Armed with a digital kitchen scale and 5 of the leading salt pour gimmicks, I decided to measure the popcorn salt load capacity of each container. From heaviest to lightest, here are the results:

1. Kozak 5.3 oz. Load capacity 2.4 oz.
2. Presley Guitar 2.4 oz. " " 1.4 oz.
3. Riser 2.3 oz. " " 2.6 oz.
4. Paul Fox/Danny Dew .6 oz. " " 2.9 oz.
5. Levent .3 oz. " " 2.1 oz.

The winner is the Paul Fox/Danny Dew gimmick at 2.9 ounces of salt, followed by the Riser gimmick at 2.6 ounces and the Kozak gimmick in third place at 2.4 oz. I thought the Kozak gimmick would take first place but this was not the case. All gimmicks were filled to the very top where the shoulder meets the neck.

What size of Paul Fox/ Dew gimmick did you measure? There are a couple of sizes.

Still very interesting data.

Thanks Richard. You're right, there is the smaller PF/DD version but I just left that one in the plastic prop jar. The difference in capacity between the largest gimmick and the smallest is 1.5 oz. That's not a lot of salt and you can certainly get a lot out of a smaller gimmick if you pour it correctly.

I did this out of curiosity and figured there might be some folks who also wondered about the capacity limits of each model.

It is also worth noting that when these devices are filled, their capacity can be increased (slightly) by 'tamping down' the salt. I find that I can get just a little bit more into any of these gimmicks by gently tapping the bottom of the gimmick on a hard surface. it settles the salt more compactly in the gimmick.

Interestingly, I''ve used everyone of these gimmicks except the Kozak model and I regularly used the larger Paul Fox / Danny Dew model...but have replaced it with the Levent gimmick. A smaller load, it's true... but the shape is ideal and the translucent plastic allows me to monitor the flow more accurately.

Regards-
J.Neal

I prefer the Pressley Guitar just because I am used to the weight of it. Kozak's had weight but just felt too huge in the hand.

The problem with this effect is not in the limitations of the gimmicks but in the banality of the presentation: The magician vanishes a quantity of salt and it reappears in the other hand. Kozak overcomes this problem by magically producing a tequila bottle and using salt to prepare his tequila cruda: The drinker will moisten the back of his hand near the first finger and add a bit of salt to that spot. This is to presumably reduce the burn from the tequila by licking the salt off the back of the hand before drinking the shot.

Kaps embellished his presentation by expressing embarrassment and frustration at the long pour and continually striking up the live band behind him to save the effect. He would also grab into the salt stream with his free hand and pocket the excess salt.

Kozak also discusses this tapping technique on his DVD. I did that with each gimmick to ensure as much accuracy as I could. It also works well when spooning the coffee in into my small aluminum expresso maker.

Leo brings up a great point: it's really NOT how much salt you produce, it's how much salt in an ENTERTAINING manner.

The same holds true for quantity silk productions. (and bottles, etc;)

Which Riser gimmick did you use? he made several....

I used the Riser Classic. It feels like a refined PF/DD gimmick. Click here and scroll down:

http://www.jamesriser.com/Magic/DiscontinuedItems.html

I just bought the Levent's Salt Pour and Levent's Salt Shaker.

Can't wait to perform with it. I always loved Fred Kaps' performance. It was Kaps who inspired me to take this on.

Porper has a killer "second load" gimmick designed by R. Paul Wilson.

All the gimmick does is hold the salt. It is not a self working gimmick or effect. It does take some ability on the performer's part to create the effect, and to control the amount of salt that flows from the container. It matters little how much the quantity the container holds. Regulating the flow is the performers responsibility. That only comes from practice and experience with the prop.

Kozak did create a great finish to the Salt Pour, the very large wide spread final pour. Making it look like there was no way such a huge quantity cold still come from the hand.

There is also no need to justify for doing the trick, or using salt. Speculating, is one thing the member's like to do a lot, but going out and actually presenting it, will tell you a lot more. When I perform the Salt Pour, I use the Pressley Guitar handling, and it get the whole audience applauding, so much I have to stop and accept the applause.

The performer makes or breaks the Long Salt Pour. The gimmick, can be tube, a ball, a vial, a ear syringe it does not matter. It is the routine and it is presented at matters. Sure it is nice to have custom made props, but it is not necessary for this trick.

Absolutely right, Bill.

The performer is more important than the prop, and, it's the performer that "makes" the effect, with his presentation.

I tried to present the salt trick back in the '80s. I tried a "handful" of different gimmicks. I tried a half dozen different presentations. MEH! I finally had to admit defeat.

The sleight was no problem, The gimmicks were the best obtainable. I knew all the 'secrets', like pop corn salt, ETC. You wanna buy five pounds of SALT???!!!

I have to correct part of my post. There was a brass gimmick made and put out by Magic Methods, Jerry Metzer. It was a tube, with a disc at the bottom, that when the holes were lined up, the salt was allowed to flow out of the small hole. I never bought it, why, because I thought. Salt dissolves in moisture. What if on a humid day, the salt absorbs the moisture in the air. Clogs up and will not flow through the hole. What if salt gets between the bottom of the tube and the disk, will it jam the disk. Just to many questions of trouble waiting to happen. This device was an attempt to sell a gimmick to the people that believe the gimmick makes the magic, and is self working.

Sorry, don't know anything about the gimmick Martin Breese sells. Some unnamed craftsman designed it. Anyone have this model?

Bill, is the Pressley Guitar handling similar to Ross Bertram's technique of brushing loose salt from the top of the fist and thumb clipping the gimmick? Kozak's technique is pretty much this way as well. I have a PG gimmick but I picked it up from an auction and it did not come with any papers.

Pressley Guitar's handling has little to do with the steal method, it is a complete description of the "act" and handling, handling meaning detail moves to accomplish the routine. How you want to hold, use the left or right hand, or where to dump the salt, floor or container, is the performer's choice. Let's just say, with PG routine, you can do it in every stand up show one choses to, and it will be a sold hit. It does not come with any patter, as again, that is your choice, music or patter. It does tell you how to start and finish.

I will add that the Pressley Guitar Gimmick can b e stole n in similar manner to the paul Fox, or if your finger is small enough, using the 'poke" method that is so popular with simplex dye tubes. The 'throat' of the gimmick of Pressley's is narrower than the Fox gimmick, because of the thicker walled brass.

I understand that PG didn't like the finger steal and designed his gimmick to prevent this. The opening is very small. Levent's gimmick is definitely designed for this steal.

Thanks Bill for your description. Is PGs Salt Pour Act published?

It is 2 pages of instructions that come with the gimmick.

Bill, I had those instructions some where. Is that the one with the two fisted salt pour. I collected some many gimmicks down the years, I can't remember which one PG's is.