| Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies Author: | enig | Posted: | May 13, 2020 16:26 | Subject: | 2555 - even more variants | Viewed: | 122 times | Topic: | Catalog | Status: | Open | |
|
| Happy day The time that is spent differentiating between mold variants is
certainly not worth it money-wise, but worth it in other ways.
A customer purchased some classic 2555's. Apparently we still sent two different
variants to him. Sure, most of the older parts have various mini-differences,
just never thought anyone would actually care about getting a specific variant.
Either way, I was not aware of this particular difference.
Our customer described it as 'The wider ones and the narrower ones' and
sent us a picture, circling the different variants. A bit hard to see, I am attaching
one more.
The difference itself is in the sharpness of the outside/inside edges - the very
tops the clips. Principally kind of similar to the difference between classic
and modern 2555, except much more subtle. Difficult to judge if looking at the
edge itself, but becomes easy when comparing from the top view. At least when
you have two pieces to compare
The left one has, call it, completely sharp edge. The right one has a slight
roundness to it. That rounding comes at a cost of reducing the top surface area
of the clip.
Complete list of the differences between the two:
The 'flat top' type:
* Sharper edge / bigger top surface area of the clip
* mold pip on a side
* now looking from yet another side, the sidewall of the clip is completely straight
in all dimensions - does not get narrower towards the top and forms a straight
rectangle (the last picture)
The 'slightly slightly rounded top'
* Slightly rounded top edge of the clip, reduced flat surface area of the top
* mold pip at the bottom
* sidewall is of slightly concave shape - forms a trapezoid
Some more differences, but only concerns the construction of the mold and the
ejection pins placement.
Question(s).
1 - How many of you have/have not noticed this particular difference before?
Curious.
2 - any other different classic 2555s than these two?
|
|
|
Author: | yorbrick | Posted: | May 13, 2020 16:19 | Subject: | Re: Category Definitions Discussion - Parts P - R | Viewed: | 28 times | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| I don't think the definitions should be so focussed.
|
I've modified the Propeller definition to this:
For items with circularly-spinning blades, including accessories and component
parts.
|
|
|
Author: | bje | Posted: | May 13, 2020 15:06 | Subject: | Re: Category Definitions Discussion - Parts V- | Viewed: | 33 times | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| In Catalog, bje writes:
| […]
Wheel - For items that is a solid disk or a rigid circular ring connected
by spokes to a hub, designed to turn, which may or may not fit tire and tread.
|
Hmm, those are wheels:
and fit your description but I’m not sure we’d want them in the Wheel category
|
Me neither, Let me sleep on it though
snip
|
Dang. No one ever agree with anyone, not even lexicologists.
(French “véhicule” (the etymon) admits the “extended” usages.)
|
And in Afrikaans (voertuig) any mobile machine used for transport.... which can
makes things easier or more difficult
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | May 13, 2020 14:28 | Subject: | Re: Category Definitions Discussion - Parts V- | Viewed: | 27 times | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
not 30633
|
|
Author: | SylvainLS | Posted: | May 13, 2020 14:26 | Subject: | Re: Category Definitions Discussion - Parts V- | Viewed: | 33 times | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, bje writes:
| […]
Wheel - For items that is a solid disk or a rigid circular ring connected
by spokes to a hub, designed to turn, which may or may not fit tire and tread.
|
Hmm, those are wheels:
and fit your description but I’m not sure we’d want them in the Wheel category
| | | […]
2. A vehicle is by definition only something with wheels for land transport.
Consider rather moving the aircraft section out.
|
By which definition?
A vehicle is a means of transporting, carrying, something or someone. I don’t
see anything preventing vehicle to be used for aircrafts or boats.
Indeed, this is from WP ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle ):
“A vehicle (from Latin: vehiculum[1]) is a machine that transports people or
cargo. Vehicles include wagons, bicycles, motor vehicles (motorcycles, cars,
trucks, buses), railed vehicles (trains, trams), watercraft (ships, boats), amphibious
vehicles (screw-propelled vehicle, hovercraft), aircraft (airplanes, helicopters)
and spacecraft.[2]”
The references are [1] OED and [2] MacMillan Contemporary Dictionary.
|
Vehicle noun (MACHINE)
B1 [ C ] formal
a machine, usually with wheels and an engine, used for transporting people or
goods on land, especially on roads
Cambridge English Dictionary set to US English specifically
|
Dang. No one ever agree with anyone, not even lexicologists.
(French “véhicule” (the etymon) admits the “extended” usages.)
| Also, we have aircraft and boat sections, which presumably should exclude those
from being in another section.
|
Okay.
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
|