Why did the professional camera reviewers totally miss a serious flaw in the camera?
Jeanette Guire
serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.
The flaw is the infamous Nikon coolpix flimsy battery door latch molded as
a thin, easily broken loop of plastic on the coolpix camera body. The fix
has been described in various ways by various users in other threads. The
fix isn't the point of this thread.
DPREVIEW didn't even test camera integrity:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp3100/
DCRESOURCE totally missed the mark:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/nikon/coolpix3100-review/
STEVE'S DIGICAMS was clueless:
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/nikon3100.html
The question I am incensed about and very curious about is how could the
reviewers I trusted have been so inanely incompetent to have totally missed
the fact the camera would inevitably turn into a brick due to the obvious
poor engineering that wasn't visible to the consumer but which should have
been wholly obvious to the "professional" camera reviewer?
Is it that the reviewers are:
- Paid by the camera manufacturers to tout their products?
- Paid by the advertisers to tout the manufacturer's products?
- Clueless?
- ??? or ???
Ron(UK)
>
> Is it that the reviewers are:
> - Paid by the camera manufacturers to tout their products?
Good heavens! how could you even think such a thing!
;)
Ron(UK)
Eric
"Jeanette Guire" <jeanet...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:t2LQi.10811$4V6....@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net...
> I'm curious why...
Charles
wrote:
>I'm curious what this has to do with home repair?
>
>"Jeanette Guire" <jeanet...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:t2LQi.10811$4V6....@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net...
>> I'm curious why...
>
You have to repair the camera when you get it home.
Brendan Gillatt
Hash: SHA1
They probably aren't allowed to test the cameras to destruction! With the
light use the reviewers put on a test camera, something like a flimsy
latch isn't going to break. Even if it did they aren't going to write it
in their article - camera manufacturers aren't going to be too trusting
of a reviewer who breaks cameras!
- --
Brendan Gillatt
brendan {at} brendangillatt {dot} co {dot} uk
http://www.brendangillatt.co.uk
PGP Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBACD7433
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (MingW32)
iD8DBQFHE5hzkA9dCbrNdDMRAraqAKC4lQL5yyYJBQDC4+HxclHCN8edMACfVpVE
bhccDitlOkzfFJ6XAluHiRo=
=4M9N
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
HeyBub
> I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed a
> very serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.
>
> The flaw is the infamous Nikon coolpix flimsy battery door latch
> molded as a thin, easily broken loop of plastic on the coolpix camera
> body. The fix has been described in various ways by various users in
> other threads. The fix isn't the point of this thread.
You came to the right place with your concerns.
Experts here at alt.home.repair are ready to deal with your worries. We
unaimously recommend:
Duct tape.
Hope this helps.
Al Bundy
news:13h7kcl...@news.supernews.com:
Absolutely listen to this recommendation. This guy knows his shit big
time.
You must have heard the famous saying, "When someone says Duct Tape,
people listen."
RickH
wrote:
I guess the Nikon name just doesn't carry the same weight it once did,
if its cameras are associated with China manufacturing then they've
just sold that venerable good name down the river, it's mudd now.
John McWilliams
Darn tootin'! Nothing says "I love you" more than a
fresh-off-the-production-line full roll of silver duct tape. But most
people ask for "Duck Tape". Quack, quack!
--
fu set.
John McWilliams
flambe
reviews. While some of these design flaws may be significant they just don't
come up in reviews that are focused solely on image quality.
Even more to the point is the suspicion that reviewers get cherry picked
cameras/lenses that are not of the build quality that the consume can
expect. How else to explain the frequent discrepancy between lens reviews
and what users actually experience?
I'm looking at the rubberized side caps over the electonic ports in my D80
and wonder how long they would last if frequently used.
Dave
"HeyBub" <heybub...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:13h7kcl...@news.supernews.com...
your concerns.
>
> Experts here at alt.home.repair are ready to deal with your worries. We
> unaimously recommend:
>
> Duct tape.
>
> Hope this helps.
Or rubber bands. Larger applications can use bungee cords. Packing tape
will do in a pinch if you're short on duct tape, but must be supplemented
with twine.
You could have dragged your lazy ass into a store and looked at the camera
yourself. Probably would've taken less time overall than all your whining.
Did it ever occur to you that if you buy a cheap camera at the low end of
the model scale such as CoolPix, you just might get a friggin' piece of
trash? Did it never occur to you that virtually all consumer-grade
electronics have become completely disposable? Or that Nikon has a vested
interest in ensuring that that camera you just bought DOESN'T last 20 years?
Suck it up and admit to yourself that it was your own damned fault.
Or get a small dog to kick. But whatever you do, do it someplace else.
just bob
We're you expecting a real answer?
