[Bell Historians] Taylor's 1895

[Simon Adams]

The tenor at St.Peter's Leamington Spa was put on ball bearings by Taylors
(sometime in the 1920's?) because it was said to go rather "hard". It now
goes quite decent and doesn't seem to be bothered by tower movement.

On more than one occasion I've heard Chris Povey say that.................."
a modern Taylor frame as we know it (1896 onwards) is a thing of great
beauty...........................a real work of art"


----- Original Message -----
From: "David Bryant" <david at b...>
To: <bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 9:10 AM
Subject: Re: Re: [Bell Historians] Taylor's 1895


> > I'm not sure that I blame them either. Bells on well engineered,
> > well maintained plain bearings go superbly well and, often, are not
> > subject to the 'suck and blow' that you sometimes get with ball
> > bearings.
>
> Yes, they're fine where they are a) in good condition and b) regularly
oiled. However, the majority of plain bearings left now are getting pretty
knackered and given that a large proportion of ringers don't know what's
above the ceiling boss then ball bearings, which don't require regular
oiling, are perhaps a better option.
>
> I understand that plain bearings are useful where there is a lot of tower
movement, as the intertia of ball bearings can make the tower movement
affect the bells more than if the bells were on plain bearings. I noticed a
few years ago that the front three at St Mary's, Warwick, as still on plain
bearings. Given that this is a tower which moves a lot, I wonder whether
this is the reason?
>
> David
>
> --
>
> Whatever you Wanadoo:
> http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/time/
>
> This email has been checked for most known viruses - find out more at:
http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/help/id/7098.htm
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>