Bolex SP 8 Special

[Paul Adsett]

Brian that switch is a bear! A prime example of Eumigs misplaced obsession with making all their own switches instead of using reliable readily available ones. I just finished adressing this problem on my 820 a couple of weeks ago. Symptoms were - lamp not reliably lighting when turning the control knob to forward with sound, even though the lamp was preheating correctly in the other knob positions. i ruled out a bad lamp connector, and eventually traced it to that wretched switch where I could see the switch arcing. i tried cleaning the contacts with electrical spray, and also tried bending the contacts a little bit. I could see that the contacts were not making hard contact in the lamp ON positions. As a last resort it tried bending that tiny little curved leaf spring - BAD MOVE! The spring popped off and I spent 3 hours trying to get it back in position and finally gave up. I retrofitted an identical switch from an old parts only Eumig 807 and it works fine. But why on earth did'nt Eumig use a standard off the shelf sub- miniature microswitch in this design. Same question for all the other switches that Eumig loved to make, and are now a problem on their projectors, particularly the 900 series.
.

[Brian Harrington]

Interesting, Paul. I believe the 820 is the closest to the Bolex SP 8 Special. The Special indicator is equivalent to HQS. The main difference other than cosmetics is the Bolex doesnt have the programmable feature. It also has no tone control. It does have the 18/24 indicator which Eumig doesnt have. Also the Bolex had a led indicator for recording level not on the Eumig.

I use the f1.2 lens on my Eumig and it fits in the Bolex as well, which came with the f1.3 lens. It is labeled as a Bolex on the zoom ring but on the other end it says made in Austria. They can no longer try to pull the wool over our eyes!

Micro switches arent a panacea, either. I recently needed to repair one on a Yamawa machine. Yes, repair not replace. I searched and found similar switches, even the same brand, but everything needs to be exact. I had to break open the plastic since there was no screw. I cleaned the contacts and had to bend the thin metal back into shape so the snap contacts would work. Similar to that Bolex Eumig light switch. Then I glued the plastic back together and surprisingly everything worked. What was happening was the motor wasnt always turning on properly and would occassionally stop for a second mid film and would then start up again. Unlike the Eumig, when plugged in nothing turns on automagically!

Another switch right next to it was acting up when I first got the machine, where the lamp would sometimes stay on when stopping the projector. Of course this happened when I stopped it mid film and it burned a frame. I just fixed it by working the switch and havent had the issue since, and that was several years ago.

There is no perfect projector, and certainly no problem-free 40+ year old ones! They all will have issues sooner rather than later.

[Brian Harrington]

While we're on the topic of why Eumig did things they way they did --

I'm not sure what the Eumig engineers thought was the advantage of using the rubber discs instead of the more traditional belts. I know the issue has been discussed for 20+ years...but just what were they thinking? Similar to Elmo deciding to have a rubber wheel/tire drive the outer rim of the metal shutter, unlike their sub-1200 foot models. Unlike Eumigs, however, this has not proved to be much of an issue -- at least not for me. And I know some models originally had rubber around the shutter but neither of mine had them when I got them.

After the 800 series, Eumig's next models should have been a big improvement, and perhaps would have challenged Elmo, but they dropped the ball with the 900 series up to the 926. You don't "improve" a projector by eliminating the front sprocket. I know this was rectified >926, as has been discussed, but those were not the tanks that the 800 series were. It also makes me wonder if they ever tested those lower 900 models with film??? I still maintain that the Eumig 907 I bought as NOS in the mid-90s was the worst sound projector I ever used. I wound up selling it a few years later. My Chinon 7500 is now challenging it for that distinction.

[Shane C. Collins]

While we're on the topic of why Eumig did things they way they did --

I'm not sure what the Eumig engineers thought was the advantage of using the rubber discs instead of the more traditional belts. I know the issue has been discussed for 20+ years...but just what were they thinking? Similar to Elmo deciding to have a rubber wheel/tire drive the outer rim of the metal shutter, unlike their sub-1200 foot models. Unlike Eumigs, however, this has not proved to be much of an issue -- at least not for me. And I know some models originally had rubber around the shutter but neither of mine had them when I got them.

After the 800 series, Eumig's next models should have been a big improvement, and perhaps would have challenged Elmo, but they dropped the ball with the 900 series up to the 926. You don't "improve" a projector by eliminating the front sprocket. I know this was rectified >926, as has been discussed, but those were not the tanks that the 800 series were. It also makes me wonder if they ever tested those lower 900 models with film??? I still maintain that the Eumig 907 I bought as NOS in the mid-90s was the worst sound projector I ever used. I wound up selling it a few years later. My Chinon 7500 is now challenging it for that distinction.