John Tserkezis
> I guess the Nikon name just doesn't carry the same weight it once did,
> if its cameras are associated with China manufacturing then they've
> just sold that venerable good name down the river, it's mudd now.
You get what you pay for.
Nikon have, do, and will continue to make cameras in their range that are
almost indestructible. Not the entire range they offer, just some.
Price is a good indicator.
If you expect hardy equipment at rock bottom prices, you're fooling yourself.
--
Linux Registered User # 302622
<http://counter.li.org>
Moro Grubb of Little Delving
"Jeanette Guire" <jeanet...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:t2LQi.10811$4V6....@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net...
> serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.
You broke your battery door. And its everyone else's fault?
/M
John Tserkezis
> You broke your battery door. And its everyone else's fault?
Don't forget the subsequent whining about how the paperclip repair is
supposed to be bent. Now it's the fault of those who offer repair techniques too.
HankLanglin
The most inventive use I've ever seen for duct-tape to make the most efficient
and low-cost watercraft ever ------ Red Green used sections of straight and
elbow air-ducts (the large 2x2 ft. variety). Creating two pontoons by taping the
sections together. The elbows upturned at the ends to keep the water out, the
shape making a boat-bow for easier movement in water. A section of chain-link
fence across the two pontoons with some lawn furniture on top. It worked
perfectly.
How is this camera related? If some photographers built one they might be able
to get to some scenes worth viewing by others. Those who inflict the world with
their agonizingly boring cat and birdbath photos need all the help and advice
that they can get. If not for them, then for the rest of us who have to endure
their relentless shit.
Billy_Bancroft
<j...@techniciansyndrome.org.invalid> wrote:
> If you expect hardy equipment at rock bottom prices, you're fooling yourself.
Then explain the titanium shell of Sony P&S cameras that have even withstood
being run over by a jeep and still kept working as new (true story). Story and
photos online in one of dpreview.com's discussion forums.
You're fooling yourself by thinking that money = quality. Lengthy research into
which ones are worth buying = quality. Cost isn't an indication of anything
these days, other than the seller's bank account .... at the expense of fools
who love nothing better than to parrot outdated sayings that no longer hold any
truth whatsoever.
John McWilliams
lsmft
Eeyore
Jeanette Guire wrote:
> I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed a very
> serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.
Because today's revieweres are merely there to provide support for the
magazine's advertisers.
Graham
Stoneman
wrote:
It's nothing a little Red Green Duct Tape can't fix.
I mean, it could be worse..
Stoneman
John Tserkezis
>> If you expect hardy equipment at rock bottom prices, you're fooling yourself.
> Then explain the titanium shell of Sony P&S cameras that have even withstood
> being run over by a jeep and still kept working as new (true story). Story and
> photos online in one of dpreview.com's discussion forums.
I can't explain it. Because I can't find any evidence of a Sony P&S with a
titanium casing. I've had a look on the sony site, and dpreview.com, but
there's too many cameras for the time that I can afford to look through
(looked at the first dozen or so, no find on "titanium").
What models where you talking about?
> You're fooling yourself by thinking that money = quality.
I didn't imply that. I said "Price is a good indicator", not price is the
ONLY indicator.
> Lengthy research into which ones are worth buying = quality.
Agreed.
> Cost isn't an indication of anything these days, other than the seller's bank
> account .... at the expense of fools who love nothing better than to parrot
> outdated sayings that no longer hold any truth whatsoever.
It doesn't mean a thing. You do your homework and if you find that Product
A offers similar quality and features to Product B, but Product A is cheaper,
then you buy Product A. Duh.
Just because Product B is outlandishly expensive doesn't mean it's because
of any of the reasons you outlined, there are hundreds more reasons why. And
the bulk of those reasons have nothing to do with how far the manufacturer has
their finger up their backsides.
Ron Hunter
Most likely all three, but also because they just don't use the cameras
long enough to notice such potential weak points.
Dennis Pogson
A rubber band is better. Duct tape will mark the camera body.
Dennis.
Dennis Pogson
Yeah! I think in future reviewers should use the camera extensively for
around 3 years before writing a review. By that time the camera will have
been replaced about 5 times with newer models, so it won't matter if the
battery door fails. You can sell it on E-Bay with an elastic band round it,
pointing out that this is a design feature.
Dennis.
Charles
I broke the one on my 990 by dropping it down the stairs. Maybe they
should do that as well.
Edwin Pawlowski
> On Oct 15, 11:45 am, Jeanette Guire <jeanettegu...@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
>> I'm curious why the following three camera reviewers totally missed a
>> very
>> serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.
