Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Prevost & Fumeo 35mm projectors

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Prevost & Fumeo 35mm projectors (Page 1)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Author

Topic: Prevost & Fumeo 35mm projectors

Ken Layton
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1452
From: Olympia, Wash. USA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 05-28-2000 07:32 PM

Anybody here have any experience with Prevost and Fumeo 35mm projectors? I understand that Xetron distributed them here in the USA in the early 80's. Are these machines any good?

Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 05-28-2000 10:30 PM

Ken: I just picked up an independent with several of the Prevost 93's. They look like a copy of an Ernemann and all of mine leak like sieves. I haven't been able to tackle that particular problem just yet, but I assume they're leaking from around the intermittents, or maybe the cover gaskets.

The dual aperture plate seems to be hard to index solidly, but it could be that something's worn.

I don't care for the huge sprockets... too easy for the film to ride up off of (found that out with my loops), and more chances to have pitch errors.

------------------
Better Projection Pays!

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-28-2000 10:34 PM

Ken-Tim, A chain that I did service for a long time ago tried out a P-93 projector. There were 4 problems right off the bat. 1, The motor(a sync motor) got so hot on that you could bake cookies on it. 2, They leaked oil in droves as it all collected up front by the motor inching knob and there was no place for it to go but out all over the floor. The older 35/70's had a front that tapered back down and allowed it to drain. There is no cure but to attach a hose to the front part that juts out and drain it to a bucket, or back to the sump if you can rig it that way. 3 There was alot of flutter. 4, The gate kept popping open. We eventually tried 3 different machines all courtesy of Xetron. They did do their part to try to make it work but they were unsucessful at resolving the problems except for the motor problem. They replaced the american made motor with the same one from the 16mm Prevost.
Also write to Gord and ask him as he has worked on quite a few of them.
Mark

Ari Nordström
Master Film Handler

Posts: 283
From: Göteborg, Sweden
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 05-29-2000 04:15 AM

Never heard of a Fumeo, but I've used a pair of Zeiss Favorit 70' (license-built Prevost P70's) for more than a decade, and I love them. It's a matter of personal opinion, of course, but I've always preferred the Favorit 70 to the Philips DP70.

The downside is that you can never be sure that a part from one Prevost fits to another Prevost. They all seem to be totally hand-made. Also, the optical sound head really isn't that good. It has all kinds of problems, ranging from problematic side tracking to mediocre optics. Optical alignment is a bitch with them.

Some people also complain about image steadiness, but I've never had any real problems with that.

If you take proper care of the machine, it will run for decades and decades. Our pair's been in almost daily use since 1966.

Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 05-29-2000 10:06 AM

Mark: Oi! That's the oil problem alright, it's spilling all over the place. Not very encouraging. Do you remember where they leak from?

------------------
Better Projection Pays!

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-29-2000 01:03 PM

Tim,
I primarily remember them leaking from the inching knob area. Ours was a down tilt setup and alot of oil collects up in the part of the main casting that just out for the motor mount. There is no escape for the oil except around the shaft and out onto the floor. Also the back cover can be a problem too. Xetron used to seal the crap out of the back covers of new machines. Also like the older X-L's they might actually be leaking right through the metal casting. Keep spare drive belts around too. They don't seem to like running in the oil too well. On a scale of 1 to 10 I'd give the P93 a 2.5.
Mark

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-29-2000 03:03 PM

All the Prevost 35mm in Canada were the model P55 which is all gear driven the P 90 serries added a very expensive timing belt in the oil bath ( similar to the favoriet 16mm)
The do leak oil It apperars in downward angles and it appears that the oil slinger around the inching nob is at fault
We probably have about a hundred Prevost in use inthe Toronto Area in grind houses and they give very little grief.
The image is rock steady (compared to a Vic5) The only major flaws were the oil issue and getting the sound stabiliser set correctly as the felt pad must have just the right amount of oil
Xetron was the major problem as the P90 serries was based on there demanded changes to the older designs.
It has appeared that every projector that xetron redesigns is a mess
I understand that fumeo only built 16mm machines
The Itallian 35mm machines were
Veronesse
Prevost
Cinemecanica
Microlambda (extinct)
Fedi (extinct)
MicroCine (portables) ((mignon))

Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 05-29-2000 10:46 PM

Mark, Gordon: Thanks for all the info! Jeepers, I'm in for it, sounds like. A toothed belt in an oil bath?! That just sounds like trouble.

