any <BR>individual protection. In the meantime, they coul=
d=20
suffer corrosion <BR>and other manner of degradation, and slowly become s=
crap.=20
While we <BR>should be looking after the frames of yesterday, we should a=
lso=20
be <BR>recognising those items of today that will become historical gems =
of=20
<BR>tomorrow. Perhaps the CCC Committee members among us could comment on=
=20
<BR>the possibility and/or advisability of achieving some sort of=20
listing.<BR>> <BR>> I guess the reasons for the current trend in=20
fabricated bellframes <BR>are primarily cost (cast-iron sideframes are=20
expensive and welding <BR>now makes fabrication quick and cheap) and seco=
ndly=20
DIY (Stephen Ivin <BR>made the sideframes for St Thomas, Oxford, for=20
instance).<BR>> <BR>> Chris Povey.<BR><BR></TT><BR><BR><TT>Th=
is=20
message was sent to you via the Bell Historians' Mailing List. To unsubsc=
ribe=20
from the list send an email to=20
bellhistorians-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<BR><BR></TT><BR><BR><TT>Your u=
se of=20
Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <A=20
href=3D"http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Yahoo! Terms of Service</A>.</=
TT>=20
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>