>> The question I am incensed about and very curious about is how could the
>> reviewers I trusted have been so inanely incompetent to have totally
>> missed
>> the fact the camera would inevitably turn into a brick due to the obvious
>> poor engineering that wasn't visible to the consumer but which should
>> have
>> been wholly obvious to the "professional" camera reviewer?
I've had a CoolPix for a couple of years now. Until you brought it up here,
I've never noticed the latch and never thought of it being a defect. Just
as the designer did not think it would have the faults that shoed up.
I really doubt that the reviews missed it, they just did not see it being a
problem. Yes, sometimes companies take a chance a launch a product with a
flaw, but most never see it until the unit is put to use for a period of
time and in greater numbers than their test panels.
Mine has thousands of photos and thousands of miles on in and still works so
I don't see it as a design flaw. If it does, I may change my mind.
AZ Nomad
>Duct tape.
>Hope this helps.
You're behind the times. Use nylon cable ties instead.
Maybe wash the thing out with some contact cleaner first.
Tony Hwang
Hi,
Or hay wire!
Janey
> serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.
1. Depending on the venue (magazine, not-for-profit web site, etc.), if Nikon
or one of their distributors advertises in/on their venue editorial policy
may dictate that reviewer must not bring out negative traits of the product
(for fear of losing advert revenue).
2. Having the camera in hand for such a short period of time (hours? days?)
it's simply not possible to "road test" it to the extent that the normal
owner may eventually do so.
Good luck on the next one.
Jeff Liebermann
>Experts here at alt.home.repair are ready to deal with your worries. We
>unaimously recommend:
>
>Duct tape.
Duct tape is so very 20th century. In the 19th century, the universal
repair solutions were baling wire (used for hay bales) and chewing
gum. Victorian machinery was held together by farm tools. Duct tape
was suitable for most 20th century repairs because the devices were
large enough to handle the tape. It's still useful today on the Space
Station:
<http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/print/5598>
"They also decided to rig a thermal barrier out of a surplus
reference book and all-purpose gray tape."
but not on small things.
This is the 21st century, where things are getting smaller and
smaller, while Duct tape has remained unchanged since the invention of
ummm... ducting. More important, many devices are being designed with
little concern for repairs or even disassembly. About all one can do
with duct tape today is embalm the device.
I don't know what will become the 21st century equivalent of Duct
tape. My vote is for Superglue, epoxy, and urethane glue and goo. I
had some hope for ty-wraps replacing baling wire, but even ty-wraps
are being replaced by glue and goo. Much home construction and a
growing number of products are already assembled with adhesives.
For the 21st century, it's adhesives, not Duct tape.
--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Ron(UK)
Polymorph (mouldable plastic resin) is a rather wonderful invention.
Loads of uses in the workshop.
Ron(UK)
Al Bundy
news:AoSdnaBZ4dt_cYna...@bt.com:
Google seems to say that it is called Friendly Plastic here in the
states. Anybody ever get any? Where?
SparkyGuy
causes the adhesive to quickly fail):
- - - - -
POPULAR SCIENCE (December 1998)
Tape That Doesn't Live Up to its Name
DUCT TAPE is one of the most versatile materials ever invented. You can
patch a tent, seal up a box, or even repair a leaky garden house with it.
But according to the Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory, there's one thing duct tape doesn't do well: seal a duct.
In leak tests at the lab, researchers Max Sherman and Iain Walker forced
alternating hot and cold air flows through finger-jointed metal ducts sealed
with a variety of products --including duct tape, clear plastic tape,
foil-backed tape, mastic, and injected aerosols. The researchers also baked
the sample ducts at temperatures of 140 to 187 degrees F, simulating the
conditions in many attics.
"Of all the things we tested," says Sherman, "only duct tape failed. It
failed reliably and quite often catastrophically."
Duct tape consists of a cloth backing and a rubber adhesive. "We think that
heat degrades the glue, and that's what's killing the duct tape," Walker
says.
The researchers are recommending that duct tape manufacturers reformulate
the glue to work better at higher temperatures, and that longevity standards
be developed for all duct sealants. Whether that will happen remains to be
seen; as of press time, manufacturers were studying the test results.
In the average house, 20 to 30 per cent of the energy used for heating and
cooling is lost through ducts.
- - - - -
There is a different type of duct tape that works. It's black and actually
sold in better heating & cooling supply stores.
The original that I remember was available from drama supply stores called
gaffer's tape. It is of a different constitution and doesn't leave a residue
when you take it off after a week or 2.
Arthur Shapiro
Just to lend some seriousness, duct tape doesn't work. There's enough
continuous upward pressure on the door from the spring-loaded pair of AA cells
that the door gradually shifts the tape, opens slightly, and loses the
electrical connection.
Rubber bands don't work because they happen to pass over various controls
(such as the zoom) that need to be freely accessible.
