TheSamba.com :: View topic - Reproduction SWF Sem lenses and arms: BEWARE

Sat Mar 10, 2007 8:21 pm

I have been spending some time lately restoring several pairs of SWF (and SHO) semaphores. I have bought lots of parts lots and have all kinds of original and reproduction parts.

I have found recently some significant, dimensional flaws in some of the reproduction parts:

I have found both yellow and orange "repro lenses" that are way out of spec. Overall they are shorter than the originals (I have NOS ones to comapre them with). And the wall thickness is heavier (1.2-1.3 mm instead of .95-1.0mm on the originals). Also, on the skinnier end, they are thicker (wider) as seen in the pics.

Here are some pics. The two on the left are the out of spec repros, the third from the left is a repro from Ryan Thompson in OR, and the one on the right is an NOS original.

Another obvious check is the detail in the inside, notable the small "barb" just behind the sliding contact hole. The bad repros do not have the barb. The Ryan Thompson ones have it, but it is not pointed like the original (right). But I do not beleive that this barb has any function in the lens.

The detail on the end, where the arm "catch" nub is, is also a good indicator. Again, the NOS original is on the right. It looks like it might have broken off the one on the left.

This pic shows probably the biggest problem. Notice the distance between the bolt holes and the contact opening/far end. The two on the bottom are significantly shorter!! This means that if you try to use original arms, the holes won't line up by about 4 mm!!

Maybe the problem was "addressed" by this:

The repro arms are also out of spec, the far end to hole spacing is shortened. Repro (painted brass) is shown on the left, originals (2 bolt and single bolt) are on the right. Note that the originals have a tab at the top end (bottom in this pic).

Another pic:

So, if you ues the repro arms, with the repro lense (they need significant Dremel modification to even work with the repro arms), the holes line up, but your sem is shorter than original (don't take it personally... :wink: ). Mix original/repro, and stuff won't line up!!!

On the arms, the correct far end (bent "nose" end) to first hole distance (if it has one) is 106.9mm (hole center) and 137.2 mm to the second hole. On the bad repros, the first hole is at 102.7mm.

Now, let me state I do not know who is making these out of spec parts, I got some from a large eB-y parts lot, and other were given to me with a customers sems to restore. I do not know that all of the brass repro arms are out of spec, but the 2-3 pairs I have had my hands on were.

Also, let me say that Ryan's lenses, while missing a little bit of detail over the originals, are dimensionally correct and very usable.

Just wanted to post this as I have seen some of this "repro" sem stuff go for big bucks and I know I'd be pissed to find holes don't line up right!!!! :evil: :evil:

Sat Mar 10, 2007 11:50 pm

thanks for the heads up

Sun Mar 11, 2007 7:21 am

John:

you should tell where are those "out of spec" parts coming from .....

in the case you need some correct repro parts , let me tell know , please

I do test EVERY sema cover i do manufacture with a set of original lenses .

also EVERY repro lense i sell , is completely hand adjusted and polished (no extra charge) so it can be installed in a split sema with a factory sema cover .

needless to say that my repro sema covers and the repro lenses can be used together without any hassle , everything is tested for 100% correct fit before delivery .

Ricardo

Sun Mar 11, 2007 8:07 am

Libreriajenny wrote: John:

you should tell where are those "out of spec" parts coming from .....

in the case you need some correct repro parts , let me tell know , please

I do test EVERY sema cover i do manufacture with a set of original lenses .

also EVERY repro lense i sell , is completely hand adjusted and polished (no extra charge) so it can be installed in a split sema with a factory sema cover .

needless to say that my repro sema covers and the repro lenses can be used together without any hassle , everything is tested for 100% correct fit before delivery .

Ricardo

As I said above, I do not know where they are coming from/being made.

Sun Mar 11, 2007 8:10 am

i have a bunch of repo lens sourced from germany, i dont know if they are bad or what.

Sun Mar 11, 2007 8:12 am

just try to install them , you`ll find out real soon :wink:

Sun Mar 11, 2007 9:35 am

i bought a set of semaphores from a guy in California a couple months back and they have those exact cheap semaphore arms and lenses. very cheap. and i thought cali didn't roll like that! :D

Mon Mar 12, 2007 1:24 pm

This problem is not isolated to split semaphores. I have seen the same crappy fitting problem with later smooth semaphore lenses. One pair of repro orange SHO lenses I tried to fit took about 2 hrs of whittling with an Xacto knife before they would even bolt up.
I never could get them to unwarp. What CRAP.

Thu Apr 03, 2008 5:31 pm

Adding a post to a year old thread..... after a year of restoring sems and finding more out of spec parts.

What I wanted to add here is this: You cannot "test fit" an arm on a bare lens. Of course you can, but there are arms out there that test fit that well on a bare (good repro or original lens), but try to use it on a real sem, with the long brass bulbholder, and you will have fitting problems. One common repro arm is slightly too narrow an the grooves too shallow.

For SWF Sems, the specs are:

Width 14.1mm
Height: 3mm

For SHO Grooved:

Width: 15.6-15.7 mm
Height: 2.55 mm

But no one is reproing SHO sem arms that I know of.

The too shallow SWF arms will not allow the edges of the lens to fit up under them, and they are typically about .3-.5mm too narrow also.

Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:34 am

I too have experienced significant challenges relating to split-especially SWF ribbed semaphore parts. A few observations:

NOS lenses - are often not to be releid upon to make repro lenses or to buy and use - they SHRINK and they warp.

Repro lenses - Ryan's are the best so far and do fit and line up - some fitting is still needed. I recently sent him some NOS lenses that had shrunk and were not useable to make a new mold. When repro lens makers make the lens wall thicker on the inside nothing fits - the short inside arm will force out the outer walls so the outside arm (painted black or body colour) does not fit. If extra thickness is placed on the outside of the lens the inner short arm fits but the outside arm (painted black or body colour) does not fit.

Arms - we stock what are so far the best fitting brass ribbed arms - they have worked well with correct length repros and NOS.

Matthew Ross
Matt's Parts

Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:43 am

why use sema covers in brass when you can use them in steel ??

Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:43 am

Good points Matt.

As someone who has been messing with sems longer than me, I'd like to know if you concur that only NOS lenses have the cone shaped barb as seen on the sem in the right in this pic?

I have never seen a repro that has this detail....