Does anybody make a machinist oriented calculator ?

or what calculators does everyone use ?

how about a waterproof one ?

thanks
Mike

No machinist oriented one, specifically. I keep a TI fractions capable
calculator on my bench. It works equally well in fractions or decimals or
mixed, and converts freely between the 2. Mine came from Radio Shack. For
calculations in long formulas a direct algebraic entry calculator is handy.
One of these, that is programmable, IMO would make a very good "machinist
oriented" calculator.

Bob Swinney
"Mike" wrote in message
om...
Does anybody make a machinist oriented calculator ?

or what calculators does everyone use ?

how about a waterproof one ?

thanks
Mike

In article , Mike says...

or what calculators ...

HP15C for me.

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

Mike wrote:

Does anybody make a machinist oriented calculator ?

or what calculators does everyone use ?

how about a waterproof one ?

thanks
Mike




Try Google. Here are a couple. There is software available for your PC too.

http://www.toolingu.com/bookstore/it...spx?item_ID=29

http://www.eisc.com/catalog/product_...products_id=28
--
Randy Replogle (Central Indiana)

In my shop, I use whatever dirt cheap or free POS I have at the moment.
Sometimes my brain doesn't want to subtract 0.916 from 1.241 or something.
Upstairs, I use an HP-15C, which I believe is the absolute pinnacle of
calculators as far as what it can do and user interface. There are much
newer lower power models but you have to program those using a dumb computer-
science-like language. The HP-1XC models, on the other hand, although slow
and battery-hungry by today's standards, you can learn *everything* on once,
and you never forget it. Were I to sell it today (fat chance) it would bring
nearly double what I paid for it. At my last engineering job I had young
engineers gasp when they saw it and say things like "Aren't you worried
someone will STEAL that? Do you know how much those go for on ebay now?"

Grant

Mike wrote:

Does anybody make a machinist oriented calculator ?

or what calculators does everyone use ?

how about a waterproof one ?

thanks
Mike

In article , Grant Erwin says...

The HP-1XC models, on the other hand, although slow
and battery-hungry by today's standards,

Say what? I think the batteries in my 15C are about
10 years old at the moment. Are more modern calculators
even *better*?

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

"Grant Erwin" wrote in message
...
The HP-1XC models, on the other hand, although slow
and battery-hungry by today's standards, you can learn *everything* on
once,
and you never forget it. Were I to sell it today (fat chance) it would
bring
nearly double what I paid for it. At my last engineering job I had young
engineers gasp when they saw it and say things like "Aren't you worried
someone will STEAL that? Do you know how much those go for on ebay now?"



That blew my mind! I never would have guessed my HP11C is worth more than I
paid for it twenty plus years ago!!
What do you mean by battery hungery?! My HP11C has the original 20+ year old
batteries in it! I have it laying in the tool box in the shop. I rarely use
it, but ran across it the other day and it is still working fine!
Greg

Mike wrote:
Does anybody make a machinist oriented calculator ?

or what calculators does everyone use ?

how about a waterproof one ?

thanks
Mike


How about a abacus or soroban? They are prety much water,
lubricant etc proof. :-)
...lew...

Greg O wrote:

"Grant Erwin" wrote in message
...

The HP-1XC models, on the other hand, although slow
and battery-hungry by today's standards, you can learn *everything* on

once,

and you never forget it. Were I to sell it today (fat chance) it would

bring

nearly double what I paid for it. At my last engineering job I had young
engineers gasp when they saw it and say things like "Aren't you worried
someone will STEAL that? Do you know how much those go for on ebay now?"




That blew my mind! I never would have guessed my HP11C is worth more than I
paid for it twenty plus years ago!!
What do you mean by battery hungery?! My HP11C has the original 20+ year old
batteries in it! I have it laying in the tool box in the shop. I rarely use
it, but ran across it the other day and it is still working fine!
Greg

My 10C is also on its original battery and it's OLD. Don't remember
how old it is. Whenever the HP 21 keyboarf started to double on a
few keys. Must have been shortly after the 11C came out.
...lew...

