Sho-Bud Pro I/6139 questions. First Sho-Bud.

Danny Goddard · From: Tallahassee, Florida

Well technically it isn't mine yet but I am in the middle of a trade for this steel. I have looked it over and everything looks clean and tight, minor cosmetic issues that don't bother me. I do have a few questions that some Sho-Bud folks could maybe help clarify.

First is the model. I was told it was a "Pro I" but based on what I have read here on the forum the 6139 is a slightly different model. I don't really care about the name but I just want to make sure that they are considered to be in the same "quality class" as the Pro I and that there are no "known issues" with the 6139.

Second, I know what the rack and barrel system looks like and this ain't it. What is it? I just need the terms so that I can search and read about it.

Third, the pedal rods are way too short and one of the leg adjusters won't hold the leg up. Are these parts available these days?

And lastly, but importantly. Switching this from Emmons to Day looks pretty straight forward, is there anything tricky that I should now before I swap the changes? I have taken my MSA S12 linkages completely apart and reworked them a few times, no problem.

Thanks in adnvance, I haven't been on the forum for a loooong time and my playing has suffered Smile

Glad to be back!

Danny Goddard, Tallahassee

Other info you may need:
6139
#9921
3+4
Bought from a guy named Bill Cooper in Ga (He thinks)
Greenish brown color Smile

_________________
Sho-Bud LDG and a lifetime of learning to do.

Lane Gray · From: Topeka, KS

Either Gary Sill or Don Burrows can sell you leg clutches. Look for them in the links section up top.
6139 is what the label says.
You have the third generation after the rack and barrel, it's often called nylon nuts and 2hole pullers.
Quality wise it's up there with the rest of the Buds, but I'd rather have barrels.
_________________
2 pedal steels, a lapStrat, and an 8-string Dobro (and 3 ukes)
More amps than guitars, and not many effects

Ian Worley · From: Sacramento, CA

what Lane said. Technically the 6139 is not a Pro I, but the only real difference is the Pro I (model 6148) had a decal and one more knee lever. This configuration underneath, two hole pullers with no barrels, was their last iteration with this style mechanics before they completely re-designed the undercarriage, changed the design of the changer fingers to the modern scissor style, and went to the dreaded "pot metal" fingers, brackets and bell cranks (the so-called Super Pro style mechanism).

If the pedal rods are too short, perhaps the legs are longer than standard? You can extend the rods with 10-24 coupling nuts and some all-thread from your local hardware store, or Michael Yahl sells them in whatever length you specify. http://www.psgparts.com/Rod-Pedal-42mm-Rod-Pedal-42mm.htm

There's a bit of useful info about Sho-Bud models here: http://bb.steelguitarforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=2342990#2342990

and a long thread here: http://bb.steelguitarforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=166611&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

Dan Beller-McKenna · From: Durham, New Hampshire, USA

Some of these late 6139s might , in fact, have the pot metal fingers. The way to tell is whether the string attaches to the finger with a pin (older) or a slot (newer, pot metal). My understanding (which could be wrong) is that all fingers with slots for strings are pot metal. Of course, if it has the older style changer design, it might not matter as much what the finger is made of. In the later "Super-Pro" era it was the dreaded steel tab on the raising plate hitting the soft pot metal on the finger that caused trouble in the later changer.

Danny Goddard · From: Tallahassee, Florida

This looks like the slotted version to me. If this is slotted does that mean it is definitely pot metal, should that be a deal breaker? There are slight grooves on the changer were the string rests. I was thinking I could flatten those out to get the strings to seat a little better.

_________________
Sho-Bud LDG and a lifetime of learning to do.

Dan Beller-McKenna · From: Durham, New Hampshire, USA

Danny,

as I said, I don't know all the details here, but I believe that slots=pot metal. Again, whether this changer has the same issue as the later Super Pro changer, where a groove eventually wears into the back side of the finger and often causes the string to "hang-up" and not return from a lower--that's another question for folks who know with more certainty than I. I can tell you that filing down the top of a finger (where the string sits) is always a tricky job and probably a no-no on pot metal. Better approach is to simply seat the string a little off to the side of the rut.

