Hi folks,

I apologise if the title is a bit of a mouthful. But I've been thinking
about this issue for some time, and would like to seek the opinion of
people here. You frequently hear people complain about the quality of
modern products and say things like "They don't make them like they used
to". But it has occurred to me that maybe older products look good today
because only the good products have stood the test of time, and the poor
products have been thrown away years ago. What do people think? Were
products better in general back in the fifties, say, or were there a
mixture of good and bad? I'd be interested to hear people's opinions, as
I'm not old enough to remember myself.

Best wishes,

Chris

"Christopher Tidy" wrote in message
...
Hi folks,

I apologise if the title is a bit of a mouthful. But I've been thinking
about this issue for some time, and would like to seek the opinion of
people here. You frequently hear people complain about the quality of
modern products and say things like "They don't make them like they used
to". But it has occurred to me that maybe older products look good today
because only the good products have stood the test of time, and the poor
products have been thrown away years ago. What do people think? Were
products better in general back in the fifties, say, or were there a
mixture of good and bad? I'd be interested to hear people's opinions, as
I'm not old enough to remember myself.

Best wishes,

Chris

No problem. Some people here are so old that we can't remember, either. g

It's a mixed bag. Cars are much better, and fishing reels are, too. But
wooden matches have gone to hell. Toasters today are complete crap compared
to the old ones.

What I think you'll find is that the quality of goods has risen or fallen to
match the consumers' expectations and desires, with a strong influence
coming from the fact that people don't really *want* things to last that
long anymore.

Now I'll get out of the way as the blizzard of messages sweeps into this
thread...

--
Ed Huntress

Christopher Tidy wrote:
Hi folks,

I apologise if the title is a bit of a mouthful. But I've been thinking
about this issue for some time, and would like to seek the opinion of
people here. You frequently hear people complain about the quality of
modern products and say things like "They don't make them like they used
to". But it has occurred to me that maybe older products look good today
because only the good products have stood the test of time, and the poor
products have been thrown away years ago. What do people think? Were
products better in general back in the fifties, say, or were there a
mixture of good and bad? I'd be interested to hear people's opinions, as
I'm not old enough to remember myself.

Best wishes,

Chris

Having experienced some antique furniture that was pure crap from the
day it was made.

Yes, I think a lot of it is just that what we see has been sorted by its
quality.

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

Do you need to implement control loops in software?
"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" gives you just what it says.
See details at http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 03:50:57 +0000, Christopher Tidy
wrote:

Hi folks,

I apologise if the title is a bit of a mouthful. But I've been thinking
about this issue for some time, and would like to seek the opinion of
people here. You frequently hear people complain about the quality of
modern products and say things like "They don't make them like they used
to". But it has occurred to me that maybe older products look good today
because only the good products have stood the test of time, and the poor
products have been thrown away years ago. What do people think? Were
products better in general back in the fifties, say, or were there a
mixture of good and bad? I'd be interested to hear people's opinions, as
I'm not old enough to remember myself.

Best wishes,

Chris

Engineers and manufacturing do the best they can given the cost and
schedule constraints placed upon them. Global competition has
brought considerably sharper focus on how to make products that
consumers will buy in volume.

In some niche markets, they make 'em better than they used to.
Example: production rifles that will shoot 1/2 MOA right out of the
box are quite common now. This kind of accuracy was only available in
customized and "accurized" rifles not that many years ago.

Why? Mostly because CNC machining (and designs to exploit it) can
produce better accuracy at lower cost than previous production
methods.

I missed the Staff meeting, but the Memos showed that Tim Wescott
wrote on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 21:41:06 -0700 in
rec.crafts.metalworking :
Christopher Tidy wrote:
Hi folks,

I apologise if the title is a bit of a mouthful. But I've been thinking
about this issue for some time, and would like to seek the opinion of
people here. You frequently hear people complain about the quality of
modern products and say things like "They don't make them like they used
to". But it has occurred to me that maybe older products look good today
because only the good products have stood the test of time, and the poor
products have been thrown away years ago. What do people think? Were
products better in general back in the fifties, say, or were there a
mixture of good and bad? I'd be interested to hear people's opinions, as
I'm not old enough to remember myself.