Mike wrote:

Does anybody make a machinist oriented calculator ?

or what calculators does everyone use ?

how about a waterproof one ?

thanks
Mike

Mike,

I use an older HP 11C Scientific, among some other vintage HP's and keep
it in a one quart clear plastic zip lock bag that I replace frequently.
Fold the bag round back and tape it. The reason for the affinity for HP
is that I like RPN and the calculator carries 12 places of accuracy,
whether you can see it on the readout or not.

If I want to lay out 127 divisions around a circle, each step is 2.83
degrees, but calculator will carry 2.83464566929 degrees to be added to
the 2.83 degrees. This very accurate number allows the error to be
distributed around the circle as best as you can read your dial.

Henry

In article ,
jim rozen wrote:

In article , Grant Erwin says...

The HP-1XC models, on the other hand, although slow
and battery-hungry by today's standards,

Say what? I think the batteries in my 15C are about
10 years old at the moment. Are more modern calculators
even *better*?

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================


I have and use a 15C too... however, I change the batteries every 3 or 4
years as I worry about them corroding.

I figure batteries are cheap, 15C's are expensive now.

Erik

PS, Also have a 32SII. It does fractions very well, best I've ever seen.

From: "Mike"

or what calculators does everyone use ?

K&E Log Log Duplex Decitrig G

Richard Coke

"Erik" wrote in message
...
In article ,
jim rozen wrote:

In article , Grant Erwin says...

The HP-1XC models, on the other hand, although slow
and battery-hungry by today's standards,

Say what? I think the batteries in my 15C are about
10 years old at the moment. Are more modern calculators
even *better*?

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================


I have and use a 15C too... however, I change the batteries every 3 or 4
years as I worry about them corroding.

I figure batteries are cheap, 15C's are expensive now.

I have a 12C and a 15C, and I change batteries every ten years, whether they
need it or not. g

The battery life in those things is beyond belief. That, and my Fluke 75
voltmeter. The battery (or batteries?) has been in there for at least 15
years, and it's still going strong.

Ed Huntress

Yup, they're old NMOS technology, whereas today's are CMOS. Also, today's
voltages are much much lower. - GWE

jim rozen wrote:
In article , Grant Erwin says...


The HP-1XC models, on the other hand, although slow
and battery-hungry by today's standards,


Say what? I think the batteries in my 15C are about
10 years old at the moment. Are more modern calculators
even *better*?

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

In article ,
(Richard Coke) wrote:

From: "Mike"

or what calculators does everyone use ?

K&E Log Log Duplex Decitrig G

Not a giggle; I find a crude 6" slide rule very handy for making up gear
trains for really odd threads because you can 'see' the error on ratios.

--
free men own guns - slaves don't
www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5357/

Yeah, and don't forget possibly the greatest savings is that the LCDs use
ambient light and pose no drain on the batt.

Bob Swinney

"Grant Erwin" wrote in message
...
Yup, they're old NMOS technology, whereas today's are CMOS. Also, today's
voltages are much much lower. - GWE

jim rozen wrote:
In article , Grant Erwin says...


The HP-1XC models, on the other hand, although slow
and battery-hungry by today's standards,


Say what? I think the batteries in my 15C are about
10 years old at the moment. Are more modern calculators
even *better*?

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

or what calculators does everyone use ?

K&E Log Log Duplex Decitrig G

Where does the battery go in that one?

"Richard Coke" wrote in message
...
From: "Mike"


Richard Coke

http://www.machinist-calculator.com/...alculator.html


--
Steve Walker
(remove wallet to reply)

What was the name of that mechanical calculator you guys were discussing
here a few months ago? It was a round anodized beast.

Lance

In article Hsh9c.23365$li5.14848@pd7tw3no, Lance A Boyle says...

What was the name of that mechanical calculator you guys were discussing
here a few months ago? It was a round anodized beast.

Curta.

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

jim rozen wrote:
In article Hsh9c.23365$li5.14848@pd7tw3no, Lance A Boyle says...

What was the name of that mechanical calculator you guys were discussing
here a few months ago? It was a round anodized beast.


Curta.

Jim

That's it. Thanks.

Lance

In article ,
jim rozen wrote:

In article Hsh9c.23365$li5.14848@pd7tw3no, Lance A Boyle says...

What was the name of that mechanical calculator you guys were discussing
here a few months ago? It was a round anodized beast.

