Garrard 440M series

[Hi-Fi-Mogul]

I have a new customer who wants his girlfriend's Zenith
branded Garrard 440M changer fixed.
She inherited the console when her Grandma passed.

From doing only a couple of those Garrards, I know what's
coming with the epoxy grease.
IIRC, I think I'll have to drop the sub-plate to get to that
one part that is ALWAYS frozen.

The good news is that these youngsters who have the dough,
don't mind paying for whatever is needed to be done.
So I get the benefit of pay for my time and they get
satisfaction.

[electra225]

That changer looks a little rough, Mr. Mogul. Good luck!

[William]

Somehow it just does not look like a Garrard, at least the Garrard's I remember or like the one I have.

Bill

[Hi-Fi-Mogul]

That changer looks a little rough, Mr. Mogul. Good luck!

You hit the nail on the head there.
This baby will need lots of cleaning and lube.

The idler has a true chunk of rubber missing. (?)
The motor rotor is very gunked up.
The cartridge stylus is broken off.
The mechanism speed control linkage is frozen.

At least that grungy platter cleaned right up
with some dollar store de-greaser.

[Hi-Fi-Mogul]

I am so glad I put on some rainy cold day Jazz before I
started the removal of the sub-plate mechanism.

This has got to be one of the worst "re-imagined" engineerings
of a record changer that exists.

As a preface, I would NOT recommend buying any record player
that uses the Garrard Unimech design.

How this design could have been less expensive than the
better Garrard auto-slim design is beyond comprehension.

Anyway, editorial over.

I have to do some dis-assembly of the unimech to access that
internal control lever that is frozen completely.

The record support arm, tonearm, and these "friction" washers
on certain plastic linkages must all first be removed.

That alone took about 1.5 hours, as you have to be VERY
careful taking those friction washer connectors off of the
plastic linkage protrusions.

There was a metal control lever that was almost frozen
from the dried brown grease inside its fitting well.

I'm taking a break, as all that concentration does use up
brain glucose.

Time for a late lunch !

[electra225]

Good luck with this project. The owners of that stereo are lucky to have you on the case!

[William]

I'm certainly glad this changer restoration is on your bench and not mine, Mr. Mogul. Here's hoping all of your work brings success.

Bill

[Hi-Fi-Mogul]

Whew !!!!!

I posted a photo of the whacko linkages that were gummed
up with way too much heavy brown grease.
That's all cleaned up now.

I won't list all the booby-traps within this mechanism,
but they are there.
The one that really got me was the spring loaded single
ball bearing in a plastic housing.
I did not realize the 3 parts were not held together,
and when I turned the mechanism over, you can
guess what happened.
I am very glad I have a telescoping magnet, but it
still took 30 minutes to find that tiny spring and bearing.

Not only was the speed change lever frozen, but the
cam gear was too.
I never had a more frozen cam gear wheel than this.
I used 3 solvents and butane flame on it.
After about 4 applications of each, it started to release.

One other thing which is frustrating is the really cheap C-clips
that the Brits used on BSR and Garrards.
If you pry them out, they are so thin that part of the internal
clip will break and is then useless.
I keep all extra C-clips from donor players made in the U.S.

Well, the mech is back together, and the motor is cleaned
and lubed and spins nicely.
I also realized the changer is a 6-200C model, using the
Unimech design.
Taking the night off, and tomorrow comes the re-assembly.

[Hi-Fi-Mogul]

Well, the final insult.

Everything re-assembled back together and I tested the
cycle mechanism manually...OK.

I put the old idler back in and placed 2 records on
the spindle.

The record would not drop. I noticed the spindle
looked too short.

I pulled out the spindle and reset it in the well,
and it sank down.

After much cussing this AM, I read in the manual that
the spindle position is held in place by the turntable
retainer clip.

OK, I set the retainer clip in correctly, lined up the
spindle, and it dropped down.

So, another bad design by Garrard cheapos.
The clip must be worn down at that critical
juncture.

My last attempt will be to glue that spindle in place.

I told the customer I have some BSRs that they can substitute
if the glue does not hold.

I will say I will NEVER work on these Unimechs again.

[electra225]

There was a Magnavox guru named Randy, who was on ARF for years. There is a model of Magnavox changer that he said was not repairable. It was very late, and had a plastic turntable and some other plastic parts that time is not kind to and are made of 100% unobtanium. I wonder if that Garrard is kin to that one. Good luck with the project. And, thanks for taking the time to share pictures and your experience.

