RK loop - is it any good?

[CRBeery]

Dave,
Thanks for the pictures. One thing I can tell is that your stamp is deeper and more complete than mine. The spacing looks OK to me on mine. I can not see any flat spot as you have mentioned. On the ends of mine they are rounded off but each has a small flat spot on the end. They are not perfect cones if that makes sense.
The dimensions that I gave were done with a machinists rule. I will use calipers this week at work.

Thanks,
Chet

[Dave Kane]

My pleasure Chet! My fingers are crossed for you

[Terrence]

Dave, your pictures say it all!! Nice work. Gotta love good precision instruments!

Best regards,
T

[tom hansen]

Here is some material to which Dave is referring regarding difference in appearance of the "800" and the tips of the loops for different makers. Even among juncker, there is difference for early or late loops.


This is a juncker micro 2. Note the crude finishing of the tips

[tom hansen]

juncker 800 earlier cross- better finishing at the tips

[tom hansen]

juncker 800 again

[tom hansen]

another early 800 juncker

[tom hansen]

800 L/12

[tom hansen]

another 800

[tom hansen]

L/12

[tom hansen]

another L/12 juncker

[tom hansen]

K&q Note the closer spacing of the "8" to the first "0" and how the second "0" is larger relative to the first. Also note the conical tips compared to the different juncker types.

[tom hansen]

S&l- note the spacing between the "8" and the "0" and how on juncker, the inferior loop of the "8" is larger and wider. The "0"s on S&L are a little more circular than the slight oval appearance of the juncker. Also note the conical tips of the S&L loop. It looks different than that of the K&Q, as well as the tips of the juncker. With regard to juncker, Dave will help out here, there seems to be three different styles of finishing the tips. The early pieces are nicely rounded and finished. The intermediate L/12s have an angular, yet finished appearance. Lastly the lazy 2 or micro 2, which is later, has more crudely cut tips.

Also with regard to the "800" stamps on the juncker, it appears as though there were two different stamps. I may be wrong on this, but the juncker "800" stamps are slightly larger than the other makers. However, among juncker both types of stamps show the spacing between the "8" and the first "0" with the broad base of the "8". However, and this may be due to the angle of the strike, but it appears as though one stamp has broader "oval" shaped "0"s than the other. Any thoughts from anyone?

[tom hansen]

So with regard to the loop posted, the style of the "800" looks like a juncker, but the tips are finished different like you see on a K&Q.

I agree about the dimensions of the loops, but would not the only consistent measurement be the width of the wire itself? With hand forming these and distortion due to wear, I would think there would be some variality in the width of the loop and length. Dave- any thoughts on this? Thanks

[tom hansen]

Here is some loop measurements. Oddly, the K&Q wire seems "thicker" than the other makers. Any comments on this information, Dave? I think you are the undisputed king of loop analysis and so I would be interested to hear what you have to say. Likewise, anyone who has a RK that could contribute some numbers to this information would be great.


wire diam width length

L/12 800 juncker 1.62 8.09 20.18

juncker 800 L/12 1.58 8.11 19.0

juncker 800 L/12 1.56 8.16 21.58

juncker 800 1.59 8.50 19.74

juncker 800 1.58 8.38 19.78

juncker 800 1.59 8.38 20.2

juncker 800 1.60 8.23 20.12

juncker micro 2 1.59 8.47 19.8

K&Q 1.76 7.95 20.0

S&L 1.59 8.0 19.72

S&L 1.58 7.92 19.89



These are all "real" loops for the makers. I have some others that have indistinct stamps, which I did not include. There are unmarked loops as well that I did not include.