Schertler Versus Waverly Tuners on High End Builds

[tommieboy]

Originally Posted by B....

Those wavy washers are a bit tricky to center during re-assembly. Do you think removing them would still provide good function? IF they aren't centered perfectly you can't get the post square.

The ones that were missing the washers had a stiffer feel to them; that was when I noticed that the washers were missing. Truthfully I never had any issues replacing the wavy washers and getting them centered.

Originally Posted by B....

EDIT: I couldn't resist trying to understand the construction so I took one of an old set apart. NOT advisable.

Like anything, there is a learning curve. Replacement parts like the metal and nylon washers, etc. can be an issue as StewMac does sell the individual parts. So we had to scavenge parts from other sets. In our case, we were dealing with a luthier who happened to have a bunch of older partial sets of Waverly tuners sitting around the shop. Some of them were barely salvageable, but you never know when you are going to need something like a single spare washer.

The image below is the set that is now installed on my Froggy. Still looking for some of the original photos prior to the repairs. The amazing thing is that with all the spare sets that we were dealing with, the color of the gold plating was pretty consistent throughout the years.

Tommy

[tommieboy]

This is the set that now lives on my Froggy. It was previously used, and this is what it looked like when I opened the box. The lower two tuners on the left side have smaller screws sitting within the bronze gear. Doesn't look like a big deal to just swap them out with replacement screws to match the others. Well, nothing is that easy. Those smaller screws had a slightly different thread and cross-threaded the original threads within the posts. So I needed to replace these posts in order to accommodate the original style screw. As mentioned in my previous post, there were a lot of other issues with this set that needed to be addressed.

The center tuner on the right side of the image had some barely perceptible plier teeth marks on the spanner nut/bushing. I replace that spanner nut/bushing too.

Tommy

[B....]

These are the Waverly high ratio (21:1) gold tuners I just installed. I left the nickel bushings from the original set in the headstock because these will be coming out when I receive the set of Rodgers tuners on order. I will probably replace the Waverly 16:1 set on my H&D T-0014 guitar with this 21:1 set.
So far these seem to be functioning fine & tuning is proving to be smoother than my 16:1 set which were quite stiff & made strobe tuning a real chore. Now I can get to where I wanna go more slowly without overshooting constantly.
EDIT: sorry for the failed photo attachments. I'll try to get them hosted elsewhere & re enter. In the meantime try the links :

https://app.box.com/s/tkzpjwjnjd0wrpegqaxuab9ahclcci3n

https://app.box.com/s/ybjcu1v9lo92b2mlvfxe3db5lm4zu9uu

[roberts]

I love the Schertlers on my Kinnaird. Very smooth, nice winding feedback, and when you hit your note they stay there. It's a pleasure not having to re-tune the G every time I take the guitar out of the case.

[jt1]

I think that I've been blessed to have 1920s-1940s original tuners on most of my guitars. Like the players who originally purchased my guitars, I manage to tune the things. My favorite tuners? The impossibly thin WWII-era Klusons designed to assist in compliance with the War Production Board's 1943 mandate that metal components constitute no more than 10% of a stringed instrument's weight. I believe that these things are 6:1. The cogs are thinner than dimes. And they both work fine and remind me that being able to play music is what matters. The Kluson 1943 patent application:



And Waverlys? They work fine. The things have worked fine for decades. I've speced them on my modern guitar commissions and installed them on the one guitar that I've built.

Speaking of the guitar that I built, here's my offering today:

[tommieboy]

Originally Posted by jt1

Speaking of the guitar that I built, here's my offering today:

Not to veer too far from the "tuner" topic, but I read the description on your YouTube video. That's like an automatic induction in the Evel Knievel broken bones club.



Tommy

[jt1]

Originally Posted by tommieboy

Not to veer too far from the "tuner" topic, but I read the description on your YouTube video. That's like an automatic induction in the Evel Knievel broken bones club.



Tommy

Thanks!

It's been a wild ride. I had a true near-death experience when I crashed into a deer while I was cycling. The result: 16 broken bones and both lungs punctured. When I recorded the video a couple of days ago it was the first day since the accident a month ago when I could hold a guitar with manageable pain.

The basic story:

[tommieboy]

Originally Posted by jt1

Thanks!

It's been a wild ride.....

Wow, that was supposed to be one hell of a bike ride. Alberta to New Mexico!

Tommy

[tommieboy]

Originally Posted by B....

....These are the Waverly high ratio (21:1) gold tuners I just installed. I left the nickel bushings from the original set in the headstock because these will be coming out when I receive the set of Rodgers tuners on order....

I'd be interested to see what is involved in the swapping out of the Waverlys for the Rodgers.

Tommy

[B....]

Originally Posted by tommieboy

I'd be interested to see what is involved in the swapping out of the Waverlys for the Rodgers.

