Elmo GP Series vs. Honeywell Elmo 360 and 380

[Tony Ferrara]

Hello All,

I have been doing some research and am trying to discern the differences between the Elmo GP Series and the Honeywell Elmo 360 and 380 projectors. From what I have gathered, it appears that the Elmo GP-E and the Honeywell Elmo 360 are basically the same projector (no slow motion, no tape sync), and the GP-E Slow Motion and the Honeywell Elmo 380 are basically the same projector. Is this correct?

Regarding the belts, some sellers are making distinctions between belts for the Elmo vs. the Honewell Elmo series. I have also seen belts for the Elmo FP series being sold to fit the Honewell Elmo 380, which I believe to be incorrect.

If anyone can help sort this out for me I would greatly appreciate it.

Thanks,

Tony

P.S. Both this forum and the archived forum offer a wealth of valuable information!

[Shane C. Collins]

Tony these projectors are basically the same design inside and out. I have a Honeywell Elmo FP8-C dual 8 machine from 1968. I once had an Elmo 360 but gave that away some years back. When I first bought the 360 it didn't have belts. I ended up swapping them out from the FP model. The main drive belt and the long belt fit perfectly! The 2 different series machines are set up differently. However, Elmo basically re-routed the designs, but was able to use the same length belts. The main drive belt set-up in both series is basically the same design. They both even have the rubber drive above the belt.
Here's a link to Van Eck's site. You'll see most of the FP-series, and GP-series share the same parts, belts, etc.
https://van-eck.net/en/spare-part-fi...k=52&type=GP-E

[Tony Ferrara]

Thanks, Shane. Yes, that link is where I have received lots of info. Waiting for my delivery of Eumig Motors mounts from them, too. 😀

I have a Honeywell Elmo FP8-C that I recently purchased -- belts seem to be ok. (Bolex 18-5 lens fits great -- the existing lens was unusable -- tried to clean that inner sliding lens -- cracked it in the process of bending the "crimp" back.) I have a Honeywell Elmo 380 on the way. I also have the Standard 8 only FP -- just a few weeks ago. The Bolex lens doesn't fit, though, as the FP has a slightly too small barrel. No crimp on that inner piece -- without the zoom attachment, it works well as a 25mm prime. Amazingly, just cleaning the outer parts of the inner piece, though still a bit dirty, does not effect the projected image at all. Still about a foot too narrow for my throw, but good enough. (My screen is about 4 feet wide.) It is my one and only manual-threading machine -- even my 16mm projectors are slot loads or auto-threading.

I can save money based on your info -- the 380 belts are more expensive on eBay (from a fine chap that I am sure everyone knows -- he was very helpful to me in the past -- sent me multiple belts once to see which one would fit, then I sent the ones that didn't fit back.) Who knows? Maybe the belts are OK. I have been having good luck with existing belts from projectors I have bought lately.

I found another website from Ireland that claims:
"This version of the Elmo GP-E Deluxe was an improvement from the first GP-E series.
It has less mechanical parts and has improved electronics, which makes it one of the most reliable projectors."
https://www.super8ireland.com/listof...pe-deluxe.html

From what I can gather, though, it seems to be the same as the Honewell 380 except for the addition of the tape sync (which I don't need.) I decided to get it because I can use my ST-1200HD 1.1 lens with it.


I am not sure how I missed the GP and FP series all these years. (I have been in the hobby for 48 years!) My first Elmo, the ST-1200 HD, I purchased a little over a quarter of a century ago. The SP seems to be a later update of the GP, but goes for more money on the big auction site.

Other than a dual Eumig (which I have had since it came out 48 years ago -- 810D), I did not know that any other dual-8 machine incorporated alternate sprockets. I prefer single gauge machines, but I haven't seen any Standard 8mm projectors that produce that kind of light output as the Elmo FP, GE, and SP. I have, however, done some halogen conversions on a few Bell & Howells. Bottom line is that I am trying to eliminate the use of my Super 8 sound projectors for viewing silent films.

