8mm Forum: 1600 FT Spool for the GS 1200

This is topic 1600 FT Spool for the GS 1200 in forum 8mm Forum at 8mm Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=010217

Posted by Tom Dee (Member # 4468) on September 23, 2015, 03:03 PM:

I have just seen a spool which is 1600ft that fits on the Elmo GS 1200 and other machines as well. Would these spools work ok or would they put extra strain on the motor... and would the film start to spill over at the front reel due to the weight and the same for the back reel.

Thanks
Tom

Posted by Maurice Leakey (Member # 916) on September 23, 2015, 03:15 PM:

Many years ago a British gentleman by the name of Tony Churcher (now deceased) produced what he called a Supaspool. It was the same overall diameter as an Elmo 1200ft spool but it had a smaller centre. Tony claimed it would hold 1600ft of film.

I bought some for my Elmo ST 1200. However, due to their very heavy construction and the small centre my Elmo protested from the start, and finally the take-up spool slowed to a halt long before the film had run through.

The motor of the ST1200 just couldn't cope. However, as the GS1200 has its own take-up motor it would be interesting to hear from fellow members if they had more success with this spool than I did.

Posted by Dominique De Bast (Member # 3798) on September 23, 2015, 03:32 PM:

I have very few 1600 ft Supaspools and I don't remember if I ever tried one on a machine designed for a capacity limit of 1200 ft. But I have several 2600 ft Supaspool and so far I have had no trouble with them regarding the "lasting". I had, though to lime the central hole as it was, as you say, Maurice, too small.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on September 23, 2015, 03:38 PM:

My opinions of these particular spools have been well documented on here.

A gallant effort by a passionate cine man by all accounts. But nevertheless a reel which does not follow the basic laws of science in its design and therefore fails on many different levels for its intended useage on the very machines it was designed to be of use on.

Also, Unless you have fingers the size of a bird's talons, forget trying to thread the end of your film into the centre hub slot.

Posted by Paul Suchy (Member # 80) on September 23, 2015, 03:39 PM:

The 1600' reels are fine with a GS1200; Steve Osborne sells all plastic 1600 reels that are good as "feed reels", but make poor take up reels. So if you have a GS1200 and 1 Supaspool for take up, you're good to go for 80 minutes.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on September 23, 2015, 03:43 PM:

Hmmmm...I could be on here all night explaining Paul but these days I will simply agree to disagree.

Life's too short, I've learned.

[ September 23, 2015, 08:27 PM: Message edited by: Andrew Woodcock ]

Posted by Paul Suchy (Member # 80) on September 23, 2015, 04:00 PM:

Andrew, I'm grateful for the feedback; I have several features and television shows on the 1600 reels and have never had a problem (yet). Now that you have posted, I'll have to look over my shoulder from time to time to make sure the film is collecting properly. But you certainly get no argument from me concerning the tight spot at the center! It is a pain to thread.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on September 23, 2015, 04:03 PM:

It is indeed Paul [Wink]

Watch out also Paul for the ill effects over time of an over tight and over coiled wind at the beginning of the reel when carrying such a large heavy mass of film.

Anything precious, or worth any monetary value...put them on two 800ft's if 1200ft is your limit in projection.

That's my advice,for what it's worth...that is, if you want to see your money back one day.

[ September 23, 2015, 08:33 PM: Message edited by: Andrew Woodcock ]

Posted by Dominique De Bast (Member # 3798) on September 23, 2015, 04:06 PM:

Andrew pointed out something that has not been often discussed : the conception of the holding slot. On some reels it is difficult or impossible to access and many it is too large and you have to do some manipulations each time you want to rewind a film. One can wonder if people who designed the reels thought that they would be used in the real life.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on September 23, 2015, 04:14 PM:

Many designers seemingly have never heard of the term ergonomics.

Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on September 24, 2015, 02:44 AM:

I myself have a couple of larger reels for the GS1200, but in general I would keep to either 800ft or 1200ft reels.

The reason is the take up motor on the GS1200 is real dinky toy stuff, with a tiny commutator, with two tiny brushes...I have had them apart [Roll Eyes]

. Might have been up to the task when the motor was new "just".....but not now [Frown]

Posted by Jason Gronn (Member # 3921) on September 24, 2015, 04:12 PM:

I have a stock pile of these 1600" plastic spools from the Reel Image and have all my feature films placed on them.
Never had any issues and the GS runs fine with them due to the fact as mentioned that it has it's own take up motor.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on September 24, 2015, 04:18 PM:

The plastic ones are better Jason than the TC ones could ever be.

Nowhere near as much weight to the reel itself so not the same levels of torque placed on the tiny motor Graham points out.
The TC ones are made of heavy steel not Aluminium or lighter still...plastic.
Relatively, even without film...they weigh a Ton!

still be wary though of the long term effects of those inner tight coils with lots of film resting on it!

Very easy to obtain unwanted cinch marks, warping etc on your precious prints.

There is a good scientific reason why professional reel manufacturers made their centre hubs the size they are for each incremental increase in reel capacity.

The Elmo 800ft and 1200ft reels got it spot on with their reel designs at least. The centre hubs are almost 4" in diameter on just the 800ft ones alone!

I got a print of "Scrooge" mounted on a TC reel not so long ago.
The last 200ft has THE most unsteady image I have ever seen. All because the sprockets had been stretched and elongated on inspection from the torque generated by trying to unwind this huge mass from such a tiny centre hub.

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2