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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Cinemeccanica Vic 8s & Vic 10s (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Cinemeccanica Vic 8s & Vic 10s Vernon Cramer Film Handler Posts: 16 From: Virginia Beach, VA, USA Registered: Mar 2002 posted 06-01-2003 01:13 PM                     Comparing Vic 8s and Vic 10s (looking at the manuals and the machines themselves), it looks as though Cinemeccanica evidently had some 2nd thoughts about the Vic 10s that led to the design of the Vic 8s. From what I've been able to learn so far, the Vic 10s weren't in production for more than a few years before the Vic 8s came out. Does anyone know anything about the history of the Vic 10s and what may have led Cinemeccanica to make the changes? Has anyone used both Vic 8s and Vic 10s and, if so, can you offer any comparisons? I'm assuming that, because the Vic 10s had a comparatively short production life span, the machine must have had some shortcomings (either in terms of cost, operation, or service) that led Cinemeccanica to produce the Vic 8s. Being a cinemeccanica fan and user (Vic 9s, primarily) I became curious about the Vic 10s when I ran across a pair not long ago.  |  IP: Logged Richard Fowler Film God Posts: 2392 From: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA Registered: Jun 2001 posted 06-01-2003 02:11 PM                     VIC 10 where imported by Horstein Cinemas Supply in New York in the late 1950's and I used to service and upgrade a few in Florida. The primary difference is that the V 10 has a barrel type shutter vs the conical disk type shutter of a V 8.....I remember having to do many gate trap modifications since parts available for the V 10 was an issue, probably due to the low numbers made. Richard Fowler Kinoton America Inc.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 06-01-2003 03:39 PM                     Another difference between the VIC 10 and the 8 was that both upper sprockets were the same size as the lower holdback sprocket. This made threading up the penthouse a bit trickier as there was less room up top. Vic 10's are all cast iron(certainly preferable!) while the Vic 8 is lighter built and all alumnium. Both machines are definately workhorses though, and both run 70mm better than they run 35mm. Richard, I've owned two pairs of Vic 10's over the years and both pair had the same gate and trap as the Vic 8's do. Donno about anything thats any different and the manual shows them as being the same too. They are also interchangable. That darn VIC 8/10 35mm trap plate now lists at over 1K!! Overall, I never liked the gate and trap design on any of the Italian machines and I was surprised that someone like Kelmar never came out with a better design retrofit gate/trap for them. The original designs certainly helped them to earn all the comical nicknames they have.... Mark @ CLACO  |  IP: Logged Don Furr Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 509 From: Sun City, Ca USA Registered: Nov 2002 posted 06-01-2003 04:06 PM                     Are you guys talking about the X-10 Vic? I owned and ran a X-10 in one of our theatres for 70mm. Never had a minutes trouble. What a "tank"!! I've never heard of a V-10. Don  |  IP: Logged Richard Fowler Film God Posts: 2392 From: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA Registered: Jun 2001 posted 06-01-2003 04:55 PM                     the 10's in Florida where lower number in the series and there was some differences in the gate which required me to shuttle back and forth between a machine shop using a engineering drawing supplied by Cinemeccanica to do a fix.I remember the sprocket issue. They where tanks. The take up motor clutch assembly was another $$$ item which we replaced with a torque motor set up for 1/2 the cost. The last operating ones where retired when Carnival Cruise line bought the cinema to convert to a Symphony hall on Lincoln Road in Miami Beach.... Richard Fowler Kinoton America Inc. Miami, Florida  |  IP: Logged Luciano Brigite Master Film Handler Posts: 277 From: Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Registered: Jan 2002 posted 06-01-2003 05:15 PM                     During a period of a few months, I worked with 6 Vic. 8 and 2 Vic 10. and never had any problem with any of them, no picture jumping around or film wear and at the time I got to work with them, 70MM was long gone from where I am then the experience I have with them is all with 35mm prints running on these models. The differences other than the look of both machines ( and weight)are the ones Richard and Mark already said. To be honest.. the only problem I ever had with a Vic 8 was the belt that links the motor to the mechanism tearing apart and breaking away. other than that, nothing else happened. The Vic.8 is one projector I'd like to have if I could find one still all original Other Vic's I also worked with are V-4e, V-5 and V6b ,also never any problem with any of them  |  IP: Logged Hugh McCullough Expert Film Handler Posts: 147 From: Old Coulsdon, Surrey, UK Registered: Jan 2003 posted 06-01-2003 05:21 PM                        I have worked on both Vic 10s & Vic 8s. The main differences that I can remember were:- The 10s could run at 24 or 30 fps. The 8s can only run at 24fps. The 10s had a separate motor for the lower spool take up. The 10s had a large air filter bag instead of the Fiat 500 type air filter of the Vic 8. This bag could be taken off and washed. Fitting a turret to a 10 is not possible, or if it is, would be a very expensive modification. Drum shutter on the Vic 10. Dish shutter on the Vic 8. The Vic 10 had more rollers on the sound heads than the Vic 8s making it more complicated to lace up. The film rollers on the sprockets of the 10s did not stay open on their own and had to be held open when lacing film up. Of the two I preferred the Vic 10 as it seemed to run slightly quieter than the Vic 8.  