I envy those who had enough of the surgeon's touch to mount a paperclip. I
myself used the delightfully outside-the-box solution of the metal plate
externally mounted via a bolt through the tripod mount. Brilliant!
I'd also opine that this (rec.home.repair; I see it's cross-posted within
reason) is an appropriate newsgroup, or certainly not inappropriate, for the
discussion of repairing a physical household item. Appliance repair
discussion tends to go here, and this seems little different.
Art
Al Bundy
news:0001HW.C33A57C3...@news.sf.sbcglobal.net:
Duct tape just a tradational ha-ha. Personally I like to stick <pun
intended) with Covalence Adhesives products like Polyken & Nashua.
Mr.Tony to you
"John Tserkezis" <j...@techniciansyndrome.org.invalid> wrote in message
news:4713f93b$0$31086$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
Daniel W. Rouse Jr.
news:t2LQi.10811$4V6....@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net...
> serious and obvious flaw in the Nikon Coolpix camera lineup.
>
> a thin, easily broken loop of plastic on the coolpix camera body. The fix
> has been described in various ways by various users in other threads. The
> fix isn't the point of this thread.
>
> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp3100/
>
> DCRESOURCE totally missed the mark:
> http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/nikon/coolpix3100-review/
>
> STEVE'S DIGICAMS was clueless:
> http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/nikon3100.html
>
> reviewers I trusted have been so inanely incompetent to have totally
missed
> the fact the camera would inevitably turn into a brick due to the obvious
> poor engineering that wasn't visible to the consumer but which should have
> been wholly obvious to the "professional" camera reviewer?
>
> - Paid by the camera manufacturers to tout their products?
> - Paid by the advertisers to tout the manufacturer's products?
> - Clueless?
> - ??? or ???
[removed the home repair newsgroup, the topic has nothing to do with
repairing homes or home improvement]
It didn't seem to be a flaw.
I owned a Coolpix 2100 (which is effectively the 2-megapixel version of the
CoolPix 3100, construction of the camera is otherwise identical) and when it
finally stopped working, it wasn't the battery door that failed. Instead, it
was the plastic 4-directional control that just stopped responding to left,
then left and down, and eventually, just stopped responding altogether.
Since that camera was more than 4 years old at the time the 4-directional
control failed, I just discarded the camera and purchased a different
(non-Nikon) camera that was much higher resolution and has a much better low
-light photo capability. (It didn't seem worth it to try to get the camera
repaired or replaced with what would probably be a refurbished model.)
Additionally, I changed batteries numerous times (due to the high drain
issues with that camera even with 2000+ mAh AA NiMH battery cells) during
the 4 years I owned the CoolPix 2100, and the battery door never failed to
latch.
Others, of course, may vary.
Michael A. Terrell
>
> I happen to be one of those who suffered this common problem.
>
> Just to lend some seriousness, duct tape doesn't work. There's enough
> continuous upward pressure on the door from the spring-loaded pair of AA cells
> that the door gradually shifts the tape, opens slightly, and loses the
> electrical connection.
Then you don't know the proper way to use duck (duct) tape. In a
case like this, you use the tape to hold something against the door, so
it CAN'T move.
--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.
Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
John McWilliams
>
> Then you don't know the proper way to use duck (duct) tape. In a
> case like this, you use the tape to hold something against the door, so
> it CAN'T move.
Where in world did you come up with duck?? One doesn't tape ducks; one
tapes ducts. except it isn't very good for that.....
--
john mcwilliams
Neil Ellwood
Peter Scott did it all the time.
--
Neil
reverse ra and delete l
William Sommerwerck
> tape ducks; one tapes ducts. Except it isn't very good for that...
So why the latter?
It might originally have been called duck tape. See the Etymology section of
the Wikipedia article.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duct_tape
The issue is confusing, because it wasn't used for ducts until long after it
was invented.
John McWilliams
Not so confusing now, as apparently there's a manufacturer of the stuff
with "Duck" in its name, putting out a product called
"'Duck Tape' brand of duct tape." Obviously in their interest to have
folks call it "Duck", but I've not run across this brand ever, but it
explains a whole lot.
--
john mcwilliams
Robert Haar
wrote:
And what is worse is that the stuff commonly called "duct tape" - fabric
tape with a silvery but non-metallic coating is actually a very bad choice
for sealing ducts. There are varieties of tape that are made for sealing
ducts but the common "duct" tape is not one of them.
I am surprised that no one has mentioned gaffers tape.
James Silverton
??>> Then you don't know the proper way to use duck (duct)
??>> tape. In a case like this, you use the tape to hold
??>> something against the door, so it CAN'T move.
JM> Where in world did you come up with duck?? One doesn't tape
JM> ducks; one tapes ducts. except it isn't very good for
JM> that.....
