[Bert Coules]

I was using my fairly elderly low-end Ferm rotary hammer to do some
heavy-duty chiseling and the tool fell out. When I tried to replace it, I
discovered that the rubber sleeve would no longer pull back.

Removing the sleeve and the small additional grommet-type thing that sits in
front of it didn't leave me any wiser: the shaft of the chuck still moves in
and out, but even at its extreme inward position the tool doesn't lock.

Looking into the chuck I can see the lengthways raised strips which guide
the tool in, but no visible locking mechanism - which I've discovered from
an online search should be a ball bearing.

Does this mean that the entire chuck has to be replaced? Another quick
search hasn't thrown up a source, but even if it had I suspect that it might
be almost as expensive, and a great deal easier, simply to replace the whole
thing. Am I right? Comparable budget models seem to be around for £50 or
so.

Many thanks.

[Bert Coules]

"... it might be almost as *cheap*..." I meant, of course. Apologies.

[ARW]

On 22/04/2018 12:22, Bert Coules wrote:
I was using my fairly elderly low-end Ferm rotary hammer to do some
heavy-duty chiseling and the tool fell out.Â* When I tried to replace it,
I discovered that the rubber sleeve would no longer pull back.

Removing the sleeve and the small additional grommet-type thing that
sits in front of it didn't leave me any wiser: the shaft of the chuck
still moves in and out, but even at its extreme inward position the tool
doesn't lock.

Looking into the chuck I can see the lengthways raised strips which
guide the tool in, but no visible locking mechanism - which I've
discovered from an online search should be a ball bearing.

Does this mean that the entire chuck has to be replaced?Â* Another quick
search hasn't thrown up a source, but even if it had I suspect that it
might be almost as expensive, and a great deal easier, simply to replace
the whole thing.Â* Am I right?Â* Comparable budget models seem to be
around for £50 or so.

Many thanks.

On my Makita you could just swap the ball bearing.

--
Adam

[Bert Coules]

ARW wrote:

On my Makita you could just swap the ball bearing.

Thanks for the thought. I did wonder about that, but I think there's more
amiss: previously, the outer sleeve was held out by some sort of spring
mechanism and it took some pressure to push it and (presumably) part of the
chuck down so the tool was fully home before I twisted it: now there doesn't
seem to be any resistance at all, nor anything which normally holds the
sleeve in its outermost position.

[Richard[_10_]]

On 22/04/18 15:43, Bert Coules wrote:
ARW wrote:

On my Makita you could just swap the ball bearing.

Thanks for the thought.Â* I did wonder about that, but I think there's
more amiss: previously, the outer sleeve was held out by some sort of
spring mechanism and it took some pressure to push it and (presumably)
part of the chuck down so the tool was fully home before I twisted it:
now there doesn't seem to be any resistance at all, nor anything which
normally holds the sleeve in its outermost position.




This of any help?
https://www.toolstop.co.uk/how-to-re...echanism-a1322

[Jim K[_3_]]

"Bert Coules" Wrote in message:
I was using my fairly elderly low-end Ferm rotary hammer to do some
heavy-duty chiseling and the tool fell out. When I tried to replace it, I
discovered that the rubber sleeve would no longer pull back.

Removing the sleeve and the small additional grommet-type thing that sits in
front of it didn't leave me any wiser: the shaft of the chuck still moves in
and out, but even at its extreme inward position the tool doesn't lock.

Looking into the chuck I can see the lengthways raised strips which guide
the tool in, but no visible locking mechanism - which I've discovered from
an online search should be a ball bearing.

Does this mean that the entire chuck has to be replaced? Another quick
search hasn't thrown up a source, but even if it had I suspect that it might
be almost as expensive, and a great deal easier, simply to replace the whole
thing. Am I right? Comparable budget models seem to be around for £50 or
so.

Many thanks.



Shurely if it is an alternator there's no need for a separate
regulator as such?

