The Talking Machine Forum — For All Antique Phonographs & Recordings

I am in the slow process of restoration.

Having finished shellacking the case and horn, and have moved on to the motor. It's the earlier Victor 6 motor. I mounted it to a temporary motor board that sits on a milk crate, here it can easily be handled. The motor is very clean and so far chose not to disassemble it. I have given it a basic wipe-down and lubrication. The adjustments seem ok.

After giving it a a dozen turns of the crank and inspecting the running motor, all seems well. At this point the motor is on the milk crate upside down. Turning to the upright position's time to test the condition of the springs. I am not used to a slip-on crank. I thought it was me, but soon realized the pawl was not always catching. Turning the motor upside down, I gave the sticky pawl a better cleaning and a few cranks to observe it moving and catching. So back to the springs, with the motor sitting in the correct position, started cranking and the pawl is acting up again. I now need to remove it, clean it, check for burs, etc.

Before I do this and test it again, it's time for my question.

I think the pawl may currently be on the motor upside down. Should the wider, heavier portion, hang at the bottom? And is that why it was winding well when the motor was upside down?

Thanks for taking the time to read this ramble.

James.

It is upside down when compared to my very early 6:

Neither of those looks upside down to me. Here's a pic of ours.

In addition, we have a Victor D which has the same style winding arrangement. It was plagued with the crank handle flipping back at the moment I would stop cranking. I cured it by removing the pawl, and squeezing the opposing ends together slightly in a vice, and then filing the worn end smooth. It has worked fine for several years now. One must be careful when doing that to not squeeze it too far, it only takes a little bit. something like .025" (twenty five thousands of an inch) or so. If you go too far, it will bind as it rocks.

Rene, that sure answered my original question, but that nice photo leads me to a new question. I see the shape of both pawls differ and the way they are installed on each motor are the same in respect to the hooking aspect of the pawl. Both upper portions lack hooks and both have lower hooks. If I flip mine it would be wrong. Maybe it just needs a better cleaning to swing freer?

In case it was a design change, this Vic has a numeral 6 and serial number is 5092.

Thanks,
James.


PS - I see that Startgroove added comment. His looks like a match to my pawl. That's an interesting fix.

New question...

These parts are not unique to this machine, are they? If I damage it in the vice, would another do the job?

Roaring20s wrote:this Vic has a numeral 6 and serial number is 5092.

Mine is also marked 6, with serial # 4729, so they are close.

Your pawl appears to have less sharply defined hooks at the ends. Bending it inward might indeed cause it to latch more securely.

Gosh, all of these numbers are close. Mine is 4796.

There should be a well defined hook on the lower end of the pawl and a fairly prominent point on the top end. It is not unusual for these to wear out over time with metal being worn off the ends of the pawl. That could cause the troubles you are having. Your pawl appears to have a fairly rounded hook end, it won't work as well as an unworn pawl with a more pointed end. Compare your photo with the others and you'll see what I mean. The other person's pawl has almost a sharp end.

It is installed correctly.

Cliff

I superimposed a section of Rene's pic on James' original pic and to me, it looks like Rene is correct - James' is flipped... The wide end of James' is at the top, while the wide end of Rene's is at the bottom. Also, Rene's has a much more defined hook end... Hope this helps...

I also noticed that Rene's has a much more coarse tooth cog than James, if that makes a difference...

Curt A wrote:I also noticed that Rene's has a much more coarse tooth cog than James, if that makes a difference...

I hadn't noticed that, but yes, that would make a difference since the sharper teeth would engage the pawl more readily. It appears that James' motor has much more wear on both parts. That would readily explain why it doesn't engage fully.

TinfoilPhono wrote: Your pawl appears to have less sharply defined hooks at the ends. Bending it inward might indeed cause it to latch more securely.

CDBPDX wrote:There should be a well defined hook on the lower end of the pawl and a fairly prominent point on the top end. It is not unusual for these to wear out over time with metal being worn off the ends of the pawl. That could cause the troubles you are having. Your pawl appears to have a fairly rounded hook end, it won't work as well as an unworn pawl with a more pointed end. Compare your photo with the others and you'll see what I mean. The other person's pawl has almost a sharp end.

It is installed correctly.

Cliff

I agree.


Curt, I added to your composite...
You'll see that Startgrooves matches the shape of mine. Rene's uses a different style pawl. All 3 have the hooks at the bottom only. The tops have no hook. At first, I too assumed that both ends had hooks and it could be flipped. Not so.