I see the name is much discussed later but I would debate
whether it is not useful for ducts. It's doing very well in my
house and is good for a lot of other things!
James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland
E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
John McWilliams
Gaffer's tape is mentioned in the Wiki article, and it's mentioned in
the first line that duct tape ain't so good for ducts.
--
john mcwilliams
James Silverton
JM> Robert Haar wrote:
??>> On 10/21/07 3:01 PM, "William Sommerwerck"
??>> <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote:
??>>
??>>>> Where in world did you come up with duck? One doesn't
??>>>> tape ducks; one tapes ducts. Except it isn't very good
??>>>> for that...
??>>> So why the latter?
??>>>
??>>> It might originally have been called duck tape. See the
??>>> Etymology section of the Wikipedia article.
??>>>
??>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duct_tape
??>>>
??>>> The issue is confusing, because it wasn't used for ducts
??>>> until long after it was invented.
??>>
??>> And what is worse is that the stuff commonly called "duct
??>> tape" - fabric tape with a silvery but non-metallic
??>> coating is actually a very bad choice for sealing ducts.
??>> There are varieties of tape that are made for
??>> sealing ducts but the common "duct" tape is not one of
??>> them.
??>>
??>> I am surprised that no one has mentioned gaffers tape.
JM> Gaffer's tape is mentioned in the Wiki article, and it's
JM> mentioned in the first line that duct tape ain't so good
JM> for ducts.
Despite Wikipedia, I think we should stick to photography :-)
I'm not sure whether we are talking about the same thing!
Dave Plowman (News)
John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > I am surprised that no one has mentioned gaffers tape.
> Gaffer's tape is mentioned in the Wiki article, and it's mentioned in
> the first line that duct tape ain't so good for ducts.
Despite having used it for many years I've never heard the apostrophe
added. It's gaffer tape.
--
*A hangover is the wrath of grapes.
Dave Plowman da...@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
pltrgyst
>Not so confusing now, as apparently there's a manufacturer of the stuff
>with "Duck" in its name, putting out a product called
>"'Duck Tape' brand of duct tape." Obviously in their interest to have
>folks call it "Duck", but I've not run across this brand ever, but it
>explains a whole lot.
"Duck Tape" has been a trademark registered in the US since 1993, for "Elongated
Tape Having a Pressure Sensitive Adhesive on One Side... FIRST USE IN COMMERCE:
19800114." The owner is "Manco Tape, Inc. CORPORATION OHIO 2040 W. 110 St.
Cleveland OHIO 44107."
-- Larry
Noozer
"pltrgyst" <pltr...@spamlessxhost.org> wrote in message
news:1p6oh35cg86rfo1hs...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 12:12:11 -0700, John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
>>Not so confusing now, as apparently there's a manufacturer of the stuff
>>with "Duck" in its name, putting out a product called
>>"'Duck Tape' brand of duct tape." Obviously in their interest to have
>>folks call it "Duck", but I've not run across this brand ever, but it
>>explains a whole lot.
Duck tape and duct tape are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS!!!!
Duck tape is made from cloth and is a REALLY bad choice for using on ducts.
It was designed originally to repair tarps and withstand the weather.
Duct tape is made from metal foil and is designed for use on metal ductwork.
Steve Barker LT
The original DUCT tape had and still has NO metal foil.
"Noozer" <dont...@me.here> wrote in message
news:eaVSi.106433$Da.35678@pd7urf1no...
dj_nme
> "Noozer" <dont...@me.here> wrote in message
> news:eaVSi.106433$Da.35678@pd7urf1no...
>
>>Duck tape and duct tape are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS!!!!
>>
>>Duck tape is made from cloth and is a REALLY bad choice for using on
>>ducts. It was designed originally to repair tarps and withstand the
>>weather.
>>
>>Duct tape is made from metal foil and is designed for use on metal
>>ductwork.
>
> Wrong. Again.
>
> The original DUCT tape had and still has NO metal foil.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/ywrzu5
Metal tape with adhesive is known as "flashing tape", used to seal the
edges of roofs to prevent the ingress of moisture under the edge of
roofing material or between walls that are built hard up against each other.
Flashing used to be done with lead foil sealed/glued with pitch, now it
is done with adhesive metal [usually aluminium] tape, hence "flashing tape".
In Australia, generic "duct tape" is essentially like a very wide
electrical tape: a stretchy PVC backing with glue on it, usually about 2
inches wide.
This tape that's cloth backed in plastic with an easy release adhesive
sounds more like "gaffer tape", which is used extensively in the
entertainment industry to hold electrical cables in place and for
slapdash on-the-spot repairs.
A "gaffer" is an on-set electrician used during the making of a movie or
in-house electrician for a theatre, hence "gaffer tape".
