1-1/4" T-Lock Shoe w/ White Puck Closed Cam & Grooved Stem

Hello,

I just installed 6 balancers from the above order of 8 balancers today.

The channel balancers themselves fit properly, the top clips fit correctly into the holes of the window channels and the spring weights appear to be correct. The sashes open and close easily.

However, the pucks on the T-Lock shoes are different from the originals (see attached).

In all 6 installations, I had to apply a lot of torque with the screwdriver to lock the shoe in the channel i.e. turn the cam 90° into the upright vertical position. I think too much really. The original T-lock balance shoes lock in place with less torque.

On one of the windows in which I replaced the existing balancers I took the window back off. When I tried to put the window back on, the T-lock shoe on one side would no longer lock. I think that the torque required from the first installation damaged the puck.

This must have something to do with the width of the channels in the window frame and/or how much the puck protrudes from the shoe when the cam is in the vertical locked position

I don't have a lot of confidence in the plastic pucks either in terms of durability given the temperature extremes we experience in our area (-30 F or less in the winter and +90 F or more in the summer). The heating/cooling is exacerbated more by our daily temperature swings i.e. many windows receive the full impact of the sun all day long and cool off dramatically at night with ambient temperature drops.

I see only 2 possible solutions here:

Replace the T-lock balance shoes with ones that resemble the original (metal spring puck with the "clawed" ends).

Have a stock of extra T-Lock Balance Shoes on hand for when the pucks become damaged and will no longer lock in the window channel.

Can you get T-Lock balance shoes with the above spring metal clips? Do you have any other suggestions?

Best regards,Mark

Hi Bob. The pics above appear to have been stored at a resolution much lower than that at which I uploaded them. The original email I sent on 08 Jul 2020 had 22 pics including some with the T-lock shoes and a precision caliper to show exact dimensions in terms of width and depth. These pics are much clearer. Are you seeing at your end what I'm seeing in terms of resolution? If not, s there some way I can get higher resolution pics to you?

As for the torqueing, I hear creaking and popping in the window channels as the shoe is locking in place so there is certainly some pressure being put on the channels. The existing t-lock shoes certainly don't do that. They have little forks at the ends that grip/sink into the channel. This is not ideal either because if they don't retract properly when the window is reset into the channel of the frame, they scrape along the channel as the window opens or closes probably damaging the channel too.

Here are some more closeup pics of the T-lock shoes in case you need them.

Here is what I surmise happened with the one window that I installed after replacing the balancers, removing the window and then attempting to reinstall but could not get the balancers to lock back in the channel:

As I mentioned on the support page, you could hear the creaking and cracking when I went to lock the balancer in the channel (Rotate so that the notch in the cam is vertical at 90°) so the puck was putting pressure on the walls of the channel and, conversely, the walls of the channel were putting pressure on the puck.

It is likely that this pressure was just too great during the initial installation and the puck was damaged which is why it wouldn't lock in place after the second attempt.Here are some possible considerations and suggestions:Unlike the original T-lock shoes that use metal claws at the ends to dig into the window channel and the shoe in place under the tension of the balancer, the white pucks on the Swisco T-lock shoes are made of plastic and appear to rely on a larger surface area to create the friction required to lock the shoe in place.

The white pucks that you provide may work well if their width is correct for the width of the window channel, but if the window channels are a little bit narrower, it may require too much force too turn the cam and this in turn damages the puck.

A possible solution would be to file down the ends of the puck slightly so that the shoe locks snugly into the window channel but not so much that it damages the window channel or the puck itself i.e. turning the cam offers some resistance but not too much and the creaking and cracking in the channel while unavoidable is minimal.

Bearing in mind that there may be a certain variance in the width of the channel in the window frame depending on the manufacturer, date of manufacture etc., the amount that would be needed to file down might vary from window to window.

It is possible that if the white puck on the T-lock shoe were made of metal instead of plastic, the pucks themselves would not be damaged so easily; however, if too much force was used to lock the cam i.e the pucks were too wide, it could also damage the window channel more because there would not be enough "give" in the puck.

It would be possible to file down the ends of the pucks if they were made of metal too.

I am aware that the original T-lock shoes with the metal claws are not ideal either. When they don't close properly, they scrape along the window channel and the sash does not move freely. Typically I have to tilt back the window, shake it around back and forth and close it back up. After a few tries, this typically retracts the puck and the sash moves freely i.e. no grinding sound.

I don't know what is possible or not possible to do in this situation. Perhaps a change in installation procedure, perhaps a change in ordering to include spare T-lock shoes and/or pucks that I can modify to suit our situation but I need to find a solution.

Thank you for your efforts in this regard.