Originally Posted by diredesire
I think you're glorifying the NEOS a liiiiittle bit here. I agree that the stringer is as big a variable as the tensioner (if not much, much bigger), but since the tensioning system of a crank relies on the operator, there is a consistency variable regardless implied. Saying that there's no need for a 10% compensation is also a little extreme. The 'rule of thumb' of 10% is due to a systematic difference, not strictly as a variable of pull angle. CP machines often have 360 degree rotation, thus they pull at a lower angle, does this mean the 10% rule of thumb should have an asterisk with it? I don't personally think so. I also think that the overshoot issue is more minor than we commonly discuss it to be. If the tensioner overshoots and then comes back to reference, all within the time span of <1/2 a second, I don't think there's any issue other than any systematic difference. As we all generally agree upon, provided the operator is consistent in their process, the only thing that really needs to be considered is ones' reference stiffness/tension delta versus another operator.
If you ever get overly curious, I got a buddy in your neck of the woods that has possession of my old MS200TT DA system. Just let me know, I can grab his machine and let you demo.
Now you've opened up a can of worms on me! I was checking out the Stringway web site and was wondering where I might be able to demo their clamps and mounting system -- they look pretty sweet. Because you know, it's that time of year again, where for no particular reason at all, I start considering getting a new machine (again)
I might have to take you up on that!