G
I never came across using aluminum foil tape as flashing. I have used
it for ducts, for hot exaust pipes, and other uses. Flexible sticky flashing
is now usually done with mineral based sheeting with polyethelene
backing. Most auto parts stores sell metal tape. I used some stainless
tape for covering chrome or chrome like parts. I just recently came across
the cloth tape with mild stick, or gaffers tape. New to me. There are
different backings for duck tape. I like using the remants of the not
available anymore, 100 MPH tape from Sprotsman Guide, orginally used
to repair aircraft wings. It has a stretch unlike most, and really
holds up and sticks well.
greg
John McWilliams
> In article <I7KdnbgbqbNpLYba...@comcast.com>,
> John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> I am surprised that no one has mentioned gaffers tape.
>
>> Gaffer's tape is mentioned in the Wiki article, and it's mentioned in
>> the first line that duct tape ain't so good for ducts.
>
> Despite having used it for many years I've never heard the apostrophe
> added. It's gaffer tape.
Kinda like "Can peas" or "Tin peas" in a sense. I'm sure many call it so
without the possessive, but if it's used mostly by gaffers, it should be
in the form I put it. Unless there is a widely used verb (by those in
the Biz.) "to gaff".
--
john mcwilliams
msg
> Wrong. Again.
>
> The original DUCT tape had and still has NO metal foil.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/ywrzu5
>
This is a redirect to a 3M product spec page; for this item and
others in the same category, there is _no_ reference to
using the product on 'ducts' anywhere in the description.
G
>Steve Barker LT wrote:
>
>> Wrong. Again.
>>
>> The original DUCT tape had and still has NO metal foil.
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/ywrzu5
>>
>
>This is a redirect to a 3M product spec page; for this item and
>others in the same category, there is _no_ reference to
>using the product on 'ducts' anywhere in the description.
I never really considered using the stuff on ducts. I always noticed after
years, the tape would get hard, fall apart and become useless. Some
types last longer, but the typical silver tape.
greg
G
>In article <13hplef...@corp.supernews.com>, msg <msg@_cybertheque.org_>
> wrote:
>>Steve Barker LT wrote:
>>
>>> Wrong. Again.
>>>
>>> The original DUCT tape had and still has NO metal foil.
>>>
>>> http://tinyurl.com/ywrzu5
>>>
>>
>>This is a redirect to a 3M product spec page; for this item and
>>others in the same category, there is _no_ reference to
>>using the product on 'ducts' anywhere in the description.
>
>I never really considered using the stuff on ducts. I always noticed after
>years, the tape would get hard, fall apart and become useless. Some
>types last longer, but the typical silver tape.
While it would seem to be perfect for ducts, the fall apart business seems
to be the key to it usufullness. Read
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duct_tape
Steve Barker
s
"msg" <msg@_cybertheque.org_> wrote in message
news:13hplef...@corp.supernews.com...
Dave Plowman (News)
John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > Despite having used it for many years I've never heard the apostrophe
> > added. It's gaffer tape.
> Kinda like "Can peas" or "Tin peas" in a sense. I'm sure many call it so
> without the possessive, but if it's used mostly by gaffers, it should be
> in the form I put it. Unless there is a widely used verb (by those in
> the Biz.) "to gaff".
The 'gaffer' is the charge hand electrician on a film etc crew. And only
really one per unit. With a large crew on a big rig he is more likely to
delegate the jobs needed to be done than do them himself - like any good
crew chief. Organise the work among his crew to prevent two doing the same
job - or the lazy ones doing nothing.
Perhaps the primary use of gaffer tape these days is fixing filters to
window frames etc. But I dunno if that was the original intended use -
although old I'm not *that* old. ;-)
But the same tape is equally used by other crafts within the trade - even
although others also have their own tape, like camera tape, fairly
similar to gaffer in construction in that it's fabric reinforced but 1"
wide and white and originally used to seal film tins.
--
*I started out with nothing... and I still have most of it.
Dave Plowman (News)
dj_nme <dj_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> is done with adhesive metal [usually aluminium] tape, hence "flashing
> tape".
I wonder on what sort of construction?
In the UK where buildings pretty well all have stone walls, the lead
flashing is bent into a 'chase' created in the masonry, usually the mortar
between coarses, secured with lead wedges and mortar applied afterwards to
seal. A lime based mortar is best to accommodate some movement. Down the
edge of a roof where it meets the brickwork it will be cut into a step
shape to follow the line of the horizontal bricks. And it's still very
much in use today - despite the cost.
--
*Why is the man who invests all your money called a broker?
Nate Nagel
> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 16:59:08 -0500, "Steve Barker"
> <ichase...@not.yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>It IS duct tape however. What do you think it was originally designed for?
