Thanks Joe. I must confess that the very emotional and passionate way you make your videos have made me a collector in the last year. I would like to know if you can make a video of those Typewritings that have been cataloged as icons of technology and design, such as the Valentine or the Olivetti's Letter 22.
Me too, I just got my first manual typewriter, I picked the Royal QDR over the Smith Corona SS. I found the keyboard on the QDR to have a nicer feel than the SC SS. The problem is now I want the SC SS too. Oh well in another year maybe I get the Smith Corona. 😉
Can readily understand why these two selections would remain in bulwark positions. They both embody the features that induce loyalty via their durability & reliability. As writing tools that meet those criteria routinely you have two stellar candidates there my friend. Both keepers. Mike Kirwan - Kenmore, WA
Regarding the escapement timing on the Smith Corona, this is not a problem. I have a 1950 S-C Clipper, and if you move the keys slowly, you see that it does exactly as you say - it moves the carriage a partial space forward as the typebar approaches the paper, then the rest of the space on the return stroke. But this is not what happens in action. In action, if you hit a key hard enough for it to make an impression, the slug is moving fast enough that it makes the impression before the carriage starts to move. I had wondered the same thing about my Olympia SM8, since it has half-spacing as a feature, and it didn't make sense to me because I could see that the carriage moves forward half a space as the slug is almost to the paper, which would mean that holding down the spacebar and striking a key to get a half-space-shifted character could not work if the carriage actually advanced while the typebar was approaching. So I did some tests, and discovered the same thing - if you hit a key hard enough to leave an impression, the type slug will make an impression and start the return trip before the carriage has started to move. It's just too bad the Smith Coronas don't have equal half-spacing on the down-stroke and the up-stroke, since I find this useful on the Olympias. I suppose it would be possible to mis-adjust a Smith Corona 5 for it to strike late enough to smear characters, but I haven't seen this, even on my 74-year-old Clipper. Also, while I'm here, I don't know when S-C started adding the extra two keys (1/! and =/+) to the Silent Super, but a quick look at eBay shows that almost all of the Silent Supers have these keys, and even some of the later Sterlings do. Not having '1' or '!' is a deal breaker for me, so I'm glad I know to look for this now.
I recently acquired a 1948 Royal QDL at reasonable price from a local antique store. The drawband was snapped and the backspace mechanism did not engage correctly with the escapement, but with a little work and adjustment, it now works perfectly. It's interesting to see the differences between the 1948 and 1956 models.
While being near identical mechanically, there are marked differences in the two generations in this machine. Both are reliable, but the ‘56 is more modern and has added features-like the extra four characters and a push button that releases the top. Also, the newer machine is more colorful and has more modern plastic key tops. But both are superior machines.
One of the cool things on the Royal is you can type the last letter, press and hold space then . then ‘ then release for ! No back space required. On my 1938 Royal Model A the ratchet release is for typing on a line then when it is reengaged the ratchet position is not changed, it is not the variable spacer which is the button on the left platen knob.
That thing with the Smith-Corona advancing the ribbon even when you just press shift also happens in my Classic 12. I like it as it helps me quickly see the ribbon direction without actually pressing any ke.
I just love your typewriter video series! Well, I'd be interested in you or Keving talking about his Noiseless Portable:) I recently got the Underwood Noiseless Portable (1932), I also have a regular Underwood Portable (1934) and I love these machines. I also noticed that they both are quieter than my other machines (I have 4, so not much of a comparison), but the sound of the keymovement is louder in my Noiseless, whereas the keys of the Underwood Portable are almost silent - so they're both rather quiet but in different ways. It would be interesting to hear your or Kevin's thoughts on these topics: perhaps comparing the loudness of typewriters and/or introducing his the Noiseless Portable - what fascinating machines these are. Either way it's good to see you talking about your typewriters, always interesting to hear. This is a truly wonderful series you have here!
The tab stop evolution on both machines is very interesting. On the Smith-Corona-they went to the key set mechanism very early from the old pullout tabs they used earlier. Royal went to the key set in their Futura models in 1959 (the same thing happened when they introduced the same concept in their upright typewriter in 1935-36).
It's pretty clear on the Silent Super that the tab set and clear buttons were a makeshift add-on, since they don't really fit the style of the rest of the machine. Nevertheless, I just bought a new (old) Silent Super because the 5 series machines seem much lighter and more compact than the later "Classic" and "Galaxie" models, which did eventually get a nice, wide Tab key with adjacent set and clear keys.
I'm curious as to why my 1954 Silent-Super has the "1" and +/= keys on the top row and your's doesn't even though your's is a year newer? Mine is SERIAL # 5T230656X. I believe I decoded the year correctly but I could be mistaken. Does anyone know why the difference in keys between my machine and Joe's? This is the first I've come across this. I really enjoyed this comparison - thanks again for a great video Joe! -Dan (MtPleasant Typer)
I also have a 1954 Silent-Super with those keys. I believe the "X" in the serial number indicates an "extended" keyboard - but I have no idea why there's a difference. My machine has the pica typeface; I've seen ones with elite that lack the extra keys. Could that be the reason?
