Thanks Eilliot for all the sharing .. I too wish for a ua-7082 that looks very nice and almost 12incher that can fit the dk300 plinth with dp-80 but the current asking price for a used one with unknown grommet status is worrying. Unfortunately I am no good with diy and unsure what to do if indeed the UA-5045 has significant sag or even with metal-metal contact and not performing. I bought it as it was about usd100 that I wish to spent which is for the dp-80/dk300 that had been recapped and planning to refurbish the plinth with slightly cracked veener for an affordable price to me of usd299 excluding usd100 shipping from Japan to Singapore. I only wish JVC/Victor has spares of this grommet that seems to be then a design flaw but 40 yrs is indeed a long time ago. Cheers.
Victor UA-7082 Arm, Rubber Washer at Rear Counterweight Tube: Sag/Repair/Fitting Damage.
Victor UA-7082 Arm, Rubber Washer at Rear Counterweight Tube: Sag/Repair/Fitting Damage.
................
The Large Plinth with UA-7082 I bought arrived, the plinth, legs, dust cover seriously damaged. Insured, at UPS for damage claim now.
The arm, before I bought it, the counter weight tube was sagging (very typical it seems), because the rubber washer between the main tube and the rear counterweight tube had deteriorated (the typical age related problem).
I pointed it out to seller, he fixed it, posted new photos, I bought it.
The arm arrived undamaged, however, it was going back, and, perhaps I will buy one in the future with bad rubber, soooo, I decided to see how he fixed it.
I’m no engineer, this is my attempt to clarify the rubber repair for myself and others. Lot of words to attempt clarity, it’s not that complicated.
1. the 7082 (presumably 7045) rear tube and counterweight are not totally isolated from the arm by a tubular layer of rubber like my SME 3009 was. (I repaired 3009 with factory rubber tube from SME when I first got it).
2. The 7082 rear tube is threaded, It threads into the back of a fitting on the end of the main arm, just behind the pivot. Not tight machine threads, so minor movement can occur. That is a semi-solid, not totally isolated connection. If the rubber washer is weak, these loose threads allow sag to occur. Perhaps the threaded shaft gets bent down also.
3. You thread/snug that rear tube forward against the rubber washer. The thickness of the washer is therefore not critical (except too thin). The density of the rubber needs to be firm enough to keep the rear tube from sagging, but not too hard, so it can do it’s job: dampening vibrations traveling down/back up the tube, isolating counterweight .... engineers can clarify this design function.
4. Washer Shape. Factory ____? This one: It did not slip off the front tube as I expected a simple washer would. It had an integral smaller diameter ’shoulder’ or ’neck’ that projected forward into the rear tube fitting. There are two tiny allen-head set screws at the bottom of the fitting. I loosened them and a short piece of tube came out, less than an inch long, rubber washer at the rear end.
5. Front face of the small fitting with the washer has/had a brass faced plate, curved. This one was damaged, part missing, part ’mangled’. My guess, it was set too tightly to the face of the arm shaft, someone messed with it, who knows ....
6. The point is, unless I took it apart, it looked fixed, you would definitely choose this over one with deteriorated rubber, sagging rear tube. But it had invisible damage. No way to know if buying used. Or know after you received it. I think this is probably a very rare instance, just mentioning it, perhaps someone knows something about it _____ ?
7. Effect performance??? Many have said they have weak rubber washers/sagging rear tubes: so what, plays great. The fitting: internal damaged brass face could be carefully reassembled, making sure no contact with anything.
8. Anti-Skate. I don’t like it, especially used. The plastic cap lifted off to reveal a spring coiled around the shaft (cap’s tiny set screws too loose?). Turning the top dial compresses the spring, step-less progressive resistance to the rotation of the arm shaft, great ... Counter-acts inward force when playing.
Perhaps I would be confident with new from factory, but, there is no way I would be confident with this one, or any used one. Where is zero? Prior in-appropriate revolutions? Weakened spring?
I like dangling string counterweight with many small 1/4 gram notches like the SME and others. One thing I did not like about my 3009 Anti-Skate was the age and brittleness of the plastic line, but it always tested accurate in use.
9. Actual anti-skate. Listening, test record, final set of anti-skate is best. But, when changing cartridges, Stereo to Mono, Shibata to Elliptical: quickly adding or reducing tracking force, then a quick anti-skate corresponding change ..... no listening test, trust the incremental changes from prior proven setting. I feel more confident moving the string to the next notch than adjusting a spring.