>>
>>s
>
>
> waterproof sealing tape for ammunition cases
then why does it fail so rapidly when exposed to water or high humidity?
just curious,
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
Steve Barker
:quoting from the same place you did:
The name "duct tape" came from its use on heating and air conditioning
ducts,
end quote.....
steve
<gfre...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:8nbqh3l86el58l8t8...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 16:59:08 -0500, "Steve Barker"
> <ichase...@not.yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>It IS duct tape however. What do you think it was originally designed
>>for?
>>
>>s
>
John McWilliams
> and........ proceeding to the next paragraph........
>
>
>
> :quoting from the same place you did:
>
>
> The name "duct tape" came from its use on heating and air conditioning
> ducts,
>
>
> end quote.....
That's all pretty brilliant, but all of that has been covered in the
thread. Does no one read prior to posting anymore?
--
John McWilliams
dj_nme
> In article <471cc0fc$0$30531$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>,
> dj_nme <dj_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Flashing used to be done with lead foil sealed/glued with pitch, now it
>>is done with adhesive metal [usually aluminium] tape, hence "flashing
>>tape".
>
>
> I wonder on what sort of construction?
The edges of flat roofs, the edges of walls between abutting buildings
(to prevent ingress of moisture between them) and around openings in
roofs (such as hatches, chimneys and skylights).
Michael A. Terrell
>
> Michael A. Terrell wrote:
>
> >
> > Then you don't know the proper way to use duck (duct) tape. In a
> > case like this, you use the tape to hold something against the door, so
> > it CAN'T move.
>
> Where in world did you come up with duck?? One doesn't tape ducks; one
> tapes ducts. except it isn't very good for that.....
SIGH. It was named DUCK tape by GIs who used it to waterproof
shipping containers, because 'Water flows off it, like water off a
duck's back'.
--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.
Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
John McWilliams
> John McWilliams wrote:
>> Michael A. Terrell wrote:
>>
>>> Then you don't know the proper way to use duck (duct) tape. In a
>>> case like this, you use the tape to hold something against the door, so
>>> it CAN'T move.
>> Where in world did you come up with duck?? One doesn't tape ducks; one
>> tapes ducts. except it isn't very good for that.....
>
>
> SIGH. It was named DUCK tape by GIs who used it to waterproof
> shipping containers, because 'Water flows off it, like water off a
> duck's back'
Ex-urban legend. Plus this was already covered, ad naseum.
--
lsmft
Frank ess
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
> John McWilliams wrote:
>>
>> Michael A. Terrell wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Then you don't know the proper way to use duck (duct) tape.
>>> In a case like this, you use the tape to hold something against
>>> the door, so it CAN'T move.
>>
>> Where in world did you come up with duck?? One doesn't tape ducks;
>> one tapes ducts. except it isn't very good for that.....
>
>
> SIGH. It was named DUCK tape by GIs who used it to waterproof
> shipping containers, because 'Water flows off it, like water off a
> duck's back'.
Duct tape fans unite!
http://www.ducttapeguys.com/onaroll/newsletter/040106.html
--
Frank ess
Noozer
> http://www.ducttapeguys.com/onaroll/newsletter/040106.html
DUCT tape is made of METAL!
Ron Hunter
many uses, with a metalized cloth backing, and a rather thick adhesive,
it was tested on actual ductwork, and found severely lacking for this
use because the adhesive becomes hard when exposed to heat, and the tape
turns loose. However, it has MANY other great uses, and the astronauts
on Apollo 13 wouldn't have survived had they not had it along.
It can be a valuable asset around the house, as long as you don't try to
use it on heating ducts.
The product known as 'Duck tape' is simply a cheap knock-off of the
original product, and is, in my experience, vastly inferior.
Ron Hunter
> In article <ffis5m$1qj$1...@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>, ze...@comcast.net (G) wrote:
>> In article <13hplef...@corp.supernews.com>, msg <msg@_cybertheque.org_>
>> wrote:
>>> Steve Barker LT wrote:
>>>
>>>> Wrong. Again.
>>>>
>>>> The original DUCT tape had and still has NO metal foil.
>>>>
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/ywrzu5
>>>>
>>> This is a redirect to a 3M product spec page; for this item and
>>> others in the same category, there is _no_ reference to
>>> using the product on 'ducts' anywhere in the description.
>> I never really considered using the stuff on ducts. I always noticed after
>> years, the tape would get hard, fall apart and become useless. Some
>> types last longer, but the typical silver tape.
>
> While it would seem to be perfect for ducts, the fall apart business seems
> to be the key to it usufullness. Read
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duct_tape
>
>>
Seems to be a bit of a disaster to me.