Curta.

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================


Here's a site with just about everything you'd ever want to know about
HP calculators.

http://www.hpmuseum.org/hpmuseum.html

There is some on slide rules and Curta's too in the 'Before HP
Calculators' link within.

Erik

In article ,
jim rozen wrote:
In article , Mike says...

or what calculators ...

HP15C for me.

And for me. I keep one in my belt pouch (along with a 16C for
other purposes), and a second 15C in the shop, in a Ziploc baggie to
keep coolant and swarf out of it.

Enjoy,
DoN.
--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

In article ,
Grant Erwin wrote:
jim rozen wrote:
In article , Grant Erwin says...

[ ... ]

The HP-1XC models, on the other hand, although slow
and battery-hungry by today's standards,

[ ... ]

Say what? I think the batteries in my 15C are about
10 years old at the moment. Are more modern calculators
even *better*?

Yup, they're old NMOS technology, whereas today's are CMOS. Also, today's
voltages are much much lower. - GWE

Hmm ... I *think* that the 'C' in the model number indicates
that it is one of the early ones based on CMOS technology, instead of
the NMOS used in the earlier ones -- 35, 45, 55, 65, 67, etc. I believe
that there was a 25C as well, a smaller version of the form factor of
the 35 et all, but with CMOS technology.

Those earlier ones *were* battery hungry. The 15C lasts a very
long time, except when a piece of heavy equipment holds some buttons
depressed for a month or two. :-)

Enjoy,
DoN.
--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

On 27 Mar 2004 23:28:58 -0500, the renowned (DoN.
Nichols) wrote:

In article ,
Grant Erwin wrote:
jim rozen wrote:
In article , Grant Erwin says...

[ ... ]

The HP-1XC models, on the other hand, although slow
and battery-hungry by today's standards,

[ ... ]

Say what? I think the batteries in my 15C are about
10 years old at the moment. Are more modern calculators
even *better*?

Yup, they're old NMOS technology, whereas today's are CMOS. Also, today's
voltages are much much lower. - GWE

Hmm ... I *think* that the 'C' in the model number indicates
that it is one of the early ones based on CMOS technology, instead of
the NMOS used in the earlier ones -- 35, 45, 55, 65, 67, etc. I believe
that there was a 25C as well, a smaller version of the form factor of
the 35 et all, but with CMOS technology.

Those earlier ones *were* battery hungry. The 15C lasts a very
long time, except when a piece of heavy equipment holds some buttons
depressed for a month or two. :-)

The later ones, like the HP48 series, are much worse on batteries than
the earlier C ones. Probably 50 times worse in terms of current. They
go through a set of 3 AAA cells in no time. The others use much lower
capacity button cells and seem to last forever. I think HP must have
switched from their own ASICs to cheaper off-the-shelf technology.

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

Hmm ... I *think* that the 'C' in the model number indicates
that it is one of the early ones based on CMOS technology, instead of
the NMOS used in the earlier ones -- 35, 45, 55, 65, 67, etc. I believe
that there was a 25C as well, a smaller version of the form factor of
the 35 et all, but with CMOS technology.

Those earlier ones *were* battery hungry. The 15C lasts a very
long time, except when a piece of heavy equipment holds some buttons
depressed for a month or two. :-)

Enjoy,
DoN.

I wouldn't bet my life on it, but I recall reading that the 'C' in all
those HP calculator model numbers meant they had continuous memory...
something really cuting edge at the time. I think the 25-C might have
been the first with it.

Much later they dropped the 'C', but all HP's (that I know of anyway)
still have the continuous memory feature.

Erik

Lance A Boyle wrote:
What was the name of that mechanical calculator you guys were discussing
here a few months ago? It was a round anodized beast.

Lance

Curta.
...lew...

In article , DoN. Nichols says...

Hmm ... I *think* that the 'C' in the model number indicates
that it is one of the early ones based on CMOS technology,

Ah HAA!

I always wondered about that. Where were
the A, B, D, etc? What a throw-back to a
different time, imagine a manufacturer putting
the logic type in a part number, now.