[Shane C. Collins]

Tony, some good information here! Like you I also have my Elmo FP8-C fitted with a Bolex prime lens. The light output is very bright. Just recently I bought a Eumig Mark M Super 8 only machine. That projector uses a 100 watt bulb that also incorporates a special condenser lens. That believe it or not is just as bright as my Elmo. The lens is a 1.4 zoom that is razor sharp. I actually prefer this projector over the Elmo. The design is nicer and easier to use. Eumig also made a regular 8 version of the Mark series that probably is just as bright. These projectors also use a twist to focus lens that stays in focus the whole time. Well anyways I'm rambling now LOL.
The Elmo GP machine I had some years back was actually nice but the lens was not very sharp. I tried fitting better lenses but it never quite worked. I sold the machine as a result. The Elmo FP8-C is nice though. The Bolex lens brings it to a whole new level.
What Bell & Howells have you owned? I had several when I first started this hobby some 16 years ago. I think the models I had were the 456 and the 466A. Also a later Lumina sound model.

[Nantawat Kittiwarakul]

I also have GP-E Deluxe too - a real great dual 8 projector with exceptional build quality, performance, and all imaginable bell & whistle being thrown in.
Therefore I'm not sure about less mechanical parts claim. To my eyes this is actually the projector with highest number of parts count I've ever seen in this category. Thus that gives me a concern that if anything breaks down in the future, it would be well beyond my skill to have it fixed then.

[Tony Ferrara]

Shane,

Take a wild guess on why I recently purchased the Elmo FP8-C and knew that the Bolex lens would fit.
I like to give credit where credit is due! I was an avid long-time reader of the forum before I decided to join a few weeks ago.

I am familiar with the Mark M and Mark S (Standard 8 sound), though never saw one in action.
I am not sure why Eumig reverted back to an incandescent lamp for the 712, which I believe came out after those other 2 models.

My Honeywell Elmo 380 arrived today. My Elmo 1.1 lens from my ST-1200HD fits perfectly -- that's why I got this projector. Belts look OK but I haven't plugged it in yet to try it. Pretty clean film path, so not much work to get it into action. Just some lube as a matter of course, thought that looks ok too.

So it looks like I met my goal, but I don't want to jinx myself before I try it out, lol. This should give as bright and sharp a picture as my Elmo ST-1200HD. After all, I will be using the same lens, and both have 150 watt halogens, albeit EFR vs. EJM. As I think I mentioned, I want to reduce wear on the ST-1200HD sound heads when I run silent films. I wish the ST-1200 had a silent mode with raised sound heads like my Yashica. But even so, why wear down other parts as well on a sound machine for silent films? Although dual-8, with the sprocket changes, and a 2 pinned claw that adjusts for the gauges (actually the gate adjusts, which effectively changes the claw position) it is practically like having 2 separate machines.

Nantawat,

Yes, there is a certain amount of complexity with the gauge change moving the both the sprockets and gates into position, but since this is all mechanical, to me it is fixable because I can see what is happening. When it comes to electronics, other that seeing if a wire is disconnected, I have no other knowledge. I have no idea what's going on in a circuit board, or if a capacitor needs replacing, or how to replace a capacitor. I don't even know what the heck a capacitor does. I probably once did though, since in college physics one semester was called "electricty and magnetism". Not sure if capacitors were covede in the course -- any answer is just a google away now. The course was all complex triple integrals! I couldn't solve a triple integral equation now if my life depended on it!

My Honeywell Elmo is basically the GP-E Deluxe without the tape sync -- which I doubt anyone cares about today anyway. And as I said I will be using my Elmo 1.1 lens in it. So it is closer to a Elmo GP Hi Deluxe, actually. I just hope it works OK without too much maintenance to put it in use.

Not sure why Elmo used different model numbers just for a different lens specs. To me, that's just a configuration option. I am still trying to determine what differentiates the regular GP (without the E), the GP-F, and the GP-E SZ from the GP-E. The Super 8 database isn't really clear on that. They don't even list the GP, but I found a manual for it online last week. I thought maybe the SZ was for a different country, but it too claims to have a power source of 100-115-125-200-220-240 V AC, 50/60 Hz, 300 W.

The GP manual shows a pic, and it definitely shows only "GP" on the projector. The other confusing thing is that it mentions the slow motion feature, and says "only for the models GP with slow motion." I am thoroughly confused. Oh, and BTW, my Honeywell 380 does not have the built-in film trimmer. Even the manual shows a hand holding the trimmer separately. The trimmer was not included in mine, but I have the same trimmer on my other Elmos. Someone already remomoved the glass heat shield from the lamp house cover, but that's not an issue since it seems to be the same size as for my other Elmos, which I sometimes remove anyway.

