8mm Forum: That ol' 708 is back up on the 'Bay I see...

This is topic That ol' 708 is back up on the 'Bay I see... in forum 8mm equipment for sale/trade at 8mm Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=002804

Posted by Stuart Reid (Member # 1460) on February 22, 2016, 02:19 PM:

Non-paying winner - was it one of you lot?! [Wink]

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Beaulieu-708-EL-double-track-capstan-drive-Schneider-Kreuznach-MC-Xenovaron-/151987993993?hash=item236330bd89:g:w4gAAOSwvUlWrmN9

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on February 22, 2016, 03:21 PM:

Yes I noticed the return of the 708 desperately seeking a new loving owner.

Not me Stuart (non payment) that much I can say! [Wink]

Posted by Alan Gouger (Member # 31) on February 23, 2016, 12:07 AM:

Looks in rough shape but if everything works and with a little love and care it will make someone a fine projector. You rarely see these for sale anymore. No mention if the audio works though.

Posted by Terry Sills (Member # 3309) on February 23, 2016, 01:30 AM:

Why not name the non payer! It would help others to block them from their eBay listings. I've not encountered this problem yet, but I can understand that it would be very frustrating.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on February 23, 2016, 03:58 AM:

Alan, the inherited owner here wouldn't be able to verify too much re sound etc.

So far it has only be tested using regular 8mm film!
Hardly a means to preserving what you have to begin with here.

Posted by Del Phillipson (Member # 513) on February 23, 2016, 05:39 AM:

I'm pretty sure I have a bag of bolts in my garage looks in better shape than that projector [Big Grin]

Posted by Terry Sills (Member # 3309) on February 23, 2016, 12:46 PM:

Del
I agree. I wouldn't touch a projector in that condition with a barge pole, let alone pay that sort of money for it.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on February 23, 2016, 01:25 PM:

Terry and Del. You are of course both correct to have your reservations regarding the overall condition of this projector, but just like when it originally surfaced and was discussed here and elsewhere, these machines do have quite a high residual value even if only for spare parts

When you consider two spindle hubs now would cost you over £400 delivered to the UK, also a magnetic head will cost over £200 each as would a main motor, then you begin to realize that even if this projector sells for around £250 like last time, this could well prove to be a relative bargain to many Beaulieu owners out there.

At the price it currently stands £99, anyone who already has duo model or higher, has nothing to lose quite frankly.

There are plenty of useful parts on even this poor specimen to be able to get your money's worth as a donor for a decent one.

Belts, cam, claw, heads, motors, transformer, guides etc etc...the list is endless.

Not too long ago, I saw a guy here wanting a rear cover for his decent machine. This is exactly right for someone in that position. Nowhere else would you find one.

Rob Young here needed a spindle clutch for example not too far back here. Luckily Rob was able to repair his existing one once he spent much time taking it apart and working out a strategy, but this would have provided an excellent quick fix solution had it been available at the time.

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on February 23, 2016, 02:04 PM:

True, Andrew, although I did have to endulge Wittners and their imaginative pricing system for that repair, amongst other subsequent repairs.

So a punt at a £100 spares machine may not be so bad.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on February 23, 2016, 03:12 PM:

Agreed Rob. [Wink]

Posted by Brian Fretwell (Member # 4302) on February 26, 2016, 07:18 AM:

I was going through South Shields (seller's location) this week, should have bid and collected, or at least asked to have a look.

Posted by Del Phillipson (Member # 513) on February 26, 2016, 11:25 AM:

Hi Andrew, don't get me wrong I get the parts bit but if the projector is in that condition are the parts going to be any better. It looks hammered so there's a good chance the sound heads etc are also hammered, still wouldn't touch it with a barge pole (not that I could pick a barge pole up)

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on February 26, 2016, 02:23 PM:

With an electricians head on me looking at this, I'm inclined to think differently Del. This machine has been sat for a very long time, no doubting that.

It actually doesn't look hammered to my eyes, just neglected and unused in a very long time while being stored in a very damp place.

What that says to me, quite like Phil's machine here recently, is that due to the damp conditions of storage, there is a good chance that quite a large section of the electronics will need replacing.