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

"Spehro Pefhany" wrote in message
Those earlier ones *were* battery hungry. The 15C lasts a very
long time, except when a piece of heavy equipment holds some buttons
depressed for a month or two. :-)

The later ones, like the HP48 series, are much worse on batteries than
the earlier C ones. Probably 50 times worse in terms of current. They
go through a set of 3 AAA cells in no time. The others use much lower
capacity button cells and seem to last forever. I think HP must have
switched from their own ASICs to cheaper off-the-shelf technology.



My first calculator I bought for college was a TI-55, the old style, brown
door stop looking model. I bought batteries by the case! That sucker,
(literally), could eat a battery in one day of heavy use. That is when I
bought the HP. Best investment I ever made, as far as calculators go. I
remember buying the HP and tosing the TI-55 in the trash can during a class.
Two or three guys dug it out and were fighting over it!
Greg

Greg O wrote:

"Spehro Pefhany" wrote in message
Those earlier ones *were* battery hungry. The 15C lasts a very
long time, except when a piece of heavy equipment holds some buttons
depressed for a month or two. :-)

The later ones, like the HP48 series, are much worse on batteries than
the earlier C ones. Probably 50 times worse in terms of current. They
go through a set of 3 AAA cells in no time. The others use much lower
capacity button cells and seem to last forever. I think HP must have
switched from their own ASICs to cheaper off-the-shelf technology.



My first calculator I bought for college was a TI-55, the old style, brown
door stop looking model. I bought batteries by the case! That sucker,
(literally), could eat a battery in one day of heavy use. That is when I
bought the HP. Best investment I ever made, as far as calculators go. I
remember buying the HP and tosing the TI-55 in the trash can during a class.
Two or three guys dug it out and were fighting over it!
Greg

Mike,

I use an older HP 11C Scientific, among some other vintage HP's and keep
it in a one quart clear plastic zip lock bag that I replace frequently.
Fold the bag round back and tape it. The reason for the affinity for HP
is that I like RPN and the calculator carries 12 places of accuracy,
whether you can see it on the readout or not.

If I want to lay out 127 divisions around a circle, each step is 2.83
degrees, but calculator will carry 2.83464566929 degrees to be added to
the 2.83 degrees. This very accurate number allows the error to be
distributed around the circle as best as you can read your dial.

Henry

Greg O wrote:

"Spehro Pefhany" wrote in message

Those earlier ones *were* battery hungry. The 15C lasts a very
long time, except when a piece of heavy equipment holds some buttons
depressed for a month or two. :-)

The later ones, like the HP48 series, are much worse on batteries than
the earlier C ones. Probably 50 times worse in terms of current. They
go through a set of 3 AAA cells in no time. The others use much lower
capacity button cells and seem to last forever. I think HP must have
switched from their own ASICs to cheaper off-the-shelf technology.




My first calculator I bought for college was a TI-55, the old style, brown
door stop looking model. I bought batteries by the case! That sucker,
(literally), could eat a battery in one day of heavy use. That is when I
bought the HP. Best investment I ever made, as far as calculators go. I
remember buying the HP and tosing the TI-55 in the trash can during a class.
Two or three guys dug it out and were fighting over it!
Greg

Gosh - a Calculator in college - what a dream!

Bought my first plug in the wall 4 banger + memory mind you Nixie tube 12 digits, Cannon IIRC
in '70. Bought a SR-50 a few years later. The first one was $600.00 and the SR-50 was 150?

Then I got to put down the docs on calculation of logs with a 4 banner that was in EDN or Electronics
at the time. Those were the days, engineering...

Martin

--
Martin Eastburn, Barbara Eastburn
@ home at Lion's Lair with our computer
NRA LOH, NRA Life
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder

On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 04:38:46 GMT, "Martin H. Eastburn"
wrote:

Greg O wrote:

"Spehro Pefhany" wrote in message

Those earlier ones *were* battery hungry. The 15C lasts a very
long time, except when a piece of heavy equipment holds some buttons
depressed for a month or two. :-)

The later ones, like the HP48 series, are much worse on batteries than
the earlier C ones. Probably 50 times worse in terms of current. They
go through a set of 3 AAA cells in no time. The others use much lower
capacity button cells and seem to last forever. I think HP must have
switched from their own ASICs to cheaper off-the-shelf technology.