@@danmiller6890 I'm not 100 percent sure that pica/elite is the reason . . . just an observation. Like you noted, typewriters have many mysteries. I'll bet someone else here has the answer.
@@LTHanlon For my guess, most of the early silent-supers had lacked the 1 and =/+ key since Smith Corona was still waiting for the newer type-segments to arrive, and they built the first model-year ones with the older type segments. And I can shoot down the pitch for being a reason since I have a Pica 1954/55 Silent Super that lacks the 2 keys.
I don’t think type size has to do with it. More likely, it’s that Smith-Corona updated its machines, as other makes have theirs along about the early to mid 1950s-some with 43 keys and others with 44 keys. By the late 1960s most all machines had at least 44 keys-some had even more.
Good choices! I can tell you that those are both together more toteable than an Osborne 1 - that sucker weighs like 40+lbs. I hope Ryan actually organizes a retro computer event like he was saying last month., so I have some reason to keep it around :D
I would be very much interested in answering your questions about your machine, as Olympia is a superior typewriter-and one of my favorites.!! Aah, that good ol’ German over engineering!!
... what Olympia was thinking, waiting until 1963 to go from carriage shift to basket shift, when both Smith-Corona and Royal had this in the early 50s? Is that what you were going to ask? Or were you asking why THEY didn't include the '1' key on all American models until 1969? Beautiful machines, and as precise as you could wish for, but truly, what were they thinking? I mean, look at the SM7. This was introduced in 1962 with a new and very modern and stylish body, along with the SM5 in the same year, with the classic body style (as if they weren't sure if the market was ready for a modernization), and still with carriage shift! And then they had to redesign the body AGAIN in 1963 to incorporate the basket shift. But maybe that's not what you were wondering..
This is odd, but all older Royal portables, Underwood portables and old style uprights early 1953 on back and most foreign typewriters use the same spool. It must be hanging up somehow. About the only thing I can suggest is to study the spoils to see if the ribbon is too tight or if it mis-wound. You may also have one or two bent spools.
You're the Bob Ross of typewriters, Joe. I love the comparison videos, a great way to review 2 machines at once. Thanks for sharing.
Thanks Joe. I must confess that the very emotional and passionate way you make your videos have made me a collector in the last year. I would like to know if you can make a video of those Typewritings that have been cataloged as icons of technology and design, such as the Valentine or the Olivetti's Letter 22.
Me too, I just got my first manual typewriter, I picked the Royal QDR over the Smith Corona SS. I found the keyboard on the QDR to have a nicer feel than the SC SS. The problem is now I want the SC SS too. Oh well in another year maybe I get the Smith Corona. 😉
Can readily understand why these two selections would remain in bulwark positions. They both embody the features that induce loyalty via their durability & reliability. As writing tools that meet those criteria routinely you have two stellar candidates there my friend. Both keepers.
Mike Kirwan - Kenmore, WA
I absolutely love your videos.
Regarding the escapement timing on the Smith Corona, this is not a problem. I have a 1950 S-C Clipper, and if you move the keys slowly, you see that it does exactly as you say - it moves the carriage a partial space forward as the typebar approaches the paper, then the rest of the space on the return stroke. But this is not what happens in action. In action, if you hit a key hard enough for it to make an impression, the slug is moving fast enough that it makes the impression before the carriage starts to move. I had wondered the same thing about my Olympia SM8, since it has half-spacing as a feature, and it didn't make sense to me because I could see that the carriage moves forward half a space as the slug is almost to the paper, which would mean that holding down the spacebar and striking a key to get a half-space-shifted character could not work if the carriage actually advanced while the typebar was approaching. So I did some tests, and discovered the same thing - if you hit a key hard enough to leave an impression, the type slug will make an impression and start the return trip before the carriage has started to move. It's just too bad the Smith Coronas don't have equal half-spacing on the down-stroke and the up-stroke, since I find this useful on the Olympias.
I suppose it would be possible to mis-adjust a Smith Corona 5 for it to strike late enough to smear characters, but I haven't seen this, even on my 74-year-old Clipper.
Also, while I'm here, I don't know when S-C started adding the extra two keys (1/! and =/+) to the Silent Super, but a quick look at eBay shows that almost all of the Silent Supers have these keys, and even some of the later Sterlings do. Not having '1' or '!' is a deal breaker for me, so I'm glad I know to look for this now.
I recently acquired a 1948 Royal QDL at reasonable price from a local antique store. The drawband was snapped and the backspace mechanism did not engage correctly with the escapement, but with a little work and adjustment, it now works perfectly. It's interesting to see the differences between the 1948 and 1956 models.
While being near identical mechanically, there are marked differences in the two generations in this machine. Both are reliable, but the ‘56 is more modern and has added features-like the extra four characters and a push button that releases the top. Also, the newer machine is more colorful and has more modern plastic key tops. But both are superior machines.
Thanks as always for great information! Can't wait to see this story continue as you go through your machines :)
One of the cool things on the Royal is you can type the last letter, press and hold space then . then ‘ then release for ! No back space required.