The only thing I am worried about is when I reduce the speed to close to 18fps for my older silent films from the late teens of the 20th century to early 20s. I try to adjust the speed to what looks natural, especially for non-comedies. The comedies, especially Sennets and Chaplins, do look a little better played a bit faster than 18fps though. A lot of Chaplin's visual gags seem to need the faster projection as Ben Model (if you know who he is) has pointed out in some videos on his blog.

But when Chaplin re-released many of his films in the 50s, he step-printed them to slow them down knowing they would be projected at 24fps, and the music was recorded at 24fps. The correct speed for films from the silent era is a big can of worms that no one can agree on. Off-topic -- and a subject for another time and another thread. But just saying, since I was curious about the heat shield for slower than 24fps.

I have played a few films on my ST-1200HD at 18fps, but I think I left the heat shield in. On my other projectors, I have played at slow speeds, but they had incandescents, and no heat shields except for slow-motion or still projection where it swings into place.

But incandescents give off more heat toward the film gate, right? Halogens are a bit cooler and the heat radiates toward the rear of the projector. So once again I am confused despite being in this hobby for 48 years. Ignorance was bliss before the internet, lol. None of my films were ever damaged due to heat from the lamp.


BTW, my wife and I went to Thailand about 15 years ago. We went to Bankok and Chiang Mai.
I rode and elephant in Chiang Mai, as well as took a raft trip down the river there, complete with a boxed lunch!

[Shane C. Collins]

LOL, I was wondering how you came to use a Bolex lens in the Elmo FP8-C. Well, I feel honored you did this same mod with your machine. It truly brings the Elmo into another dimension. The original Elmo lenses are usually no good any longer, which you already know.
In case you didn't know, there are two versions of the early Eumig projectors. The Eumig Mark M, which is regular 8, and the Eumig Mark M Super 8. The Super 8 version actually says Super 8 on the cover and the badge on the lamp cover. The regular 8 version just says Mark M. I actually got confused by this, and when I purchased a copy of the owner's manual I ended up getting the regular 8 version. It's the Super 8 version I need, but can you believe for the life of me, I can't find a copy online.
Your research into the Elmo GP Series is interesting. I never really gave that series much thought. Having only owned the 360 briefly, I didn't study this line of projectors. The FP Series I have done research online. Seems that line of projectors is easier to find history on.

[Tony Ferrara]

Yes, I enjoyed your youtube video, too, which was embedded in the Van-Eck site for that projector. I wouldn't have bought it if I didn't know that the Bolex lens would fit. The fact that it does fit was a fortunate accident, I guess. I am sure it wasn't planned.

I was aware of the Mark S for Standard 8mm sound (which Phil Johnson says was the best Standard 8mm sound projector ever produced, at least by Eumig). I have heard of the Mark M, but never dove into it to find out much about it. There are just too many makes and models of projectors.

I didn't even know anything about the FP series until I saw the posts, mainly by you and Janice, and others, too. I am sure I have seen it listed on eBay over the past 20 years, but never paid it much attention, especially since it was dual-8. The different sprockets, the 150 watt halogen lamp, and the 2-pinned claw made it a game changer for me. And at a cost of little more than a President Grant greenback, including shipping, it was hard to resist.

I wasn't specifically looking for that FP8-C, I just wanted one with the 150 watt halogen lamp. Janice's post in the archives about the slow motion being the key to the halogen lamp helped a lot, especially when I figured out that if you see the red switch on the front that means slow motion, made it a no-brainer. There are tons of the FP model series for sale. Like the now defunct Syms used to say, "An educated consumer is our best customer."

After only running a 200 footer, my FP8-C has already shown some issues. Before I even ran a film, I notice something amiss. There was a metal piece dangling beneath the film gate, attached by just one screw. I looked at some pics on the net, and saw how it should be attached. It was also bent out of shape. I didn't even know what it was for. Luckily, I found a screw that fit in my jars of spare screws of all sizes.

After I attached it, I saw that it lifts the lower portion of the pressure plate during threading. I adjusted it a few times, since the slot for one of the screws is elongated. I think I optimized the position since it lifts up the pressure pad perfectly when the threading button is pressed.