It's not a bad system when the rubber is in good condition, and treated properly. I think most of the issues people have had over the years, is not properly maintaining the rubber. My practice has been to clean both discs with alcohol, followed by treatment with automotive belt dressing. This stuff works great, and helps to make the rubber like new again. It also seems to help improve the grip, by applying some sticking formula. I've been running my 709 the last 2 years with one treatment. Now granted this machine was like new, with little to no use when I acquired it! Just my thoughts!

[Paul Adsett]

I follow the same procedure as Shane. Clean discs with alcohol, let dry, then wipe on Automotive belt dressing with a q-tip all over the face of the rubber discs. wait 24 hrs before powering up the projector. This works very well in restoring the grip of the discs, but to keep it working well I still recommend powering up and running for a couple of hours every 3 months or so. These machines hate being idle. Shane clearly runs his 709 quite frequently which is very beneficial in keeping the rubber in a softer condition with better grip.

[Brian Harrington]

Thanks guys.

Yes, but other projectors that use belts don't have that problem. So although there is a way to get it working again (and I did get it working again), a better design to begin with would have been preferred. And other machines don't need motor mounts replaced. If it weren't for Van Eck making the mounts, most Eumigs would be ready for the trash heap.

What I'm after, and we will probably never know, is what the Eumig engineers had in mind with that transmission design. There must be a reason they thought it would be better than belts, even if it turned out not to be. And the speed selection being mechanical, with the motor speed being controlled by the frequency instead of the voltage, was also an interesting decision. Was it cost? I hardly think so, since Eumigs were very highly priced back in the 70s. In 1977, Blackhawk sold the Elmo ST-1200D for $560. The Eumig 810D Lux HQS was $570.

My Bolex runs fine -- no issues with the motor, the mounts (now that I've replaced them), or the discs. Since I've "been there, done that" with Eumigs, I thought I'd have a beautifully running machine by now.

I tried Joseph's idea of using the soldering gun to loosen up the screws. No dice, unfortunately.

I'll have to get a smaller set of screw extactors, and then hopefully find replacement grub screws, or take the screws from one of my "parts" projectors. Why, oh why, didn't Eumig use grub screws instead of flatheads? The biggest problem I'm having is that I can't generate enough torque with the small screwdrivers, and even when I muster up enough downward pressure, the head of the screwdriver slips out of the screw. Since that collar is small, once I get it out perhaps the local hardware store will have grub screws that fit. (Forget places like Home Depot. They're useless for stuff like this.)

I must admit that I'm mentally exhausted with this machine. Never anticipated these problems. I don't know what the last guy did to it -- he screwed those screws in like his life depended on it, and only after he had moved the collar out of position so there is no claw penetration at all! But figuring out why previous owners did what they did to these machines is a fool's errand.

[Shane C. Collins]

Thanks guys.

Yes, but other projectors that use belts don't have that problem. So although there is a way to get it working again (and I did get it working again), a better design to begin with would have been preferred. And other machines don't need motor mounts replaced. If it weren't for Van Eck making the mounts, most Eumigs would be ready for the trash heap.

What I'm after, and we will probably never know, is what the Eumig engineers had in mind with that transmission design. There must be a reason they thought it would be better than belts, even if it turned out not to be. And the speed selection being mechanical, with the motor speed being controlled by the frequency instead of the voltage, was also an interesting decision. Was it cost? I hardly think so, since Eumigs were very highly priced back in the 70s. In 1977, Blackhawk sold the Elmo ST-1200D for $560. The Eumig 810D Lux HQS was $570.

My Bolex runs fine -- no issues with the motor, the mounts (now that I've replaced them), or the discs. Since I've "been there, done that" with Eumigs, I thought I'd have a beautifully running machine by now.

I tried Joseph's idea of using the soldering gun to loosen up the screws. No dice, unfortunately.

I'll have to get a smaller set of screw extactors, and then hopefully find replacement grub screws, or take the screws from one of my "parts" projectors. Why, oh why, didn't Eumig use grub screws instead of flatheads? The biggest problem I'm having is that I can't generate enough torque with the small screwdrivers, and even when I muster up enough downward pressure, the head of the screwdriver slips out of the screw. Since that collar is small, once I get it out perhaps the local hardware store will have grub screws that fit. (Forget places like Home Depot. They're useless for stuff like this.)

