my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Simplex SH1000 vs 5 Star

Author Topic: Simplex SH1000 vs 5 Star Don Hallmark Film Handler Posts: 12 From: Andrews, TX. Registered: Nov 2005 posted 11-24-2005 02:14 PM                     Which is the most dependable? Easiest to maintain and keep clean?  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 11-24-2005 02:27 PM                     They're both easy to clean (SH-1000's were commonly known as the '4-Star' head at the time) The '4-Star' head, which included the viscous, dampened flywheel instead of the solid one of the '5-Star'. '4-Stars' handled film better, built like a tank, and easy to maintain-just keep the oil level in the tranmission up to par. '5-Stars' have their glitchy problems with that drive shaft assembly and the bearing support for that drive shaft. Main drive bearing in that support love to get grumpy and will take out the shaft is that bearing isn't replaced pronto-being that the shaft isn't supported on the one end with the belt drive sprocket. Plus, you have to watch out for your belt maintenance as well on the '5-Star'. Changeouts are necessary about every year, especially the round toothed variety-being a thicker belt than the older square tooth belts... -Monte  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 11-24-2005 03:50 PM                        My feeling is that we moved backwards when the SH-1000 (& XL variants) died. While these soundheads seem a little troublesome now; remember some of them have been running daily since the late 30's. The 5 star that we now know had rather severe birthing pains in the 1969-1975 era. Luckily most of these are long gone. Howard Straight (Mr. Simplex) had nothing to do with any variation of the 5 star except to help get rid of the "slider". Dolby on the slider had to be seen to be believed. Terrible. Louis  |  IP: Logged Don Hallmark Film Handler Posts: 12 From: Andrews, TX. Registered: Nov 2005 posted 11-24-2005 04:00 PM                     Is the "slider" the lateral guide roller on the origional 5 star or something else. The one that I am refering to has a sliding lateral guide roller. Not like the one on the new version of the 5 star or the old 1000  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 11-24-2005 04:20 PM                     So far the only measurably better sound reproducer is the Gaumont Kalee sound reproducer that was used with the Model 21 projctor... GK37 comes to mind but I may be wrong on the model #. It has the lowest W&F of any reproducer that I've ever measured .... and I've meanured just about all of them.... excepting just a very few obscure ones thata re in peoples collections. The SH-1000 is the most reliable, best built, with fewest parts American made reproducer that you can install. Easiest to clean of all American built sound heads out there. Discontinuing it's production is one of the major blunders of our industry. The only drawback is having to oil the gearbox. We use Mobil 1 90 weight synthetic gear oil out here and we see perhaps one bronze gear every year to year and a half fail out of an estimated 400 sound heads in this area. Driving an X-L the gar box really never fails. But the intermediate X-L drive gear might fail at some point into a long life. Many SH-1000's out are also driving Century's, Westerex's and Brenkerts. Present production 5 stars are ok, but only ok... they have a tendency to fall apart and require alot more frequent serviceing to keep running right. They have quite a good 1800 rpm sync drive motor now. You will experience bearing failure of the sprocket shaft or scanning drum shaft no matter what within 7 years of installation, in dry climates like ours in Utah we see them go after just a few years!! On the SH-1000, RCA, or 5-Star the lateral guide roller should be cleaned and checked at yearly intervals and the shaft coated with a thin coating of LaVezzi synthetic oil. This oil does not dry up as will conventional oils. Using synthetic won't leave your lateral giude movable roller stuck in the open position. An option is to do Brad's mod and remove the rubber part of the pressure roller so there is nothing contacting the film. Start up is a tad bit longer but normally within the 7 second C/O delay of most automations. Mark  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 11-24-2005 07:29 PM                     quote: Mark Gulbrandsen with a thin coating of LaVezzi synthetic oil. This oil does not dry up.... Mark - a side question for you on this oil topic: Have you heard of AMSOIL synthetic(great stuff!)? They do have a 0w40 weight oil and wonder if one could use this light of synthetic on contact surfaces as you mentioned instead of the LaVezzi as you mentioned. One quart of AMSOIL is about 7 bucks, but would last quite a while for storage when needed for such lubrication procedures.... Have a good "TURKEY DAY" ... thx-Monte  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 11-24-2005 08:16 PM                     Ues, have heard of Amsoil. I believe its a racing oil. The 90 weight Mobil 1 stuff works better than any of lighter stuff I've used over the years does. 90 weight sticks to the gears better during operation contributing to longer life of the bronze gears and pinion. Mark  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.