The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

Thanks for that! I have never found Garrard motors, as fitted to your 112, to need much in the way of lubrication,even after many years, so hopefully you will not need to do anything more in the near future. The cranks on all these Columbia portables simply unscrew anticlockwise, so maybe a few drops of penetrating oil left for a few days might shift it?

Barry

GabrielePfr wrote:Interesting. When I took it off it looked like a regular o ring, pretty uniform. I'll take a closer look at it when disassembling next time.

Ah, we may be talking at cross-purposes here. Which soundbox is fitted to your 112, the No.9, or the No 15? It SHOULD be the No.9,but they have often been updated to the 15.

Phono48 wrote:Thanks for that! I have never found Garrard motors, as fitted to your 112, to need much in the way of lubrication,even after many years, so hopefully you will not need to do anything more in the near future. The cranks on all these Columbia portables simply unscrew anticlockwise, so maybe a few drops of penetrating oil left for a few days might shift it?

Barry

That's good to know, thanks! I think the mainspring might need taking out and regreasing in near future, it makes a strange shifting sound every once in a while, as if it's sticking and releasing. I'll apply some oil then to the handle, then!

Phono48 wrote:

GabrielePfr wrote:Interesting. When I took it off it looked like a regular o ring, pretty uniform. I'll take a closer look at it when disassembling next time.

Ah, we may be talking at cross-purposes here. Which soundbox is fitted to your 112, the No.9, or the No 15? It SHOULD be the No.9,but they have often been updated to the 15.

It's Columbia No.9!

GabrielePfr wrote:It's Columbia No.9!

In which case, ignore my previous post! You are right, on this soundbox, it's just a regular O ring.

Barry

Phono48 wrote:

GabrielePfr wrote:It's Columbia No.9!

In which case, ignore my previous post! You are right, on this soundbox, it's just a regular O ring.

Barry

That's great, got worried for a second!

GabrielePfr wrote:It's Columbia No.9!

In that case, you might find this post string from this forum helpful:

http://forum.talkingmachine.info/viewto ... f=2&t=4920

OrthoFan

OrthoFan wrote:

GabrielePfr wrote:It's Columbia No.9!

In that case, you might find this post string from this forum helpful:

http://forum.talkingmachine.info/viewto ... f=2&t=4920

OrthoFan

Thank you.

Just to muddy the water somewhat, not everyone was convinced that aluminium was better, back in the day. The German branch of EMI, Electrola, for years marketed a portable called, if I remember correctly, the 106. This was basically the HMV 102, but instead of a 5A or 5B soundbox it used a No 4 whose backplate had a wider "Orthophonic" sized rubber isolator and brass ring. Electrola called this the 4A. They turn up in auctions now and then, but they seem to be made entirely of pot metal, front and back. The few I've seen haven't aged well.

I had an Electrola 106R (R indicating a red case) for several years. It was essentially the "works" of an HMV101 housed in a 102 case, with the Electrola No.4A soundbox which fortunately had no evidence of metal fatigue.

I eventually sold it to a beginner, knowing it to be well sorted and reliable. There is nothing more likely to put a beginner off the hobby than to experience trouble with their first machine, and I am pleased to say that the Electrola is still giving good service.