(If a dynamo then there is)
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[Jim K[_3_]]

Jim K Wrote in message:
"Bert Coules" Wrote in message:
I was using my fairly elderly low-end Ferm rotary hammer to do some
heavy-duty chiseling and the tool fell out. When I tried to replace it, I
discovered that the rubber sleeve would no longer pull back.

Removing the sleeve and the small additional grommet-type thing that sits in
front of it didn't leave me any wiser: the shaft of the chuck still moves in
and out, but even at its extreme inward position the tool doesn't lock.

Looking into the chuck I can see the lengthways raised strips which guide
the tool in, but no visible locking mechanism - which I've discovered from
an online search should be a ball bearing.

Does this mean that the entire chuck has to be replaced? Another quick
search hasn't thrown up a source, but even if it had I suspect that it might
be almost as expensive, and a great deal easier, simply to replace the whole
thing. Am I right? Comparable budget models seem to be around for £50 or
so.

Many thanks.



Shurely if it is an alternator there's no need for a separate
regulator as such?

(If a dynamo then there is)
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/


Apologies, wrong thread.
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[Bert Coules]

Jim K wrote:

Apologies, wrong thread.

Thank goodness for that. I can normally get my head around most answers to
my questions but that one really had me beaten.

Bert

[Bert Coules]

Richard wrote:

https://www.toolstop.co.uk/how-to-re...echanism-a1322

Thanks for that. I did look around for a source for a replacement chuck but
didn't find anything: I think the model I have is just too old (and I see
that Screwfix don't market a Ferm range any more). But it's an interesting
video.

Bert

[newshound]

On 22/04/2018 12:22, Bert Coules wrote:
I was using my fairly elderly low-end Ferm rotary hammer to do some
heavy-duty chiseling and the tool fell out.Â* When I tried to replace it,
I discovered that the rubber sleeve would no longer pull back.

Removing the sleeve and the small additional grommet-type thing that
sits in front of it didn't leave me any wiser: the shaft of the chuck
still moves in and out, but even at its extreme inward position the tool
doesn't lock.

Looking into the chuck I can see the lengthways raised strips which
guide the tool in, but no visible locking mechanism - which I've
discovered from an online search should be a ball bearing.

Does this mean that the entire chuck has to be replaced?Â* Another quick
search hasn't thrown up a source, but even if it had I suspect that it
might be almost as expensive, and a great deal easier, simply to replace
the whole thing.Â* Am I right?Â* Comparable budget models seem to be
around for £50 or so.

Many thanks.

You normally need to grease these things with moly (or perhaps graphite)
grease. Both of these are notorious for having the oil escape, leaving a
packed residue of solid lubricant that could well gum up the internal
latch mechanism. I would spray liberally with WD40 or soak it in plus
gas or any of the other popular remedies (diesel, automatic transmission
fluid half and half with acetone, etc etc). And "work" it a few times
and then put it back to soak.

[newshound]

On 23/04/2018 10:33, newshound wrote:
On 22/04/2018 12:22, Bert Coules wrote:
I was using my fairly elderly low-end Ferm rotary hammer to do some
heavy-duty chiseling and the tool fell out.Â* When I tried to replace
it, I discovered that the rubber sleeve would no longer pull back.

Removing the sleeve and the small additional grommet-type thing that
sits in front of it didn't leave me any wiser: the shaft of the chuck
still moves in and out, but even at its extreme inward position the
tool doesn't lock.

Looking into the chuck I can see the lengthways raised strips which
guide the tool in, but no visible locking mechanism - which I've
discovered from an online search should be a ball bearing.

Does this mean that the entire chuck has to be replaced?Â* Another
quick search hasn't thrown up a source, but even if it had I suspect
that it might be almost as expensive, and a great deal easier, simply
to replace the whole thing.Â* Am I right?Â* Comparable budget models
seem to be around for £50 or so.

Many thanks.

You normally need to grease these things with moly (or perhaps graphite)
grease. Both of these are notorious for having the oil escape, leaving a
packed residue of solid lubricant that could well gum up the internal
latch mechanism. I would spray liberally with WD40 or soak it in plus
gas or any of the other popular remedies (diesel, automatic transmission
fluid half and half with acetone, etc etc). And "work" it a few times
and then put it back to soak.

