Help with Tormat contacts please.

I recently purchased a Seeburg 100-78D Celestia. I'm fairly good at repairing old arcade vids and pinballs, so am fairly confident in taking this next step into the coin-op world. My issue is that it is currently not playing the A side of records. After poking about a bit I found the problem. The back contact that runs along the tormat has broken off. I looked in the bottom in the hopes of finding it so I could solder it back on but no luck.
What are my options for repairing this? Are there repros out there? Could I just solder on a leaf switch contact if I can't locate the correct part?
Here are some pics of the issue:


I don't yet have the manual or any repair guides but am planning on getting them in the not too distant future as I'll need to start doing the cap kits.

Ugh. More late-in-the-game crap design.

Your thought of using a blade is along the lines of what was done on Tenth ave in the late 80's . We had a box of various contact blades. One that was approx right would be cut and an accurate, slightly oblong hole drilled to mount it. Understand that the position of the point (left vs. right) is fairly exacting and they are not inline front vs. rear.

Rob-NYC

Hi Bear,
This condition is caused strictly by "human intervention"--the phonograph can NOT do this without "help". Failure to handle the mechanism correctly, as I outlined in my Seeburg Mechanism Guide, nearly always results in this condition I have NOS contact assemblies, in stock-
PM me if you wish to purchase one, and/or a copy of my "Mechanism Guide", which I strongly suggest you read, prior to doing anything to the mechanism.
Rob,
FYI, we tested SEVERAL pair of these contacts prior to releasing them, for over one year, of constant 24/7 operation, on a Tormat. The reason for re-design was an attempt to lessen wear on both the contact itself, and the TMU gold flashed rivets. The new style contacts/leaf springs, were re-re-designed several times during this test, and the final versions were found to last aprox. 10 times longer, then the former plunger type, plus, on the last version, the contact itself, was "replaceable". In other words--this change was not prompted by the "bean counters" ( one of the very few--- ), it was done by engineering, as a "product improvement", which IMHO, it was ! Ron Rich

Ron, your points would have been better taken if Seeburg had simply rounded the blade ends so that they wouldn't plow into the Tormat rivets and snap off if the mech was reversed before it reached the end of travel. Most of the machine we had in for repair with this readout block had nothing else wrong beyond broken blades due to the mech being reversed by the op or routeman while changing records.

The NYC Seeburg rep Al Simon Co. hated all the warranty work they had to do on this problem.

I can see simplification and economy as positives in this redesign but it is tainted by the ease with which it can be damaged and frankly, the fact that Seeburg was already cheapening other aspects of their machines...particularly their amps.

Rob

Rob,
Your take is interesting--the "new style" read out contact block was introduced in 1966 with the then current "100" select model.
It was introduced on the 160 select LS-1 the following year. We heard of no problems with the new style read out contact block for a long time--then we did start hearing of twisted contact blades. An "investigation" followed, the conclusion of which was that 99.99 % of this was due to mis-handling, of the mechanism--failure to follow the correct bolt-down process as specified in the I and O manuals. The result of this "flexed" the leaf springs beyond the design limit, and when done would result in missed selections--then your "Geppetto friends" would raise the contact block all the way up, putting undo pressure on the leaves.
IMHO there was NO "cheapening" of the TSA -6, unless you consider going from "point to point" wiring of the TSA-5, to the PC boards used in the -6 ( Electronically, almost NO change in parts at all !) ? ( there surly was some 6-8 years later with the SHP-2 model amp--and even more with the SHP-3 model--) Ron Rich

-the "new style" read out contact block was introduced in 1966 with the then current "100" select model.
It was introduced on the 160 select LS-1 the following year.

Ron are you sure about that? I had a pile of mech's and washed-repaired three of the native 45 LS series, two for hideaways, one for a K that came back from the UK w/50hz gears. The only difference in the block that I saw was the elimination of the ground plungers.

An "investigation" followed, the conclusion of which was that 99.99 % of this was due to mis-handling, of the mechanism--failure to follow the correct bolt-down process as specified in the I and O manuals. The result of this "flexed" the leaf springs beyond the design limit, and when done would result in missed selections--then your "Geppetto friends" would raise the contact block all the way up, putting undo pressure on the leaves.

"Some" Geppettos that I knew used replaced the tiny plunger wires with short lengths of 18Ga lamp wire and yes, the block was pushed way up. Needless to say I got rid of that...pronto. I've been using the flexible braid that couples speaker voice coils to the terminals, I've never had to replace any of those equipped with that sort of wire. I don't understand why Seeburg didn't use it originally. It is only slightly more difficult to solder.

What I meant by "cheapening" was what went on in the mid-late 1970s -mostly with regard to the SHP series. The core 'n coil O-T, the single tapped volume control, that goofy velcro RVC, the much simplified pre-AGC board --all of which worked Ok, but it was a bit depressing and typical of what was happening to American manufacturing back then.

Rob

Hi Rob,
Yep--positive--the very first trip I made to Seeburg was in 1967--at that time I spotted 4-5 mechanisms running back and forth ( no record rack, just the end castings installed) and re-call axking whomever I was with "whatz that " ?? The answer was a "reliability test" of the new style contact block, that had been ongoing for over two years, at that point--don't know how much longer they ran it ??
As for the "cost cutting" done to the amps--you ain't seen nothin'! The bean counters really attempted to cut costs--engineering/QA fought them, and finally won a few of the removed things, back on the amps--The proposed SHP-3 was a nightmare !!
"Bean counters" won on the electrical/mechanical design of the SMC--they convinced the "powers that be" to go to an outside design house for the preliminary design of that model-- Basically, as I see it, that was the final straw that broke Seeburg's back ! Ron Rich