Contrast Mystery (not a necessarily a problem)

After a number of years happily printing with my Omega D2V condenser head I decided to run some tests (a la Anchell) with a Stouffer Step Wedge (31 step) using a new set of 6" Ilford MG filters, MG IV RC Perle, and fresh Dektol with the following results:
Filter #2 = grade 1 (iso range # 135)
Filter #3 = grade 1 1/2 (iso range # 115)
Filter #4 = grade 3 (iso range # 85)
Filter #5 = grade 4 1/2 (iso range # 65)
No Filter = grade 1 (iso range # 125)
My condensers are clean, clean condition Nikkor 80mm f5.6 and my safe lights have pasted the Kodak test out to 7 minutes. After reading Anchell's results with a D5 I was expecting a solid grade 2 with no filtration as well as higher iso numbers from all my filters. Not that I can't work with these uneven steps in contrast, because I have been, but am curious if other using my setup have experienced similar lowered contrast results. Could it be my paper? Purchased 250 sheet box in October 2010. Would appreciate any thoughts as to why my results were so different from Anchell's.

While no master printer, a couple suggestions come to mind...

What dilution, temperature, time, and agitation did you use in the Dektol?

Why not try a developer Ilford recommends for this paper, and compare. Then try some glossy fibre base MGIV and compare again.

Dektol should be fine. You need to contact print the wedge to test your filter/paper combo. Then project the wedge to see how much contrast you lose to fog and flare. Could be you are having issues masking light around the negative, a dirty lens or safelight issues.

ic-racer said:

Could be you are having issues masking light around the negative...

Click to expand...

Good point. Try putting the lens cap on the enlarger lens, and a mirror on the enlargers base. Turn off safelight and let your eyes adjust to the dark, then turn enlarger lamp on. Be prepared with black tape and to be shocked at how many light leaks there are.

Does the Anchell test have you put the negative on the easel (contact test for paper range) or in the negative carrier (system test of paper + enlarger range ... which incorporates flare)?

I also wouldn't discount the effect of the pearl surface.