Hope this is helpful, perhaps others can clarify anything I got wrong.
Elliott
................
The Large Plinth with UA-7082 I bought arrived, the plinth, legs, dust cover seriously damaged. Insured, at UPS for damage claim now.
The arm, before I bought it, the counter weight tube was sagging (very typical it seems), because the rubber washer between the main tube and the rear counterweight tube had deteriorated (the typical age related problem).
I pointed it out to seller, he fixed it, posted new photos, I bought it.
The arm arrived undamaged, however, it was going back, and, perhaps I will buy one in the future with bad rubber, soooo, I decided to see how he fixed it.
I’m no engineer, this is my attempt to clarify the rubber repair for myself and others. Lot of words to attempt clarity, it’s not that complicated.
1. the 7082 (presumably 7045) rear tube and counterweight are not totally isolated from the arm by a tubular layer of rubber like my SME 3009 was. (I repaired 3009 with factory rubber tube from SME when I first got it).
2. The 7082 rear tube is threaded, It threads into the back of a fitting on the end of the main arm, just behind the pivot. Not tight machine threads, so minor movement can occur. That is a semi-solid, not totally isolated connection. If the rubber washer is weak, these loose threads allow sag to occur. Perhaps the threaded shaft gets bent down also.
3. You thread/snug that rear tube forward against the rubber washer. The thickness of the washer is therefore not critical (except too thin). The density of the rubber needs to be firm enough to keep the rear tube from sagging, but not too hard, so it can do it’s job: dampening vibrations traveling down/back up the tube, isolating counterweight .... engineers can clarify this design function.
4. Washer Shape. Factory ____? This one: It did not slip off the front tube as I expected a simple washer would. It had an integral smaller diameter ’shoulder’ or ’neck’ that projected forward into the rear tube fitting. There are two tiny allen-head set screws at the bottom of the fitting. I loosened them and a short piece of tube came out, less than an inch long, rubber washer at the rear end.
5. Front face of the small fitting with the washer has/had a brass faced plate, curved. This one was damaged, part missing, part ’mangled’. My guess, it was set too tightly to the face of the arm shaft, someone messed with it, who knows ....
6. The point is, unless I took it apart, it looked fixed, you would definitely choose this over one with deteriorated rubber, sagging rear tube. But it had invisible damage. No way to know if buying used. Or know after you received it. I think this is probably a very rare instance, just mentioning it, perhaps someone knows something about it _____ ?
7. Effect performance??? Many have said they have weak rubber washers/sagging rear tubes: so what, plays great. The fitting: internal damaged brass face could be carefully reassembled, making sure no contact with anything.
8. Anti-Skate. I don’t like it, especially used. The plastic cap lifted off to reveal a spring coiled around the shaft (cap’s tiny set screws too loose?). Turning the top dial compresses the spring, step-less progressive resistance to the rotation of the arm shaft, great ... Counter-acts inward force when playing.
Perhaps I would be confident with new from factory, but, there is no way I would be confident with this one, or any used one. Where is zero? Prior in-appropriate revolutions? Weakened spring?
I like dangling string counterweight with many small 1/4 gram notches like the SME and others. One thing I did not like about my 3009 Anti-Skate was the age and brittleness of the plastic line, but it always tested accurate in use.
9. Actual anti-skate. Listening, test record, final set of anti-skate is best. But, when changing cartridges, Stereo to Mono, Shibata to Elliptical: quickly adding or reducing tracking force, then a quick anti-skate corresponding change ..... no listening test, trust the incremental changes from prior proven setting. I feel more confident moving the string to the next notch than adjusting a spring.
Hope this is helpful, perhaps others can clarify anything I got wrong.
Elliott
- ...
- 33 posts total
richard_crl032where do you live. near enough to me, plainfield nj 07062, we could meet, it would be an easy fix we could do together. |
Now that Richard dredged up this old thread on the Victor 7 series tonearms, I am stimulated to finally fix my 7045. But also let me say that these are very well conceived tonearms that are very modern in design approach in most ways. They deserve more praise than they get. The only feature (in my opinion) that might separate this design from the best modern ones is the fact that the pivot is not in the plane of the LP. But there are dozens of other tonearms that are in common use that also exhibit this "defect" and work wonderfully. I wonder if any of us is using a 7045 or 7082 and with what cartridge. |
- 33 posts total