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 06-01-2003 09:03 PM                     My only beef with the vic 10 was getting my fingurs through it to thread far less room. The extra rollers in the sound path did reduce flutter a lot I have seen Vic 5 turrets fitted to a 10 (after removing the penthouse) Both machines give excellent performance  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 06-01-2003 09:09 PM                     My backup plan for the DP-70 and using short focal length lenses is to mount a Kelmar turret, or single barrel Century style lensmount via an adaptor to the normal lens mounting pad on the main frame. This way a lens as short as about 40mm should work without difficulty. Of course the door will have to be set aside on one of these..... I had a VIC 8 that would run at either 24, or 30 fps. there were also two pair of Vic 8's, one pair in McClurg Court, and one pair at the Edens Theatre in and near Chicago respectively that would also run at either speed. It was done through different drive pulleys...... The operator at McClurg prefered the Vic 8's over anything else, while the operator at the Edens didn't seem to prefer anything, or even running film for that matter. The 8 I had in my home screening room was relatively new when I got it. It ran good, but I felt it was too hard on older somewhat dry film so I sold it and got my first DP-70. The DP is gentle as anything I've ever seen and performs better on the screen with new or old film. I've had masking taped together pieces of film make it through as though everything was normal!! You can also run nitrate safely, and to code on it, as Phillips was smart enough to make nitrate rollers available for the DP-70 fire traps. Don, The Line was called Vic and what ever serial number....hence V-10, V-8, V-5, And V-4, and so on. I've never heard of an X-anything...... Mark @ CLACO  |  IP: Logged Don Furr Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 509 From: Sun City, Ca USA Registered: Nov 2002 posted 06-01-2003 10:29 PM                     Mark..... After 10 years plus it all comes back. The Vic 10 was actually "X"....referred to as the X 70/35. Unlike the V-5, V-8, etc, the manuals printed indicated the X 70/35.....not V-10. My mind is slowing down.....too much coconut oil!! -Don  |  IP: Logged David Kilderry Master Film Handler Posts: 355 From: Melbourne Australia Registered: Sep 1999 posted 06-02-2003 07:34 AM                        Both great machines, having run a good deal of 70mm on both, not a good deal of difference in the projected image quality. The separate motor take-up in the Vic 10 caught many a relief projectionist unaware. If the lever was not brought across to the run position just right, the take-up motor would reach speed before the main drive and "snap" went the leader. Not a problem on 70 but sure caused plenty of bad language when it happened on 35. The plant I used at the Forum Melbourne, was originally from the Chelsea and was installed for Porgy and Bess. All 70mm projectors bought by Greater Union Theatres after that plant were Victoria 8's. Those Vic 10's lasted until 1986 when they went to a small rural theatre. I can recall some of the last 70mm they ran: Right Stuff, 2010, 2001, Star Trek II, Star Trek III, ET. David Kilderry  |  IP: Logged Ron Lacheur Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 650 From: British Columbia, Canada Registered: Feb 2002 posted 06-02-2003 08:41 AM                     Some of the Vic 8's I used to use leaked oil, but I guess that can happen to easy projector. Also, the framing knob was messed up, you could never thread the damn thing in frame, it was loose.  |  IP: Logged System Notices Forum Watchdog / Soup Nazi Posts: 215 Registered: Apr 2004 posted 11-23-2006 11:22 AM                 It has been 1270 days since the last post.  |  IP: Logged Andrew McCrea Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 645 From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada Registered: Nov 2000 posted 11-23-2006 11:22 AM                        So, for the VIC10, can anyone help me with a few questions? -Was it a gear machine with an oil bath? -How many blades/wings did the drum shutter have? -Was the drum shutter (What exactly is a drum shutter) just a single shutter? -Are the lamphouse choices limited? -Was it "direct transmission driven" like the Vic 8, with a second motor for the lower take-up reel? I'm just trying to make a PDF reference sheet, and what I have so far is: -35/70mm Projector. -Can run at 24fps or 30fps. -Features a drum shutter. -Easily removable heat filter for 35mm use. -Has a second motor for lower spool take-up. -The large air filter bag can be easily removed and washed. -The Penthouse uses a soft loop based on a klang film design. That is all stuff I've researched on the forums. Any information you can contribute would be superb!  |  IP: Logged Fred Georges Master Film Handler Posts: 257 From: Lombard, IL, USA Registered: Jun 2000 posted 11-23-2006 12:38 PM                     "while the operator at the Edens didn't seem to prefer anything, or even running film for that matter." LoL. I know who you're talking about. He could sure make time with the Concession girls though. He has His own A/V company & is Very successful. Notice I said "Successful" NOT "Good"!  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.