Multiple Slingerland Spec Questions - Page 1

Hello, Doctor C. Here are several questions concerning Niles-era Slingerlands; feel free to break this post into individual questions for easier future searching:

1)--What are the thread/pitch specifications for the mounting screws Slingerland/Niles used on their lugs ... and what were the lengths for the 3-ply and 5-ply shells? Was this a proprietary spec, or are replacement screws available via commercial retail sources (hardware store, etc.)?

2)--Did Slingerland/Niles ever outsource any shell manufacturing -- say, to the likes of Keller or Jasper -- or was all manufacturing always in-house?

3)--RE The Slingerland Spirit shells ... I did read that you said the Spirits were simply 3-ply shells without reinforcing rings. Were they of the same overall quality as the Slingerland "main line" shells with re-rings? Would it be safe to say that someone could take a round/true Spirit shell, ring it, and have a fairly close approximation of a factory-ringed Slingerland 3-ply shell?

4)--RE Zoomatics ... Your comments concerning the Niles-manufactured versus imported units?

5)--Are Niles Zoomatics really that easy to refurb? Does anyone offer such a repair/refurb service -- with proper parts support?

6)--I have noticed that the "Slingerland Copy" tom lugs -- from at least one drum parts supplier, at least, are not exactly "Niles spec" ... the tension rod hole on the copy lugs are "higher" than on the Niles lugs, making for a greater "T-rod OD." Do you know of any modern-manufacture "copy" lugs that really are "Niles spec?"

7)--If you were going to fill extra holes in Niles 3-ply shells with dowels, what would you use ... solid maple or laminated dowels ... and what sort of glue would you recommend -- one that would be strong enough to withstand some re-drilling, if necessary?

8)--I did read about the "P" versus "M" shell markings -- Pearl versus Lacquer, but am curious about the exterior diameter. What were the differences between the ODs of the P versus M shell, and could someone run into trouble by wrapping an "M" shell?

Thanks!

[COLOR="Navy"]Hello Yapz:

I would imagine by now you have been able to get what you need, nonetheless here is some quick information. And this is more or less off the top of my head, you?ll undoubtedly want to dig deeper on your own with specs, etc.

1) Niles lug screws are a UTS standard 32 teeth per inch (pitch 1/32). Lengths varied somewhat with era and type of screw used, but typically you might find a 5-ply shell screw to have threaded length at 5/8?, about 1/8? longer than that for a 3-ply shell. Nothing proprietary here, hardware store will do to find a suitable replacement for any Niles screw. Of course don?t expect the modern version to necessarily be a cosmetic clone of a part made 20 ? 40 years ago. But you can get close.

2) Niles Slingerland made its own shells. There are a couple of examples where a new product was being experimented with or introduced and Slingerland initially purchased some shells ? for example, one time from Jasper, another time from overseas ? but this changed over once Slingerland tooled up in house with the right size shell molds, etc.

3) The Spirit shells made by Slingerland in house had the same wood composition and ply lay-up as the 3-ply shell with reinforcing rings. However, the ring-less 3-ply shell also had sharp 45-degree bearing edges, in contrast to the more classic 30-degree (-ish) rounded edges of the ringed shell. So depending on how faithful you want to be, if you want to make a ring-less shell into a ringed you would also have to deal with the edges. And in the same vein the reinforcing rings should be solid maple, not plywood. Now this is just one person?s opinion ? what you want to do with your property is purely your business ? but if you are looking to approximate a Slingerland shell ? why not go to Keller? They can pretty much get you almost anything you want these days ? very close anyway ? and then you don?t have to permanently change a vintage Niles shell. Just one person?s meager view?

4) Slingerland Zoomatics are a fun topic, one which I actually have an upcoming article on, so I am going to pass on this one for now. Thanks for understanding.

5) Of course, ?easy? is a matter of one?s personal viewpoint. What I can say is that Zoomatics are eminently serviceable / repairable / refurbish-able. I have personally done many, many of them. As with any such effort, the work just has to be done with proper care.

6) Slingerland and Slingerland style lugs made after Niles closed its doors in 1986 are similar, but different. The biggest differences are the following. a) The threading post-Niles is metric versus the UTS on Niles (the standard ?American? system). b) The OD on the shell lug inserts is such that a modern copy lug won?t necessarily fit into the shell holes of a Niles drum. Of course this is somewhat true even among different Chicago ? Niles eras ? often swapping lugs between eras can lead to a slightly tight fit. c) The cast profile of the copy lugs has increasingly deviated from the old Niles lug design - a Slingerland purist can tell the cosmetic difference. And in this context I am not personally aware of anyone making lugs rigorously to ?Niles spec?.

7) I suppose this somewhat depends on the size of the hole in shell. For a Slingerland 3-ply shell with maple inner ply and the thick poplar middle, a solid maple fill would certainly be a nice choice. I don?t expect there is any ?magic? glue out there that can completely guarantee against drilling; any good quality wood glue should be fine. One key is to make the dowel and hole sizes, and the surfaces, such that the fit is very tight. That will produce the best bond.

8) Niles shells with P (wrapped) and M (lacquered) markings are pressure-formed plywood shells and were generally made a little undersized to ensure that any plastic head would fit. In the 1960?s and 1970?s selection of a P or M stamp was actually most often an issue of cosmetics ? did the outer ply look nice enough to take a clear lacquer, etc. However, shell size manufacturing tolerances not being absolutely perfect, the best approach is always to check before wrapping an M shell. Place some wrap around the drum and see if a head will go on comfortably. In principle, the diameter of an M shell would have to be smaller than that of an unwrapped P shell by twice the thickness of the wrap. Also, wrap thickness does vary somewhat by type and date of manufacture, so ultimately the only way to be sure you?ll have success is just to check the candidate shell and wrap combination.

Sounds like you have some fun Slingerland projects in the works!

DrCJW

[/COLOR]