Anyway, after I cleaned the film path thoroughly (I unscrewed all the plastic guides and cleaned them in the sink), lubed all the gears, cleaned the belts and rubber rollers that touch the shutter, as well as the shutter itself, with alcohol, I ran a Super 8 200 footer. I thought I was watching a Blu-Ray! It has many splices that I made myself since it was in poor condition when I first bought it. A lot of intermittent sprocket damage, but I maybe lost about 10 feet, tops. It handled it well --
maybe 2 or 3 times I needed to hit the loop restorer that worked like a charm. I was a happy camper.

The next night I decided to try Standard 8mm. Well, I naturally projected light on the screen first to get the size right before loading a film, but instead of getting a clean rectangle, I got some distorted discombobulation. I then realized that the Standard 8 aperture plate was messed up, remembering a post here on the forum. I probably did it when cleaning, since you can't swing out the lens -- so I cleaned the aperture with a q-tip by sticking it through the lens hole into the aperture.

Bad move. I've done that a million times with other projectors, but I was not familiar enough with the FP8-C, and forgot that little detail I had read about. So it's on my to-do list to fix. There is a nice PDF someone put together in that thread that compiles the pertinent information on how to fix it.
That thread is not in the technical index, so I have asked Doug to put it there.

I'm a glutton for punishment. I specifically wanted to try problem prints -- since any projector can handle a good condition print -- at least in theory. So I chose another Super 8 film with no splices or sprocket damage, but on other projectors cannot focus evenly across the screen. It has very slight warping, probably fixable with a good soak in Film Renew, but runs fine through my Sankyo 2000H Dualux, which I find to be a finicky projector due to the one-pin claw and no sprockets. Its still very watchable, as you can get the center section of the screen in focus, with it being a hair or 2 off on
one side or the other.

Well, this print could not hold the loop. The loop restorer would get the film back in order for maybe 2 seconds. Sometimes not at all. I would stop, reset the loops by hand, but to no avail. Darn it!

So I removed the film from the film path after about 25 feet. Not easy. No instructions to do this in the manual, as this model obviously wasn't designed for it. But I did it anyway. Obviously, disengage the sprocket caps (or whatever you call them), then flip the pressure plate holder toward the lens, then remove the pressure plate. Now the next trick I learned from experience using the ST-1200HD. You need to slip a small piece of paper between the sprockets and the film guides, as well as between the rubber rollers and the film guides, section by section. This is the only way to remove the film without bending it or twisting it which would damage the film.

The long and short of it: I believe the claw needs to be adjusted so the pins extend past the
film gate a bit more. I searched this forum and its archive, found how to do it for other projectors, (I have done it on the ST-1200HD before), but not for the Elmo FP series. So before I start tearing the projector down blindly, can anyone please give me advice on the best approach for this projector? I know usually 1mm protrusion is the rule-of-thumb, but the key here is how do I get to the screw to make the adjustment, assuming there is a screw for that purpose. I know I read that for some projectors, possibly some Elmos, you actually have to bend the claw! Hopefully that won't be necessary.

Thanks

[Shane C. Collins]

The Elmo FP8-C is a pretty nice projector overall. It does have it's quirks, but it's reliable. I'm not a big fan of the location of the control dials. The only issue I've had to date was corrosion on the variable speed control. There is a rather large porcelain resistor under the speed dial itself. A few months ago, while showing a film, the projector stopped. I had to quickly move the speed dial until the projector started to run again. A week later I decided to look into why this occurred. I took the bottom plate off, and discovered green oxidized corrosion all over the switch. There is a large sliding metal piece that makes contact with the bottom of the speed resistor. I used contact cleaner to clean this area, and low and behold it worked. I started the projector back up and moved the dial from slow to fast. I've also cleaned the rubber wheel that applies pressure to the shutter wheel. I'm not a big fan of that design either, but it works.