Having said all that, I own a Super Pro with pot metal fingers and love the guitar. Will I replace those fingers when someone comes out with new ones made of better material? Sure. But, in the meantime, the pluses outweigh the negatives. Also, from the pics, this appears to be an extremely clean guitar. If the price is right, I'd probably go for it.

Danny Goddard · From: Tallahassee, Florida

Thanks for that info, Dan. I think the positives do outweigh the negatives on this guitar. Like you said, if I experience a problem related to that pot metal I can always replace the part Smile

I need to get this thing jacked up so I can really play it. It sounds really great so far.
_________________
Sho-Bud LDG and a lifetime of learning to do.

Dan Beller-McKenna · From: Durham, New Hampshire, USA

Slight clarification Danny: at this time, as far as I know, no one is making replacements for Sho-Bud pot-metal fingers. John Coop did, but he died a few years ago. In the past, both James Morehead and Michael Yahl have mentioned plans to make them, but they are not making them yet.

Ian Worley · From: Sacramento, CA

Those do look like pot metal fingers, the surface texture is different, slightly different color than the changer housing. The left and middle ones in the picture are the old style, far left is aluminum from a ~'72, 1/1 with string pin as Dan described, the middle is pot metal (zinc) from a '75, 2/1 with the slot, the right is the later 3/2 Super Pro style. Unlike the knee lever brackets, they are not prone to breaking, they will work fine.

The biggest issue is that they are plated so you can't really re-surface them when they become pitted. If eventually they do need replacing, both Michael Yahl and James Morehead can make aluminum replacements. The ones Michael has listed (http://www.psgparts.com/Finger-Assembly-Professional-100-101-001.htm) are 1/1 for use with barrels, but he could probably make them with two hole raise bars too. As you can see in the pic they're not all that different.

Jon Light · From: Saugerties, NY

Don't got looking for problems if they're not there. Plenty of pot metal changers that work fine. If it's ok, it's ok.

Additional terminology---those pullers are sometimes called two-hole swivel pullers.

re: changing Emmons to Day:

Ascertain whether the pulls are pretty well in tune right now. If so, then note which hole the swivel button is in (high or low). You want to replicate this after the conversion. It may require moving the swivel which requires removing the snap ring which can get bent and need replacement (or more likely, it may launch across the room and never be seen again.)

Pliers are nice and spare rings are nicer. 1/4", I believe.

Richard Sinkler · From: aka: Rusty Strings -- Missoula, Montana

Ian Worley · From: Sacramento, CA

Dan Beller-McKenna · From: Durham, New Hampshire, USA

Sho-Bud changers sure did change over time. With the c. 1970 type changer design, I don't see that the pot metal would be much of a problem in the steel you are buying, Danny. The problem occurs on the later Super Pro fingers at the spot I've marked with a circle here:

That little bent tab, made of steel, pushes against the softer pot metal and eventually wears a groove. When the groove gets large enough, the tab can lodge in there. Not a happy situation. There are a couple of fixes for it:

http://bb.steelguitarforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=243602&highlight=super+pro+problem

http://steelguitarforum.com/Forum5/HTML/013203.html

Danny Goddard · From: Tallahassee, Florida

Thanks you guys. This is a bunch of good info for the future 6139 searches. Mine has the middle fingers in Ian's picture. I'm glad to hear that it's not the problem pot metal I have read about here on the forum.

I have just finished making wooden dowels to secure the legs. Feels good and is really straight forward but when it's a good height for me the pedals stick up in the air. I contacted Billy Cooper and he let me know about the dowel trick and he is also sending me pedal rod extenders so I can actually play it Smile

Billy and Wanda were really nice to me and told me a little about the steel as they had sold it to the guy I got it from.

I am getting a lot of noise (string buzz zing rattle)from the roller nut. I am going to put in the new strings and see if that fixes it. Previous owner said he had cobbled together the current set.
_________________
Sho-Bud LDG and a lifetime of learning to do.

Ian Worley · From: Sacramento, CA

Danny Goddard · From: Tallahassee, Florida

What are you talking about, Ian, it says 6139?? Just kidding, that was a major DUH moment. I edited the posts for searchers...

