Jamb mounted, awning crank for a top hinged steel window

Contractor from Mclean, VA

Apr 24, 2015 12:09 pm

We are doing a large restoration job in VA and will need to replace several, several awning cranks. The attached pics are an example of a typical crank that will be replaced. Please contact me with any questions or if you need more info.

User submitted photos of a window operator.

6 Replies

Dave Sr. from SWISCO

Apr 27, 2015 11:25 am

Looks like your arm has broken off. That will make it more difficult to identify. That said, start by looking at our 39-001 and 39-002 and let me know if either of these could work for you as replacements.

Contractor from Mclean, VA

Sep 30, 2016 2:19 pm

Dave,

It has been a while since i inquired about this we have finally got the job where these will be used. I installed one, right handed 39-001 (see pics) but it seems not to open much and am not sure if there is another option for these windows or maybe it is installed incorrectly. The attached pics will hopefully shed some light. let me know what you think.

User submitted image of their window hardware.

Dave Sr. from SWISCO

Oct 4, 2016 10:14 am

Hey, good to hear from you again. Sorry that you're having trouble. I think the issue could be the length of the arm, which I remember was one of our reservations originally. The 39-001 and 39-002 have arm lengths of 9", but I'm not sure what your original may have been. Looking at your new picture, I think it may have been longer. See our 39-141 and 39-142 instead. These have the same mounting hole pattern as the 39-001, but have 11" arms. If these would be better, you may also need a new track to accept the different type of bearing; see the 39-504. I would also recommend the 39-114L handle. Let me know your thoughts.

Contractor from Mclean, VA

Oct 4, 2016 4:17 pm

I think the length maybe fine, what we are seeing is that the angle of the bend is larger than the original and the arm is hitting the top of the slot not allowing for full extension.

Dave Sr. from SWISCO

Oct 6, 2016 11:10 am

I can't say for sure. Is there any way we can see an undamaged version of the first operator? Can you also give us its exact dimensions, including the offset size?