On Fri, 8 Mar 2002 15:33:24 +0000 Tony Firshman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, 8 Mar 2002 at 06:20:22, Al Feng wrote: > (ref: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) > > >EVERYONE! > > > >Speculation about the material used in the QL's membranes by > Sinclair > >or otherwise seems futile.
<snip> > Nope. As I said earlier in this thread, Sinclair used a good clear > plastic for earlier machines, and this is 100% OK. I know this 'cos > I > have a few and seem to last for ever and are showing no sign at all > of > failing. The conducting strips also show little sign of oxidisation > - > and these all date from 1984. My experience of the std membranes is > that they become brittle on exposure to air. Heat simply > accelerates > this. I have had a lot of people who report their QLs have not been > used > for many many years. They worked fine when hibernated, but > membranes > failed while not used. This happens because the tails are bent > round > in a tight 180% degrees, and the bend is under tension. I'll have to take your word that you posted another message regarding the clear membranes ... it never arrived in my Inbox. BUT, I have to admit that I have stopped reading all the messages posted because too many people seem to have taken to using this forum as a chat room. AND, no offense, Tony, this is the first time I have ever heard anything about a more durable material in presumably-prototype, 1984 units ... why wasn't this told to whomever it might have concerned when the last batch of post-SRL membranes was being cobbled up? Regardless, "pure" vinyl, or materials approaching same [as the standard QL membranes APPEAR to be] are by their nature more likely to degrade than a polyvinyl -- yup, that's why chemists came up with them. Al ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
