Graflex "23 Graphic" roll film backs?

[Let Biogons Be Biogons]

Does anyone know if the Graflex "23 Graphic" roll film backs are any good? How do they compare to the current, and seeming standard, Horseman roll film backs? I realize the Graphic back or now pretty old and long-in-the-tooth, but are they reasonably reliable and can they be counted on to hold the film flat?

Outside of the Graphic and Horesman roll film backs, are there any other reliable, worthwhile Graflok-standard 6x9 roll film backs for 6x9 format bodies?

Thanks.

[Bill_1856]

They're quite reliable, but sometimes don't hold the film as flat as some other backs. It helps to load the film just before using it, so you won't get the reverse curve "set" in the film where it runs around the rollers. Color film seems more prone to this than B&W. The later 6x6 and 6x7 backs from Graflex are flatter, (with larger rollers and smaller film aperture).

[Terence McDonagh]

Look for the ones that advance with a lever, not a knob. These are the newer ones and hold the film flatter.

[Dan Fromm]

Actually, since the film carriages interchange between shells, having a lever advance doesn't mean that the roll holder has the enhancement what flattens the film. The enhancement is a pair of pin rollers on the shell, one on each side of the gate. Look for them, not at the winder.

[Mark Woods]

I have one with the pin rollers and enjoy it. The 4 3/8" Tessar lens is quite sharp and the negs make quite nice enlargements. I've done 11x14 with no problem.

[Dan Fromm]

Um, Mark, a while ago I showed Charlie Barringer some 8x10 prints made from negs shot with my 2x3 Graphics. He allowed that they were, like yours, quite nice, then dismissed them with a comment to the effect that a 4x blowup wasn't very taxing. He did agree, when prodded with a sharp stick, that the results couldn't have been attained from 24x36.

Cheers,

Dan

[Mark Woods]

Nope!
:-D