Tommy

I will post a complete account of the work when the time comes in a few months,(maybe a seperate thread), but I have already established a procedure to my satisfaction. It may need adjustment as I see how it develops but the headstock holes need enlarging to a depth of the new 10mm support bushings. It is imperative that I keep the holes square to the top surface. The plate screw holes will need new attachment holes as well & plug the old ones. Not sure if only one old hole will be visible. If it's completely clear of the new plate, I may make it contrast rather than try to match mahogany. Maybe another brass screw or ebony plug.(I have some spare bridge pins I can use)

I want to make sure this mod can be reversed to re install the Waverlies in the event that the next owner ( it will outlive me by a long shot) wishes to have the original traditional dreadnought character with butterbean Waverlies. This is not a one off build like most solid headstock Rodgers tuner installations but rather a special dreadnought guitar that has a high demand due to limited production. This mod is strictly personal - not ONLY because it servers a better tuning option. The Waverly 21:1 ratio tuners are doing that in spades. I may just leave the Rodgers bushes in place for the Waverly reinstall if that happens.
EDIT: I have ordered the splined bushes like the Waverlies - not the concentric grooved ones for gluing in place. so I can remove them if desired. Or I can install the hex Waverly conversion bushes that I have now acquired as well. I can always purchase another set of Rodgers bushes for its tuners if I leave them in the dreadnought.

[tommieboy]

Originally Posted by B....

I will post a complete account of the work when the time comes in a few months,(maybe a seperate thread), but I have already established a procedure to my satisfaction. It may need adjustment as I see how it develops but the headstock holes need enlarging to a depth of the new 10mm support bushings. It is imperative that I keep the holes square to the top surface. The plate screw holes will need new attachment holes as well & plug the old ones. Not sure if only one old hole will be visible. If it's completely clear of the new plate, I may make it contrast rather than try to match mahogany. Maybe another brass screw or ebony plug.(I have some spare bridge pins I can use)

I want to make sure this mod can be reversed to re install the Waverlies in the event that the next owner ( it will outlive me by a long shot) wishes to have the original traditional dreadnought character with butterbean Waverlies. This is not a one off build like most solid headstock Rodgers tuner installations but rather a special dreadnought guitar that has a high demand due to limited production. This mod is strictly personal - not ONLY because it servers a better tuning option. The Waverly 21:1 ratio tuners are doing that in spades. I may just leave the Rodgers bushes in place for the Waverly reinstall if that happens.
EDIT: I have ordered the splined bushes like the Waverlies - not the concentric grooved ones for gluing in place. so I can remove them if desired. Or I can install the hex Waverly conversion bushes that I have now acquired as well. I can always purchase another set of Rodgers bushes for its tuners if I leave them in the dreadnought.

Thanks, B....

In the following links, one of our members converted from Waverly to Rodgers tuners so it looks like the existing screw holes will not be visible. Still, it would be nice to see the actual surgery involved.

https://www.acousticguitarforum.com/...7&postcount=34

https://www.acousticguitarforum.com/...4&postcount=40

Tommy

[B....]

Originally Posted by tommieboy

Thanks, B....

In the following links, one of our members converted from Waverly to Rodgers tuners so it looks like the existing screw holes will not be visible. Still, it would be nice to see the actual surgery involved.

https://www.acousticguitarforum.com/...7&postcount=34

https://www.acousticguitarforum.com/...4&postcount=40

Tommy

Thanks Tommy. I had seen a couple of those photos & agree that the button size is oversize compared to Waverly butterbean. The white colour accentuates it as well. BUT - at a ratio of 15:1, even with smoother mechanism, the larger buttons will assist in the smaller increment of adjustment to fine tune. I am all for tradition but sometimes straying from the norm is exciting. In addition, I am overwhelmed by the prospect of excellence & experiencing the best that craftsmanship can produce. I won't get into what psychological analysis might have to say about that. .

I've linked a couple pics of relevance. 1. shows the textured rectangular plate of the SS34 of my order. Mine will spec the low profile end-pips, & snakewood (reddish) buttons shown at right. 2. the SS34 style without the textured plate.
Not being able to attach photos from my desktop is frustrating to say the least. If I could do that , a photo work procedure would be in order when it's done. I've gone thru the photobucket thing & not again.
EDIT: Of note: Rodgers uses "delrin" plastic in the bushings as an option where some others would use teflon or nylon. I can't be sure but it appears that may be the coating on the worm screw as well. NICE!


1. https://app.box.com/s/fn6agkgc215tlenowmumhhawlxmaiq6e

2.https://app.box.com/s/8p7pyc638wjdl78bztngch3rrtkv49f2

[tommieboy]

Here you go...

[tommieboy]

Originally Posted by B....

Thanks Tommy. I had seen a couple of those photos & agree that the button size is oversize compared to Waverly butterbean. The white colour accentuates it as well. BUT - at a ratio of 15:1, even with smoother mechanism, the larger buttons will assist in the smaller increment of adjustment to fine tune.

With the onset of arthritis, I too welcome the option of larger buttons with any tuner.

Tommy

[B....]

Originally Posted by tommieboy

Here you go...

Wow! Thanks for that. I may call for help in a few months.
Re. finger aging : nobody thinks about it 'til it's in your face. My string action gets lower by the year as well.