[Bell Historians] SG/WI - was Tuning forks

David Bryant davidbryant at hfYZoMKhXVhLVi63KUklniEJ0HrfkgfBg3gmhwlj8TiPXb2cMsm8ctqlHqE7t6YP5UbercJ3TO8WALyUPZUXQPLPijI.yahoo.invalid
Tue Apr 18 18:08:32 BST 2006

> It will not be too long before the EN16 has drilled its way through the
> bell.  EN16 is a very hard material and used for military purposes, the
> higher the number the harder the metal is.

The bell's had an EN16 clapper for the best part of thirty years, and the 
wear on the soundbow is no more than on any of the other bells - you can 
come and measure it if you like.

>  When I rang the bell some
> years ago there was an obscene crash when the EN16 clapper hit the bell
> and it was obvious the EN16 was knocking the bloody hell out of the bell!

It had a heavy counterweight because the bells were rung up and down twice a 
week. It therefore rested on the bell too much. The present clapper doesn't 
have a counterweight and doesn't suffer from this problem. Consequently, it 
sounds much better.

> What has yet to be mentioned is that a wrought iron clapper is sacrificial
> and much kinder to a bell than either EN16 or SG.

Have you any concrete evidence that wrought iron clappers wear bells less 
than those of SG or EN16 or it is just surmise?



More information about the Bell-historians mailing list