Your thoughts on upgrading Feickert protractor

There's too much slack in the Pin hole that hovers over the center arm pivot. There should be a longer sleeve there of tighter tolerances to allow for a more accurate measure of S2P.

Your thoughts.
What version are you talking about? The latest version or first version ?

If your turntable spindle is too thin simply wrap it with a piece of tape (around it). 

@chakster, if I'm reading both your and slaw's posts correctly, Steve is speaking of the other end of the protractor: the hole for locating the center of the arm's pivot point/bearing(s).
Ok, i just checked mine and there is absolutely no movement between the parts, metal shaft sits firmly. The latest version of the Feickert called GN (Next Generation). The Universal is an old version and it’s different from the latest NG.

If you’re using an old version i must say it has been upgraded with the NG version.

If you having some problem with NG version i have to say i don’t have such problem with my NG
I have the NG and the pin eyeballs maybe a couple thousandths inch clearance to the sleeve.  Not really sloppy.  
I have a question about procedure though.  The instructions are vague, or I'm missing something.  What I did, and it worked, was to set the overhang at step one while aligning the cantilever to the overhang grid line.  At step 2 I moved the platter so the cantilever was parallel and on the grid line (but stylus was not at an intersection?).  At step 3, without moving the platter, I checked for parallelism at the inner null point.  
Sounds great but is this proper usage?  Thanks.
@wlutke ,

I don't have to move the platter to align the cantilever at step 2.

I don't have to move the platter to align the cantilever at step 2.

The NG instruction for step 2 (outer null point) states emphatically (Bold italics) that the pin no longer needs to be aligned over the pivot point for this step.  Their reasoning is that if the overhang is correct and the inner and outer null points are parallel then all is good.  My interpretation is to adjust the platter until the cantilever is parallel to the grid for step 2 (outer null point), go on to step 3 (inner null point) and, if also parallel, all is good.  I think that’s a valid check, but not sure I’m interpreting the instructions correctly.  The stylus, while on, and parallel to, the line is not at a junction (cross-hair) on the grid like I’m used to seeing on other protractors.  It worked and quite well.  Was it dumb luck though?
My way is get the stylus centered on the cross hairs in step one.
In step two is where I align the cantilever with the grid
Step 3 is somewhat overkill and unnecessary if steps 1 & 2 are spot on.

I find that if using step 3 as part of the main alignment procedure, is not a good thing. If you pay close attention, if steps 1 & 2 are spot on, moving to step 3, the cantilever will be slightly off. This is due to the nature of a pivoted arm. Not a major issue.
Are you serious? chakster protractor CAN'T be improved. It is already the best (grin).

if steps 1 & 2 are spot on, moving to step 3, the cantilever will be slightly off 

Feickert suggests that If the cantilever is slightly off at step 3, it is telling you steps 1 and 2 are not spot on. 

Step 3 “check parallelity with lines on the inner null point.  In case 
parallelity doesn’t match (step 2) go back to (step 1) Otherwise planar setup is finished.
I like my SMARTractor. Except they should have put Stevenson alignment on also. 

Not my experience brother.

Not what is written either.

Funny how at first you seemed to be questioning your own set-up, now you’re questioning mine.

If you knew, why ask? I’m out.

I recognized your moniker from the VPI forums..... so I felt like I was being set up. Just wanted to see how far you’d go?

You should try a MyMat. Then maybe you'd spend more time listening.
Calm down.  Not a setup at all.  Your info conflicted with the instructions and I pointed it out.  It’s a discussion, not a judgement.  With an open mind I had hoped for clarification of your opinion about the nature of tone arms. I thought the Feickert instructions vague.  Still do.  btw my moniker at the vpi forums is not wlutke.  
@wlutke ,

I'm actually enjoying my VPI now that I found and fixed most of the manufacturing defects.

Just use trammel points. Dead accurate, dirt cheap. You can draw big circles with them also for when you want to play twister.
Are you serious? chakster protractor CAN’T be improved. It is already the best (grin).

Exactly, i sill hope to meet a super human being who can detect by ears a tiny difference in alignment within a few microns.

seriously, magnifying glass and lighting is what i'd like to add for improvement
Agree that instructions printed on the template itself, on the "old" Feickert protractor, are very vague. In fact, you sort of have to know what to do a priori in order to understand the instructions. For example, you set up the protractor based on the range of the expected P2S (where S = Spindle) distance, and then you set the stylus on an arc calibrated based on P2S, when in fact you are setting pivot to stylus distance, in that first step. But, at least with my original version Feickert, Steps 1, 2 AND 3 ought to be spot on, as I think it was Lutke said. If step 3 is not spot on, there was a small error in step 1 or 2. A small error in the first two steps is magnified in step 3, which is why step 3 is offered. This, my friends, is why I never bother with Step 3; I don’t give a hoot about a small error.
I agree with Chakster on the need for magnification and a high intensity light, if you wanna get crazy with the Feickert or most other protractors.  That is exactly what is offered for the premium price you have to pay to get the SMARTractor, which is otherwise based on the Dennesen, which is also the basis for the Feickert.  In addition, the Smartie gives you perfect accommodation for any one of three spindle diameters.  (I own a UNItractor, the precursor to the Smartie.)