My first calculator I bought for college was a TI-55, the old style, brown
door stop looking model. I bought batteries by the case! That sucker,
(literally), could eat a battery in one day of heavy use. That is when I
bought the HP. Best investment I ever made, as far as calculators go. I
remember buying the HP and tosing the TI-55 in the trash can during a class.
Two or three guys dug it out and were fighting over it!
Greg

Gosh - a Calculator in college - what a dream!

Bought my first plug in the wall 4 banger + memory mind you Nixie tube 12 digits, Cannon IIRC
in '70. Bought a SR-50 a few years later. The first one was $600.00 and the SR-50 was 150?

Then I got to put down the docs on calculation of logs with a 4 banner that was in EDN or Electronics
at the time. Those were the days, engineering...

Martin
In 1972 I was using a hand cranked Monroe "Educator" when I saw a
Rapidman 800 on sale for $99.99, typical 8 digit four banger that ran
on four AA batteries with no memory function. The other day I saw the
little "credit card" four function plus memory powered by a watch
battery for $0.19. you can't even buy the battery for that.
My favourite though was the TI-59 programmable, just wish they were a
little more durable. I developed a lot of programs for that while
working in the field. once I got moved to regional office, I only used
it about twice per year and it died of old age and neglect.
Gerry :-)}
London, Canada

In article ,
Henry Kratt wrote:

[ ... ]

I use an older HP 11C Scientific, among some other vintage HP's and keep
it in a one quart clear plastic zip lock bag that I replace frequently.
Fold the bag round back and tape it. The reason for the affinity for HP
is that I like RPN and the calculator carries 12 places of accuracy,
whether you can see it on the readout or not.

If I want to lay out 127 divisions around a circle, each step is 2.83
degrees, but calculator will carry 2.83464566929 degrees to be added to
the 2.83 degrees. This very accurate number allows the error to be
distributed around the circle as best as you can read your dial.

And -- with the 15C at least, you can enter a radius and the
angle, and it will convert it from polar to rectangular notation, so you
can crank in X and Y coordinates on the mill prior to drilling the
holes, so you can do it without a rotary table, if you need to do things
that way.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

In article ,
Erik wrote:

Hmm ... I *think* that the 'C' in the model number indicates
that it is one of the early ones based on CMOS technology, instead of
the NMOS used in the earlier ones -- 35, 45, 55, 65, 67, etc. I believe
that there was a 25C as well, a smaller version of the form factor of
the 35 et all, but with CMOS technology.

[ ... ]

I wouldn't bet my life on it, but I recall reading that the 'C' in all
those HP calculator model numbers meant they had continuous memory...
something really cuting edge at the time. I think the 25-C might have
been the first with it.

You might well be right about that -- but at least the memory
had to be CMOS to not drain the batteries over time, and mine still run
several years on a single set of three 357s.

Maybe I should hook it up to a power supply, and measure the
current drain when "on" and "off", just to see.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

"DoN. Nichols" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Erik wrote:

Hmm ... I *think* that the 'C' in the model number indicates
that it is one of the early ones based on CMOS technology, instead of
the NMOS used in the earlier ones -- 35, 45, 55, 65, 67, etc. I
believe
that there was a 25C as well, a smaller version of the form factor of
the 35 et all, but with CMOS technology.

[ ... ]

I wouldn't bet my life on it, but I recall reading that the 'C' in all
those HP calculator model numbers meant they had continuous memory...
something really cuting edge at the time. I think the 25-C might have
been the first with it.

You might well be right about that -- but at least the memory
had to be CMOS to not drain the batteries over time, and mine still run
several years on a single set of three 357s.

Maybe I should hook it up to a power supply, and measure the
current drain when "on" and "off", just to see.

Enjoy,
DoN.

The '25 from 10' away looked like a mini version of the original '35 but the
'25 was a full-bore programmable calculator, registers, conditional
branching, could do some pretty neat things with it.

The '25C was the '25 with a battery backed-up CMOS for the program storage.
Both had red-LED displays and both ran on a pair of AA NiCd's.

The '15C and later 'C's by were LCD display and ran on watch batteries (i.e.
357).