I will be taking that roller shaft out and cleaning it. My guess is that there is a flat spot below two of the rollers because there are two strings that are buzzing on the bottom of the bar when I am near the nut. It seems like that would be happening if the strings were a bit lower than the others.
_________________
Sho-Bud LDG and a lifetime of learning to do.

Ian Worley · From: Sacramento, CA

Bar buzz near the nut is fairly typical, it's most likely because the string heights are slightly uneven. Sho-Bud nut rollers were all the same so the varying string gauges sit at different heights and don't provide a flat plane for the bar, which bridges slightly above the some strings and causes the buzzing. Most players just compensate for this with extra bar pressure near the nut, but you can also replace the rollers with "gauged" ones that are cut to match the size of each individual string, leaving the plane of the top of the strings flat.

Tony Prior · From: Charlotte NC

PRO 1 covers tons of territory, historically , as I have been informed over the years, it is meant to be a SINGLE TEN, not a Double Ten. Pro II, Wood necks , Pro III Aluminum necks. It really may be that simple. Whether it's a '29 or '39, regardless, it's a PRO guitar. Well worth it. Racks , Two Hole pullers or Pot parts...bottom line, it ain't a Maverick !

The Two Hole puller system is stellar, your changer is a 2 up 1 down, it's fine, it's the last system before going to the SUPER PRO so called system with pot metal. The so called pot metal fingers are not an issue. As said above, don't look for issues that are not there, there are probably thousands of these configurations out there. My two included , Pro I and Pro III.

The biggest issue with the modern era, the Super Pro system , my opinion, is the HEX pot metal pullers, they can and will break at the back side around the shaft. Too thin. Easy fix, drill and tap a hole thru the puller and into the HEX cross rod and secure the puller to the hex cross shaft with a 4-40 or 6-32 screw, like MOST all Pull Steels have already. My Pro I is the Super Pro system and it is a great Steel, I love playing it and it comes to at least 1 gig each month. 3 up 2 down changer. Great action.

The Pro III I have is the traditional 2 up 1 down changer with two hole pullers. These are nice systems and tone is excellent, the issue with these is that setting pedal action is limited. Without a 3 up 2 down changer and a 5 hole bell crank, it makes it very limited to adjust and time pulls. Some pulls will be literally right at pitch with no room to spare .Changing string gauges also helps with this.

Regarding the roller nut vibration. I had this on my Pro 1 , strings 5 and 6. Wrap the strings to the tuning peg from underneath, ( the tuning peg turns opposite now) it gives it a tad more angle coming off the roller nut which is the problem , not enough angle ( down force) pushing down on the roller. The vibration on my Pro I is now absent, strings 5 and 6. Think Telecaster/Stratocaster string tree , pulling the string down from the nut before the tuner peg.

Take the Steel completely apart,including each finger off the axle. Inspect each part for any burrs ,ruff edges or spots, remove all the OLD oil and lube, clean and polish each part and reassemble. Lube with a light oil. Use new C Clips for the swivels on the pullers. Don't put new lube on top of old lube. When I took the changer fingers off the PRO III, several off them had ruff edges, from the factory and required slight filing. Considering the instrument is easily around 40 years old it's time. You will never have to do this again !
_________________
Emmons L-II , Fender Telecasters, B-Benders , Eastman Mandolin ,
Pro Tools 12 on WIN 7 !
jobless- but not homeless- now retired 9 years

CURRENT MUSIC TRACKS AT > https://tprior2241.wixsite.com/website

Dan Beller-McKenna · From: Durham, New Hampshire, USA

Just for the sake of others with slightly later Super Pro changers:

The guitar Danny is buying does not have an issue with the pot metal fingers, that's true. There is no tab (ear, whatever you want to call it) to wear a groove in the back side of the finger head. Tony and Jon are right: no need to look for a problem where none exists.

But(!)

This is an issue on The Super Pro changer and, I would argue, a much more critical one than the knee lever bracket or hex pullers. Those have readily available replacements made out of better materials. Also you will know when they fail and be able to see exactly what failed. The grooves in the changer fingers, however, will creep up on you and are a much more involved repair. Also, to my knowledge, there are no available replacements available right now. [/i]

Forum Index > Pedal Steel		Next oldest topic :: Next newest topic