------------------
Better Projection Pays!

Randy Rock
Film Handler

Posts: 10
From: Seattle, WA USA
Registered: Apr 2000

posted 05-30-2000 11:06 AM

Ken- When SRO reworked Uptown in Seattle they installed Prevosts (with Xetron consoles, of course). I serviced them in the early 90's. They were "OK". Gate/trap wear were beginning to cause steadiness problems. All three machines were nose-down at a rather steep angle. Wear in the focus rack over the years was such that the machines tended to vibrate out of focus. I was able to cure the focus problem somewhat by resetting lens collars, but cure wasn't 100% satisfactory.

They were eventually pulled out 'cause repair parts were taking a year to arrive (if ever), seemingly the fault of overseas suppliers, not Cineplex paper shuffle.

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-30-2000 11:12 AM

Prevost is usually very good at getting parts out but in the summer all the Italian suppliers shut down for what amounts to a month national holiday

Trevor Bailey
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 113
From: Woonsocket, RI
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-30-2000 04:47 PM

Ah, Prevost P-93....

A chain that I service acquired eight of them when buying a 12-screen complex. I can't speak on how they are when new, but they do not take well to neglect.

- These eight all leak oil constantly, even though at some point, someone tried to use liquid gasket on them. They use O-rings and paper forms as gaskets. I have not been able to obtain replacements that fit correctly.

- They also use rolled pins on the intermittent driven gear, which have a great tendancy to break. You might be able to resolve this using a slow-start on the motor (which these did not have). All but two of these had been converted to Bodine 48R6BFSY 120v single phase 1800 RPM motors.

- The sound head portion is always contaminated with oil and the wiring has a tendancy to loosen and rub against the sound drum.

- Test loops do tend to jump out and it is time consuming to time the shutter or tighten the framing knob assembly.

- It was almost impossible to get the correct hold back springs for the rollers.

- Over three years, four intermittents failed.

Thankfully, these units are finally being replaced with thirty year old Simplexes.

I wouldn't recommend the P-93 unless you have a skilled projectionist that enjoys constantly maintaining his/her machines. Properly cared for on a daily basis, they will probably run without too many problems.

My 2 cents

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99

posted 05-30-2000 05:10 PM

Well we have Prevost P55's at the Eatons Centre Cineplex18, The Carlton 9plex and several other grindhouses and they have had to have very little maintance other than the friction holdback in the soundhead
The use of the Bodine motor was a Xetron "improvement" the original ones from italy that were 3 phase were far better
I have always lived in fear of anything xetron improved on

Stefan Scholz
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 223
From: Schoenberg, Germany
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 06-01-2000 05:47 AM

Gordon,

another brand for your list of Italien made 35 mm projectors, but probably extinct. Ufficine (offices of) Pio Pion, Milano.
They were still somewhat available late 80's.

| IP: Logged

John Walsh
Film God

Posts: 2490
From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way
Registered: Oct 1999

posted 06-01-2000 08:44 AM

What exactly is the relationship between Prevost and Cinemecannica? Some of their projectors look alike. Were they one company at one time?

| IP: Logged

Ari Nordström
Master Film Handler

Posts: 283
From: Göteborg, Sweden
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 06-02-2000 04:02 AM

A couple of years ago, I got the impression that Cinemeccanica had acquired the whole (Prevost) company. Today, I sort of doubt it since our tech works for a company selling Cinemeccanica, but still never can resist a less-than-favorable comment about our Favorit 70 (Prevost P70) machines when given the chance.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.