Ron Hunter
conditioning people used it, and it took that name, but it has been
shown to be a very ineffective tape for that application.
Ron Hunter
> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
>> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 16:59:08 -0500, "Steve Barker"
>> <ichase...@not.yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> It IS duct tape however. What do you think it was originally
>>> designed for?
>>>
>>> s
>>
>>
>> duct tape was originally developed during World War II in 1942 as a
>> waterproof sealing tape for ammunition cases
>
> then why does it fail so rapidly when exposed to water or high humidity?
>
> just curious,
>
> nate
>
and its many imitators.
William Sommerwerck
news:471D7A25...@earthlink.net...
> SIGH. It was named DUCK tape by GIs who used it to waterproof
> shipping containers, because 'Water flows off it, like water off a
> duck's back'.
Also possibly because it was made of cotton duck cloth.
G
>gfre...@aol.com wrote:
>> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 16:59:08 -0500, "Steve Barker"
>> <ichase...@not.yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>It IS duct tape however. What do you think it was originally designed for?
>>>
>>>s
>>
>>
>> duct tape was originally developed during World War II in 1942 as a
>> waterproof sealing tape for ammunition cases
>
>then why does it fail so rapidly when exposed to water or high humidity?
>
>just curious,
>
>nate
The biggest failure is drying out.
greg
Chris Lewis
> It is simply because the crap they sell at Wal-Mart is not GI grade
> (AKA 100 MPH duct tape). I had some I used on dive gear that held up
> for many years and regularly used under water.
> You can still buy it at some military type stores but it costs over
> $10 a roll.
While perhaps not _quite_ Mil-Spec, you can get a very close equivalent
at other places. Lee Valley carries it for example.
--
Chris Lewis,
Age and Treachery will Triumph over Youth and Skill
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.
George
> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
>> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 16:59:08 -0500, "Steve Barker"
>> <ichase...@not.yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> It IS duct tape however. What do you think it was originally
>>> designed for?
>>>
>>> s
>>
>>
>> duct tape was originally developed during World War II in 1942 as a
>> waterproof sealing tape for ammunition cases
>
> then why does it fail so rapidly when exposed to water or high humidity?
>
> just curious,
>
> nate
>
version designed to be sold in big box stores.
If you go to a real supply house you can buy quality duct tape.
Steve Barker
holds the ducts together. It is merely for sealing the joint for anal
types. Most ducts don't have tape on them.
s
"Ron Hunter" <rphu...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:ysWdnU3HIvrnXYDa...@giganews.com...
John McWilliams
Crikey, Ron, can you not freakin' read?
all of this has been covered. days ago.
--
lsmft
dj_nme
If ducts are made properly, they should be locked together by a folded
seam by which the ends of the ducts slide together and an edge is then
folded over to lock it all together.
Look up "pittsburgh seam" or "pittsburgh seaming" and "ducting" on Google.
Ron Hunter
outstanding features.
robert...@my-deja.com
> Michael A. Terrell wrote:
>
> > Then you don't know the proper way to use duck (duct) tape. In a
> > case like this, you use the tape to hold something against the door, so
> > it CAN'T move.
>
> Where in world did you come up with duck?? One doesn't tape ducks; one
> tapes ducts. except it isn't very good for that.....
Some american hardware stores stock duct tape with the trade name
Duck.
Makes me laugh.
jim evans
>> Where in world did you come up with duck?? One doesn't tape ducks
http://www.duckproducts.com/products/subcategory.asp?CatID=1&SubID=1
John McWilliams
This was posted eons ago. fu set
==
Ken G.
cannot be responsable when the product is dropped on a hard surface or
it was treated with rough hands .
John Tserkezis
Agreed. I've said it before, and I'll say it again (regardless of the nut
cases who insist that cheap garbage should be as good as the high-end gear):
You get what you pay for.
Some time back, a colleague who worked at our local Nikon distributor here
in Australia told of a story where someone in a hurry to get where they're
going threw their "happy snappy" style Nikon onto the back seat and closed the
door.
In reality, it slipped off the seat, the cord being snagged by the door,
with the camera now resting on the ground.
They drove to wherever they were going, all the while thinking there was
something seriously wrong with the engine with all that clicketing going on.
Anyway, get to their destination, thought to worry about the engine later,
and come round to collect the stuff (camera included) from the back seat.
Horrified to find a now very battered camera.
Fast forward to how Maxwell's found out, they had brought it in to see what
can be done about the metal "case" (still worked after all that). Maxwell's
offered to take the camera off their hands, replace it with a new one, and
keep the old battered one on a glass shelf in the reception area demonstrating
what the things will endure and still work.
And these guys are whining about a measly door clip. Wimps.
--
Linux Registered User # 302622
<http://counter.li.org>