Please I.D this gold crown for me

[NJ1181]

Thanks

 

[rexus31]

Gold Crown III.

 

[NJ1181]

Thanks! What about the lll stands out over the l & ll?

 

[rexus31]

Thanks! What about the lll stands out over the l & ll?

Smaller, bronze plated rail counters, bronze plated pocket castings, feet and ball tray bezel, different nameplate design, larger aprons, no plastic skirts, non-pinned slates...it goes on and on.

 

[mike807]

I think it's a II. They changed the ball return on the III's so it doesn't have that bottom section. If you compare on Google images you'll see what I mean.

As far as I know the changes between II and III are just cosmetic, aside from III's have the option of 1¼ slate (I think).

I could be wrong, I'm not an expert on GCs

Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk

 

[rexus31]

I think it's a II. They changed the ball return on the III's so it doesn't have that bottom section. If you compare on Google images you'll see what I mean.

As far as I know the changes between II and III are just cosmetic, aside from III's have the option of 1¼ slate (I think).

I could be wrong, I'm not an expert on GCs

Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk

It's not a II.

 

[mike807]

Yeah, looking at more info I see that now. I assume that bottom compartment only there if the table has the ball return installed?

Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk

 

[rexus31]

Yeah, looking at more info I see that now. I assume that bottom compartment only there if the table has the ball return installed?

Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk

Yes. All Gold Crowns I-IV came standard with the ball tray integrated into the foot apron. The lower tray was for ball return tables.

 

[fastone371]

Smaller, bronze plated rail counters, bronze plated pocket castings, feet and ball tray bezel, different nameplate design, larger aprons, no plastic skirts, non-pinned slates...it goes on and on.

Any idea why the GCI's are 100 pounds heavier than all of the other models??

 

[rexus31]

Any idea why the GCI's are 100 pounds heavier than all of the other models??

Older growth wood?

 

[mike807]

I've noticed some of the wood in older tables is HEAVY. There's usually more of it as well.

The frame on this old Brunswick 10' was so heavy it didn't even feel like it was made of wood.

Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk

 

[Lawnboy77]

Any idea why the GCI's are 100 pounds heavier than all of the other models??

I think the frames on the I and II are a little beefier than the III, along with the figure 8's and pocket castings and attachment hardware being heavier than what was used on the later GC's. I didn't realize how heavy those figure 8's and pocket attachment hardware were until I took all mine off to ship the rails to Jack Z for overhaul. There are 16 of the fig 8's at about a 1/4" thick and the bars for attaching the pocket castings are even thicker, so yeah the hardware difference alone could account for some of that weight difference.

 

[fastone371]

I think the frames on the I and II are a little beefier than the III, along with the figure 8's and pocket castings and attachment hardware being heavier than what was used on the later GC's. I didn't realize how heavy those figure 8's and pocket attachment hardware were until I took all mine off to ship the rails to Jack Z for overhaul. There are 16 of the fig 8's at about a 1/4" thick and the bars for attaching the pocket castings are even thicker, so yeah the hardware difference alone could account for some of that weight difference.

Because mine is a late GCI it has the captured nuts instead of the figure 8 plates.