The transformer will need drying out and testing and may even need a re dip, I doubt there would be too much wrong with any of mechanical parts and plastic guides etc will be ok.
The motors currently both work, though as said the transformer and switches etc may all need work or replacement.
Just because they appear to work, doesn't mean they are safe!

But to come back to your point here regarding the mag heads,a machine left in storage for THIS long, probably hasn't been used anywhere near one that would still look immaculate now.

If it looks immaculate, chances are someone still loves it and therefore uses it still. Therefore wear items like mag heads and motors etc, may well have been subjected to many more miles of Film running through it, than the ones on this abandoned example featured here.

Of course, all of this is just guess work, but a neglected machine can often be a little used one also!

[ February 26, 2016, 03:41 PM: Message edited by: Andrew Woodcock ]

Posted by Mark Todd (Member # 96) on February 26, 2016, 04:43 PM:

Thing is with these one of our ranks bought a nice looking one from a good source and still needed to spend an aweful lot of money on it, and it was`nt cheap to start with.

But for performance they are very nice when on song, as long as you don`t hit one of the scratchey ones. And some just do.

I,ve seen an absolute beauty going the chap bought new for 5K in English too. !!! blimey.He would of sold it to me for £1500. I was tempted of course though generally skint, but the once good lady would of put the local murder statistics up one notch guaranteed.

Best Mark.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on February 26, 2016, 11:51 PM:

I've yet to find any way of seeing HOW these COULD scratch Mark if the input guide is set and FIXED in the right place and the claw penetration, as always, is set correctly?

There is just so little that contacts the film along the path!
The things that do, are both really well made and also made with best material and real precision.

I was baffled for weeks by mine when I first got it for the reasons stated above. I just couldn't see how it was happening.
A simple adjustment....and no longer ever the case!

[ February 28, 2016, 07:44 AM: Message edited by: Andrew Woodcock ]

Posted by Mark Todd (Member # 96) on February 29, 2016, 08:09 AM:

Well whatever causes it, its quite regular, so best to be careful at first if you are running one.

I do know they are not too keen on coping with slightly off-slit film, Waltons can be a particular issue as regularly a bit this or that way size wise.

Best Mark.

PS can`t beat the rear pressure plate though. The Braun Vicacustics have the same but even more gremlins and they really don`t travel well at all in the post if you ever considering buying one.

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on March 01, 2016, 02:44 AM:

The only thing that can cause it Mark, are the two things I have spoken about if everything else is set correctly.

I would be interested in you enlightening me to the others who have had negative experiences in the scratch department with these for the simple reason, whoever I have spoken with regarding this specific point, they have all named just two machines which,unless something is defective, will not scratch films under any circumstances.

The Fumeo 9119/20 was one, The Beaulieu is the other.
I am inclined to believe there are one or two more than that, but people with many more years under their belt than I have in this game, this is what I've listened to them say, repeatedly.

This includes the most respected UK repair specialists we have.

In response to your last point here Mark regarding these machines being fussy with some older acetate and fractional wider or "off" slit prints such as the Walton features, I was of the same mindset until I made the recent changes to the claw penetration.

Now the machine runs just as well and just as quietly with these type of films, as it does with later thinner Polyester ones. No difference at all and much much quieter now all around.
The fan noise now exceeds any claw and gate noise to put it into perspective, in the same way a good 938 does the same.

As said before, on these open gated machines, the difference between having the machine set exactly correct....., to not having, is unbelievable.
It can go from emulating a "sows ear to a silk purse" in a few simple steps.

I am inclined to believe they were all like this at one stage, then came along their owners in some cases.

[ March 01, 2016, 01:29 PM: Message edited by: Andrew Woodcock ]

Posted by Andrew Woodcock (Member # 3260) on March 01, 2016, 08:12 PM:

No answer here Then Mark? Ive seen you have been on since, but if you've got nothing else to add,well in my puzzled state, I would be keen to learn of other people's experiences and solutions to their scratching experiences on these.
To my eyes, there are only two apparent ways (as stated above) in which this is possible here when all is healthy with the initial design and build????

The machine this topic was aimed at sold for £275 this time around I see. More than it was sold for first time around to a non paying winning bidder!
Obviously this proves that these machines above many others, do indeed carry a decent residual value.

[ March 02, 2016, 05:44 AM: Message edited by: Andrew Woodcock ]

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2