I also own a Sankyo 2000H. I like that it's kind to film, but the lens, and brightness leave a lot to be desired. Speaking of brightness. I have found the shutter blade design of most projectors to be the biggest contributing factor effecting brightness. Here's a few examples: The Eumig Mark M Super 8 silent I own uses a 3 bladed shutter, a 100 watt FCR halogen bulb, separate rear reflector, and a condenser lens. That machine is just as bright as my Elmo FP8-C, which of course uses the 150 watt bulb. The Sankyo, in comparison, using a 100 watt halogen bulb, and I think a 4 blade shutter, is much much dimmer. Even with a 1.4 zoom lens on the Eumig it looks really nice, and bright on a full screen. Even my Bolex 15-5L Super 8 projector only using a 75 watt bulb is bright. Again use of a 3 bladed shutter helps in this regard.

[Tony Ferrara]

Will I be chasing a ghost if I attempt to adjust the claw on the FP8-C? Worse, would I mess it up to the point that I wouldn't get it to run any film well? Maybe I should run more film through it before adjusting it to handle that one slightly warped print. But then again, if the single-clawed Sankyo 2000H can handle it, shouldn't the double-clawed FP8-C handle it, too, especially since it is a Super 8 print that makes use of both claws?

I think the Sankyo 2000H is pretty bright and sharp, actually. My throw is about 17 feet, 4 foot wide screen. Didn't realize it was a 4-blade. I removed the heat shield; did you, Shane? There is a thread in the technical index that details how to do it. It wasn't hard -- took me a long time since I dropped screws and spent a lot of time looking for them with a flashlight on the floor. Plus my hands are too big to hold such small screws and fit my hands into the nooks and crannies of the projector. I have plenty of tools, but never seem to have the one that would make it a bit easier. Tried to find Bristol wrenches in Home Depot today, since the Allen wrenches I have to work on the Elmo are hard to use. They didn't know what they were, and didn't have them anyway -- just regular Allen wrenches.

I checked out my Honeywell 380 last night. Duh, it does have the film cutter right at the front, unlike what I said. I had read through the manual that didn't show it on the projector, so via the power of suggestion I expected it not to be there. But it IS there, lol.

It wasn't too bright, and the projected light showed an unevenly focused rectangle. So I adjusted the lens position via the screw. A little better, but still not good. It was the stupid lamp not installed correctly! I moved too fast, which I usually tend to do. Now it is super bright with a perfectly rectangular pic. And that's with the stock 1.3 lens. I haven't tried my 1.1 lens in it yet.

Need to do cleaning of the film path, and lube the gears, etc., before running a film. It seems to run a little slow. Belts seem tight enough, so we will see what happens and if I need to order a belt. The Standard 8mm aperture is fine. So I will focus on this projector before tackling the FP8-C. And that won't be until after I finish work on my Elmo ST-1200HD restoration, and of course the Eumig 810/712, if I ever get the motor mounts, lol.



BTW, I was thinking of ordering the 2-bladed shutter for the Elmo 1200 from Steve Osbourne. It's $100 -- not sure if it is worth it. He doesn't mention on his site if it will fit the HD model as well. I have read on here that some models of the 1200 had a different diameter of the shutter.

Oh, and BTW, to answer the question a few posts up, the B&Hs I have are:

1. An old 24<something> (245?) that is the only one I know the full pedigree of since it was my father's. First projector I ever used. Still have it, but never use it anymore, though. Simple Standard 8mm, no speed control, slow motion, or anything like that. Plain vanilla machine.

2. 370 Lumina Standard 8mm (with a one-pinned claw for some reason -- definitely not broken.)

3. 482A Super 8.

4. Sears Tower style Standard 8mm (but without the word Tower) made by B&H. All the bells and whistles -- slow motion and speed control.

5. Sears Tower style Super 8 (but without the word Tower) made by B&H. All the bells and whistles -- slow motion and speed control.

Attached are pics of the Sears ones from old Sears catalogs.

Both the Sears had decayed power cords. Seems they all are that way now judging from auctions. I have replaced the power cord on the 8mm. I have one for the Super 8 but haven't replaced it yet, and obviously have not turned on the projector yet. B&H obviously skimped on the power cord -- not sure why they did that. They also used the plastic screws on the spindles, as they did on some of their own branded ones, like my 482A. What did they save by doing that? A nickel? Makes no sense. I know "hard luck charlie" aka Tveden sells them, but I have found screws that fit in my spare screw jar. He charges too much for 2 screws and 2 washers.

6. 476P Dual 8 which I never use. I think I have mentioned it before.