On my 1938 Royal Model A the ratchet release is for typing on a line then when it is reengaged the ratchet position is not changed, it is not the variable spacer which is the button on the left platen knob.
That thing with the Smith-Corona advancing the ribbon even when you just press shift also happens in my Classic 12. I like it as it helps me quickly see the ribbon direction without actually pressing any ke.
Great analysis, Joe. I enjoyed the video. :-)
I just love your typewriter video series!
Well, I'd be interested in you or Keving talking about his Noiseless Portable:)
I recently got the Underwood Noiseless Portable (1932), I also have a regular Underwood Portable (1934) and I love these machines. I also noticed that they both are quieter than my other machines (I have 4, so not much of a comparison), but the sound of the keymovement is louder in my Noiseless, whereas the keys of the Underwood Portable are almost silent - so they're both rather quiet but in different ways.
It would be interesting to hear your or Kevin's thoughts on these topics: perhaps comparing the loudness of typewriters and/or introducing his the Noiseless Portable - what fascinating machines these are.
Either way it's good to see you talking about your typewriters, always interesting to hear. This is a truly wonderful series you have here!
The tab stop evolution on both machines is very interesting. On the Smith-Corona-they went to the key set mechanism very early from the old pullout tabs they used earlier. Royal went to the key set in their Futura models in 1959 (the same thing happened when they introduced the same concept in their upright typewriter in 1935-36).
It's pretty clear on the Silent Super that the tab set and clear buttons were a makeshift add-on, since they don't really fit the style of the rest of the machine. Nevertheless, I just bought a new (old) Silent Super because the 5 series machines seem much lighter and more compact than the later "Classic" and "Galaxie" models, which did eventually get a nice, wide Tab key with adjacent set and clear keys.
A very detailed and interesting comparison. 👍
So will you do a new "family portrait" like you did back in episode 146?
I should - a more intimate gathering! Thanks for the suggestion.
I'm curious as to why my 1954 Silent-Super has the "1" and +/= keys on the top row and your's doesn't even though your's is a year newer? Mine is SERIAL # 5T230656X. I believe I decoded the year correctly but I could be mistaken. Does anyone know why the difference in keys between my machine and Joe's? This is the first I've come across this. I really enjoyed this comparison - thanks again for a great video Joe! -Dan (MtPleasant Typer)
I also have a 1954 Silent-Super with those keys. I believe the "X" in the serial number indicates an "extended" keyboard - but I have no idea why there's a difference. My machine has the pica typeface; I've seen ones with elite that lack the extra keys. Could that be the reason?
L.T. Hanlon - Mine also has the PICA type. The mystery continues!
@@danmiller6890 I'm not 100 percent sure that pica/elite is the reason . . . just an observation. Like you noted, typewriters have many mysteries. I'll bet someone else here has the answer.
@@LTHanlon For my guess, most of the early silent-supers had lacked the 1 and =/+ key since Smith Corona was still waiting for the newer type-segments to arrive, and they built the first model-year ones with the older type segments. And I can shoot down the pitch for being a reason since I have a Pica 1954/55 Silent Super that lacks the 2 keys.
I don’t think type size has to do with it. More likely, it’s that Smith-Corona updated its machines, as other makes have theirs along about the early to mid 1950s-some with 43 keys and others with 44 keys. By the late 1960s most all machines had at least 44 keys-some had even more.
You should do more comparison videos!
Good choices! I can tell you that those are both together more toteable than an Osborne 1 - that sucker weighs like 40+lbs. I hope Ryan actually organizes a retro computer event like he was saying last month., so I have some reason to keep it around :D
I type like you mentioned with fingers out and i dont hit the wall of the royal buttttt i do pop the hood when im typing w's or e's sometimes 😅 lol
I really need some help to figure out what Olympia ...
I would be very much interested in answering your questions about your machine, as Olympia is a superior typewriter-and one of my favorites.!! Aah, that good ol’ German over engineering!!
... what Olympia was thinking, waiting until 1963 to go from carriage shift to basket shift, when both Smith-Corona and Royal had this in the early 50s? Is that what you were going to ask? Or were you asking why THEY didn't include the '1' key on all American models until 1969? Beautiful machines, and as precise as you could wish for, but truly, what were they thinking? I mean, look at the SM7. This was introduced in 1962 with a new and very modern and stylish body, along with the SM5 in the same year, with the classic body style (as if they weren't sure if the market was ready for a modernization), and still with carriage shift! And then they had to redesign the body AGAIN in 1963 to incorporate the basket shift. But maybe that's not what you were wondering..
And I say this as an owner of two Smith Corona 5 series, a Royal portable, and THREE Olympias (all post-1963), so I'm not just anti-Olympia.
Hey my royal "p" ribbon spool will not remove from the typewriter, i cannot pull out the spool.
This is odd, but all older Royal portables, Underwood portables and old style uprights early 1953 on back and most foreign typewriters use the same spool. It must be hanging up somehow. About the only thing I can suggest is to study the spoils to see if the ribbon is too tight or if it mis-wound. You may also have one or two bent spools.
A mi me gustan las dos. Yo tengo. Las dos pero no se que año son