I must admit that I'm mentally exhausted with this machine. Never anticipated these problems. I don't know what the last guy did to it -- he screwed those screws in like his life depended on it, and only after he had moved the collar out of position so there is no claw penetration at all! But figuring out why previous owners did what they did to these machines is a fool's errand.

I agree, past owners can screw machines up in ways that make one scratch his head! I've encountered many of these same issues when servicing a machine in the past. I got lucky with the 709 being that it was basically like a new machine. Just the basic Eumig fixes had it up and running in no time at all. Any time I work on a Eumig, I make sure to have new motor mounts purchased, a few Q tips, CRC belt dressing, and oil. Once you've worked on one they all pretty much are the same.

I just fired up the 709 this past weekend, to watch 2 large 600' reels of home movies I've shot over the last 15 years, to present. She purred like a new machine for both showings.

[Brian Harrington]

Well, I've been lucky since pretty much all the projectors I've bought on the bay I've been able to get running pretty quickly with new belts.

I have a spare Eumig claw-shutter assembly but I've never attempted to install one. If worse comes to worse, I might just try to swap assemblies. Not much to lose since the Bolex assembly is already screwed up. I've done side-to-side claw alignments with other brands with mixed success. I wanted to avoid that but my gut tells me that will be the next problem I have to attack on this Bolex if I ever get the screws out of that collar. So it's 6 of one, half-dozen of the other -- know what I mean?

[Brian Harrington]

Well, i packed up the Bolex and will put it aside for awhile. I wanted to go back to enjoying the hobby and took out my B&H 33SR made by Yamawa, and watched some films! What a reliable machine -- it just works, and the picture is rock-steady. I've heard it referred to as "entry-level", but if that means it works without problems, then yes, it's "entry-level." With an EFP 100 watt halogen and f1.3 lens, then most Eumigs, and under 800 foot Elmos and Sankyos are also "entry-level." Only a small handful of Sankyos and Eumigs used an EFR lamp. I have a Sankyo 702 that uses it, and I think it's no brighter than this B&H. The highly regarded Eumig 800s maxed out at 100 watts, and 600 foot capacity, too. I didn't even have to replace the belt when I bought it a few years ago, and the seller wasn't even a "projector guy" and knew nothing about it.

I can't spend my life trying to get this Bolex to work, and my Chinon to run prints smoothly without getting the jitters.

[Brian Harrington]

Well, I was at HD for some other stuff, and decided to pick up a new precision screwdriver set, longer than what I already have, "4x" as sturdy claims the box, with wider, grippier handles. I figured it would help get the Bolex screws out. It didn't.

I tried my screw extractor set, but it seems to be made for philips and hex screws, not flat-heads. The drill just spun around and I couldn't keep it steady, because it couldn't grip the flat-head screw. I then tried drilling into the screw with a regular drill bit -- again impossible to keep steady without slipping.

Googling yielded results like using a "left handed" drill bit which is basically what my screw extractor set is. I sprayed some WD-40 to help loosen up the screws. No dice. I had previously used 3-and-1 oil. I tried the hammer trick again -- had already tried it but gave it another go. No luck. Tried heating it with the solder gun again -- still didn't work.

I removed 2 larger screws -- easily, I might add -- with the hope that I could remove the whole shutter assembly, but it seems more complicated than that. Plus it's connected to the framer control. If I proceed with that I'll be falling down and even bigger rabbit hole trying to fix this machine.

It really bites that what's keeping me from fixing this machine is the inability to remove 2 screws. Such is life.

What bites even more is that I've already installed parts that I bought from Van Eck -- the motor mounts as well as the feed reel spindle, which suffered the same fate as Beaulieu spindles -- the 2 plastic tabs were broken off that keeps the reel secure. To do that, I had to buy additional tools -- a special wrench set. That was a pita to install, but Van Eck has a YT video on how to do it. Luckily, I only paid about $60 for the projector itself -- but still. And, oh yea, I bought extra tiny rollers from Van Eck -- 3 pairs. Those are the ones that usually get lost if you try to clean them, but luckily the Bolex had them all intact. I wanted spares just in case.

And since I've already taken hammers, drills, and soldering irons to the machine in an attempt to get those screws out, who knows what other inadvertent damage I may have caused.

[Brian Harrington]

Now I'm wondering if I can get that collar off without removing the screws? My gut says to do that I'd probably first have to remove the shutter assy from the machine. It would be great not to have to do that, but there's really no room to work to try to remove the collar without doing that. But once I do that, I might as well just replace it with the whole shutter assy I have as a spare from another machine. Six of one, half-dozen on another -- know what I mean?