I could have added, I have a meeting this afternoon with a man who has a
similar problem at his nuclear power station.

[Thomas Prufer]

On Mon, 23 Apr 2018 10:34:38 +0100, newshound
wrote:

I could have added, I have a meeting this afternoon with a man who has a
similar problem at his nuclear power station.

He needs to soak a nuclear power plant in WD-40 and "work" it a few times to get
it going?

This should be mentioned in the FAQ, y'know.


Thomas Prufer

[[email protected]]

On Monday, 23 April 2018 12:14:14 UTC+1, Thomas Prufer wrote:
On Mon, 23 Apr 2018 10:34:38 +0100, newshound
wrote:

I could have added, I have a meeting this afternoon with a man who has a
similar problem at his nuclear power station.

He needs to soak a nuclear power plant in WD-40 and "work" it a few times to get
it going?

This should be mentioned in the FAQ, y'know.


Thomas Prufer

we would but there's a separate newsgroup for it, news:free.uk.diy.nuclear-device


NT

[Andy Burns[_13_]]

wrote:

news:free.uk.diy.nuclear-device

I suppose that would get us "free archiving" by someone other than HoH
and Google ...

[Bert Coules]

"newshound" wrote:

I would spray liberally with WD40 or soak it in plus
gas or any of the other popular remedies...
And "work" it a few times and then put it back to soak.

I'll try that, thanks.

[Bert Coules]

"newshound" wrote:

I could have added, I have a meeting
this afternoon with a man who has a
similar problem at his nuclear power station.

The tools won't stay in?

[Johnny B Good]

On Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:54:01 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

wrote:

news:free.uk.diy.nuclear-device

I suppose that would get us "free archiving" by someone other than HoH
and Google ...

I managed to subscribe to that NG and request the latest 300 postings. I
got about 150 that went back to 2003, all mostly rather weird spam 800
line postings. The latest one was 2017, not exactly a 'busy' NG for the
past 5 years (one or two postings a year). It was rather more busy prior
to that, meaning 3 to 12 posts a year! :-)

Curiosity satisfied, I unsubscribed, I've got enough moribund groups in
my subscribed list with css, nsr, ucol and uch as it is to bother with an
even more moribund one thank you very much. :-)

--
Johnny B Good

[Andy Burns[_13_]]

Johnny B Good wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

wrote:

news:free.uk.diy.nuclear-device

I suppose that would get us "free archiving" by someone other than HoH
and Google ...

I managed to subscribe to that NG and request the latest 300 postings.

I assumed it was fictitious, it's not on NIN's list of ~25,000 groups.

[Rob Morley]

On Mon, 23 Apr 2018 20:54:35 +0100
Andy Burns wrote:

I assumed it was fictitious, it's not on NIN's list of ~25,000 groups.

Probably one that was auto-created by a posting to a dodgy server that
does that sort of thing ("subscribe to our great service - we carry
three trillion groups") and maybe propagated to others that aren't very
well run. NIN seems to be well run.

[[email protected]]

On Monday, 23 April 2018 20:50:45 UTC+1, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Mon, 23 Apr 2018 12:54:01 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:
tabbypurr wrote:

news:free.uk.diy.nuclear-device

I suppose that would get us "free archiving" by someone other than HoH
and Google ...

I managed to subscribe to that NG and request the latest 300 postings. I
got about 150 that went back to 2003, all mostly rather weird spam 800
line postings. The latest one was 2017, not exactly a 'busy' NG for the
past 5 years (one or two postings a year). It was rather more busy prior
to that, meaning 3 to 12 posts a year! :-)

Curiosity satisfied, I unsubscribed, I've got enough moribund groups in
my subscribed list with css, nsr, ucol and uch as it is to bother with an
even more moribund one thank you very much. :-)

It used to have some on-topic activity. And some have done it or come close, eg david hahn.


NT