Friday, November 7, 2014

Maiden Typecast From A Hammond Multiplex


Repairs finished and test sheet.

Corrections with a carpenter's pencil I pointed since I typed this at my workbench.  I also did not correct all typos.  Hammond typed nearly to the very bottom of the sheet.



I mounted it back on the lid, but this is a photo I've used before.
I like using this typewriter, but I may not use it as often as I'd like.  The shuttles are hard rubber or Vulcanite (Thanks Richard) and I do not want to damage them.  Most need cleaning.  I'm unsure if I want to only brush them or use a mild cleaner.

One thing I noticed while typing is the shuttles must be extremely free.  The one with the larger typeface is the best so far.  It slides very freely.  I think the italic one will too once I treat it with Teflon Lube. 

The touch is quite unique on this machine.  I find I cannot hit the keys or I get the blurred letters. If I press too hard I get blurred letters.  I found a nice steady and intentional rhythm works best, like musical slow 6/8.  As stiff as the carriage return is on this I have a tendency to want to press hard as if to over come hard key touch.  The way the hammer works hard pressing is not required. 

The back space is quite easy and had its own uniqueness.  My biggest problem besides wanting to hit the keys is using the triple shift.  I found it easier to adapt to my Corona 3 than the Hammond.  Margin release key is completly smooth.  On all my other typewriters the end of line lock will lock the keys and pressing the M-R key causes a click and slight motion and sometimes a hard click and bump of the carriage.  Not so with this one. Press, releases the lock, and absolutely no motions or clicks.

The index for the placement of a letter on the page is nicer than looking at the typebar slot on newer machines too.  Hammond has a pointer at the spot for a letter or symbol.  There is also an index scale, but it is not as visible as on newer machines.

I hope to test all the shuttles soon.  If I do I hope there is room on the Typewriter Database for all of them.  They'll be posted here whether or not they fit on Ted's site.

One reason I gave up my Olivetti Praxis 48 was I found an IBM Selectric-II.  I always liked the interchangeable elements.  Until I started this hobby (obsession) I never knew of the Hammond -- it had interchangeable elements a Century before IBM!  (ok, I exaggerated a bit)

Now to search for additional shuttles.

15 comments:

  1. The print quality on that really is excellent! I'm assuming it's due to the impression strip, some work of a Hammond I've seen before must have been without one.

    It's a truly beautiful machine, and you're lucky to have all of the different type shuttles!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. From what Richard Polt told me these machines do not type very good at all without an impression strip. He also warned me about using the Vulcanite shuttles without an impression strip. No strip can damage the shuttles.

      Delete
  2. Wow, congratulations, Bill! I really wanted to see one of these machines work. The typefaces look very clean! This is definitely one machine I want to have in my collection some day.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I came across this machine quite by accident. It has 14 shuttles with it. I hope to post a sample from each even though 2 are duplicates.

      Delete
  3. Yes, you can upload the extra typeface samples to the photo gallery. Each photo has a description field where you can state the typeface, pitch and whatever else you'd like to add. (:

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Ted. Supposed to be rainy here all day Sunday. A good day for me to catch up on over due projects.

      Delete
  4. This looks really beautiful, monumental machine! The metal looks like new in the pictures, what it must've looked like when bought new.
    With the shuttles being brittle and no longer being manufactured, would their design be open to printing new ones? In acrylic STL they'd be brittle too but have fine detail, in SLS more robust but about 0.2 mm detail. Choice of typeface too :)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Wow, that typing looks fabulous, especially with the blue ink. The numerals are delicious.

    You're inspiring me to get my Hammonds running.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do it Richard. I was very freightened about working on mine at first. I did not want to make it worse than is was (partially working is better than not working at all). Once I found Robert Messenger's posts I got a bit more confidnet. Once I took the cover off and deciphered its inner workings I found it is quite interesting to work on. Now if I can ever determine the exact positioning of the shuttle for the correct letters. I know the Hammond engieers had fun with that. Fo me it is put the shuttle in and hope the positioning arm stops at the correct location of the arc. Tracing the physical work of the mechanics is quite easy. Calculating it (reverse engineering) is what I want to do.

      Delete
    2. Oh, and then Gee's posting got me motivated. Why have a machine to look-at if I could get it workiing.

      Delete
  6. The numbers are beautiful. I'm amazed at how vivid the lining of the lid is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I found that amazing also. It looked nice on the sale posting. When I first saw it at the sellers house I had my doubts because the exterior of the case looks like it went through a war and a fire, yet I know it did not. I would recognize fire stink a mile away after as long as I've been in the fire service. Both the lid and the cover interior are coated with the plush fabric in very good condition. Even the document folder has the covering and is in fine shape. Even the leather handle. Except for the musty smell that is now gone the inside, like the typewriter, is in very good condition.

      Delete
  7. Looking fantastic! And I LOVE that typeface.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I do too. I hope to test the rest of the shuttles today -- wife permitting.

      Delete
  8. Oh, sexy! Count me as jealous of your machine and typefaces.

    ReplyDelete