The LED display calculators gave the impression of speed because the
displays flashed while they worked. The LCD models I recall seemed slow at
first because the display just blanked until it was done doing whatever.
They also took longer to respond to each key entry, maybe that was it.

I change the batteries in my '25 every 5 years or so. For whatever reason,
familiarity, I don't know, I have a bunch of the later LCD models but still
like the '25 best, and use it the most. That being a relative term, as
almost anything I don't crunch in my head is better off being done in a
spreadsheet.

Great tools. And they are all great around metal!

Bob

In article , DoN. Nichols says...

And -- with the 15C at least, you can enter a radius and the
angle, and it will convert it from polar to rectangular notation, so you
can crank in X and Y coordinates on the mill prior to drilling the
holes, so you can do it without a rotary table, if you need to do things
that way.

Ah... is *that* what the polar/rect conversion on that thing is
good for! I've always resorted to trig conversion. I'll have
to give that a tryout at the next chance.

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

"Gerald Miller" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 04:38:46 GMT, "Martin H. Eastburn"
wrote:

Greg O wrote:

"Spehro Pefhany" wrote in message


Those earlier ones *were* battery hungry. The 15C lasts a very
long time, except when a piece of heavy equipment holds some buttons
depressed for a month or two. :-)

The later ones, like the HP48 series, are much worse on batteries than
the earlier C ones. Probably 50 times worse in terms of current. They
go through a set of 3 AAA cells in no time. The others use much lower
capacity button cells and seem to last forever. I think HP must have
switched from their own ASICs to cheaper off-the-shelf technology.




My first calculator I bought for college was a TI-55, the old style,
brown
door stop looking model. I bought batteries by the case! That sucker,
(literally), could eat a battery in one day of heavy use. That is when
I
bought the HP. Best investment I ever made, as far as calculators go. I
remember buying the HP and tosing the TI-55 in the trash can during a
class.
Two or three guys dug it out and were fighting over it!
Greg

Gosh - a Calculator in college - what a dream!

Bought my first plug in the wall 4 banger + memory mind you Nixie tube 12
digits, Cannon IIRC
in '70. Bought a SR-50 a few years later. The first one was $600.00
and the SR-50 was 150?

Then I got to put down the docs on calculation of logs with a 4 banner
that was in EDN or Electronics
at the time. Those were the days, engineering...

Martin
In 1972 I was using a hand cranked Monroe "Educator" when I saw a
Rapidman 800 on sale for $99.99, typical 8 digit four banger that ran
on four AA batteries with no memory function. The other day I saw the
little "credit card" four function plus memory powered by a watch
battery for $0.19. you can't even buy the battery for that.
My favourite though was the TI-59 programmable, just wish they were a
little more durable. I developed a lot of programs for that while
working in the field. once I got moved to regional office, I only used
it about twice per year and it died of old age and neglect.
Gerry :-)}
London, Canada

About time someone mentioned the TI-59. Mine got me through engineering,
replacing a lot of calculus that I didn't enjoy at the time with many loops
through some little programmed iteration ... ah the memories.

On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 10:12:25 -0600, "Dave Keith"
wrote:




About time someone mentioned the TI-59. Mine got me through engineering,
replacing a lot of calculus that I didn't enjoy at the time with many loops
through some little programmed iteration ... ah the memories.


You must have been rich, I got a TI-58 in my last year. Before that I had a
non-programmable Commodore calculator that did a lot of statistical functions
and also had hyperbolic functions and complex arithmetic....possibly the most
useful calculator I have ever had. Before that I had a British Thornton
log/trig slide rule which was pretty damned fast :-)


Mark Rand
RTFM

Erik wrote in message ...

PS, Also have a 32SII. It does fractions very well, best I've ever seen.

I have the 32SII as well; excellent kit. Do you happen to know if the
manual is available electronically anywhere? I tried HP, but only
non-english versions were available. Thanks for any help.

In article ,
(Nige) wrote:

Erik wrote in message
...

PS, Also have a 32SII. It does fractions very well, best I've ever seen.

I have the 32SII as well; excellent kit. Do you happen to know if the
manual is available electronically anywhere? I tried HP, but only
non-english versions were available. Thanks for any help.

I've seen them on eBay from time to time...

Erik