[Firedome]

This is what happens when you engineer down to a price dictated by the customer. Garrard typically made high quality players, even the Model 40/Auto Slim series were well designed and put together. But by the early '70s penny-pinching reared it's ugly head, and stuff like this was the result. Normally I'd take a Garrard over any Collaro, VM, &c &c console record player, but not in this case.The AT-6 I have is an untouched original and works perfectly at 61 years old. The key is a quality mechanism and not letting them sit un-attended for decades on end. Congrats for sticking with this poor relative and making it work

[electra225]

I may have overlooked this in one of your posts. If so, please forgive. What did you do to repair the broken tone arm/cartridge? That looked pretty hopeless....

My experience with console stereos and record players has given me the distinct impression that the VM changers in this application are hard to beat. I know, I know. They have rumbly two-pole motors, clunky action and are totally unsophisticated as they come. But they are reliable, tough as nails, and don't get crabby if you abuse them like Collar does. I have one Garrard changer, but I've never used it. BSR is okay, but the VM 1200 series is far more adaptable. They can be cheap or they can be more exotic.

[Hi-Fi-Mogul]

I may have overlooked this in one of your posts. If so, please forgive. What did you do to repair the broken tone arm/cartridge? That looked pretty hopeless....

Thanks for the comments, guys.

Greg,
This Garrard had no tonearm issues.
IIRC, I worked on a 1960's Garrard AT-6 or AT-60 that had that issue.
I did fix it, but cannot remember the details, but it involved
using epoxy for the repair.

I agree with you both. That older Garrards (50's-60's era) were good,
and the V-Ms, BSRs from the 50's to early 70's were good.

V-M made some TERRIBLE changers in its last 3-5 years of
existence. Some were in Zenith models, like this Garrard is.

Those V-Ms had changer designs that mimicked BSR,
including expoxy like grease. Ask me how I know, ha ha !

[electra225]

The reason I asked was that the first picture you posted showed the cartridge not being part of the tone arm. It LOOKED busted to me.

My experience with VM has been with their 1200 series, for which I have the utmost respect. I have no experience with the really late ones, and appreciate your comments.

[Hi-Fi-Mogul]

The reason I asked was that the first picture you posted showed the cartridge not being part of the tone arm. It LOOKED busted to me.

My experience with VM has been with their 1200 series, for which I have the utmost respect. I have no experience with the really late ones, and appreciate your comments.

I think what you saw with this Garrard was the RCA jack mounting
plate which I had to remove before taking off the sub-plate.
It was dangling there for awhile.

[William]

I could not agree more, Mr. Mogul. The last generation of VM changers were nothing like the rugged reliable early models. VM was failing and they were trying everything including building cheap junk just to survive.

Bill

[TC Chris]

My experience with console stereos and record players has given me the distinct impression that the VM changers in this application are hard to beat. I know, I know. They have rumbly two-pole motors, clunky action and are totally unsophisticated as they come.

I've got a V-M 1225GE changer from 1955, a component model on a base with a 4-pole motor and a GE VR II cartridge in a plug-in head. It was my first hi-fi record playing device, through a Bogen DB-115 mono amp (P-P 6BQ5). I built a speaker enclosure from plans in Hi-Fi/Stereo Review magazine, a little reflex box that housed a GE "Extended Range" 8" speaker. Eventually I built a second one when I got my Heath stereo amp. The "extended range" moniker was a product of the advertising dept., I think.

[William]

Chris, it's interesting that VM built changers for GE and they had 4-pole motors, but they did not use 4-pole motors themselves, not even in their VM 1000's. I did find one once. It was a component VM that had a 4-pole motor, but I was not sure if that was factory or if someone changed it out.

Bill

[TC Chris]

Chris, it's interesting that VM built changers for GE and they had 4-pole motors, but they did not use 4-pole motors themselves, not even in their VM 1000's. I did find one once. It was a component VM that had a 4-pole motor, but I was not sure if that was factory or if someone changed it out.

Bill

These were not built for GE. They were a V-M product and used the GE magnetic (VR) cartridge. It's a regular 1200 model with the 4-pole motor and the plug-in arm head. It's labeled V-M. Cream-colored base, chassis, and turntable mat; silver-colored plastic trim; red knobs and cartridge head. Mine was in daily background-music service for many years and the motor bearings are a bit worn.

Chris Campbell

[William]

Chris, it they were not built for GE by VM, then GE much have switched out the motors??

Bill