Best wishes,

Chris

Having experienced some antique furniture that was pure crap from the
day it was made.

Yes, I think a lot of it is just that what we see has been sorted by its
quality.

The cheap/bad stuff wore out years ago.

There is also the issue of "over engineering". My understanding
is that now adays we can get the numbers crunched closer to optimal,
and the result is that rated capacity tends to be closer to the actual
capacity than in "the old days". E.g. you could run something 120% of
'max' because of the "margin". Or rather you ran it at 80% of
theoretical capacity. Nowadays, you run stuff at 95% of theoretical
capacity, so you can only over load it by 4%.
There is a story that Henry Ford sent engineers out to the junk
yards to find out what ports were not broken on junked Model Ts. Turns
out that it was the king pins. So he figured they were "overbuilt"
and reduced their heft. Saved on production costs (fifty cents time 2
times N units per year= real money), but people are saying "they don't
make them like that anymore".

And as was noticed, companies build what they think they can sell.
If you've never had a real X, you don't know what you are missing.


pyotr

--
pyotr filipivich
"I had just been through hell and must have looked like death warmed
over walking into the saloon, because when I asked the bartender
whether they served zombies he said, ‘Sure, what'll you have?'"
from I Hear America Swinging by Peter DeVries

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 03:50:57 +0000, Christopher Tidy
wrote:

Hi folks,

I apologise if the title is a bit of a mouthful. But I've been thinking
about this issue for some time, and would like to seek the opinion of
people here. You frequently hear people complain about the quality of
modern products and say things like "They don't make them like they used
to". But it has occurred to me that maybe older products look good today
because only the good products have stood the test of time, and the poor
products have been thrown away years ago. What do people think? Were
products better in general back in the fifties, say, or were there a
mixture of good and bad? I'd be interested to hear people's opinions, as
I'm not old enough to remember myself.

Best wishes,

Chris
When was the last time you saw the radiator on an economy car that
lasted more than ten years of rough usage? Think Ford, Model "A". I
just disposed of my beer fridge, having replaced the start switch 25
years ago, it was manufactured in 1955 and I replaced it as an energy
conservation measure. OTOH, I also just replaced my central AC after
23 seasons.
Gerry :-)}
London, Canada

Ed Huntress wrote:
"Christopher Tidy" wrote in message
...

Hi folks,

I apologise if the title is a bit of a mouthful. But I've been thinking
about this issue for some time, and would like to seek the opinion of
people here. You frequently hear people complain about the quality of
modern products and say things like "They don't make them like they used
to". But it has occurred to me that maybe older products look good today
because only the good products have stood the test of time, and the poor
products have been thrown away years ago. What do people think? Were
products better in general back in the fifties, say, or were there a
mixture of good and bad? I'd be interested to hear people's opinions, as
I'm not old enough to remember myself.

Best wishes,

Chris


No problem. Some people here are so old that we can't remember, either. g

It's a mixed bag. Cars are much better, and fishing reels are, too. But
wooden matches have gone to hell. Toasters today are complete crap compared
to the old ones.

Actually, good toasters are out there. I just bought one where all the
parts are individually replaceable and I'm really pleased with it.
Here's a pictu
http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/...t_4ATW-131.jpg

It's a Rowlett Rutland "Regent" 4ATW-131. I got it at more than 50% off.
Not sure if they export to the USA, though.

What I think you'll find is that the quality of goods has risen or fallen to
match the consumers' expectations and desires, with a strong influence
coming from the fact that people don't really *want* things to last that
long anymore.

It's certainly the case that consumers are to blame to some degree.
After all, the market serves up what they want to buy.

It's interesting to try to establish a general trend. What do people
think? In general - that is, if we try to take some kind of average - do
people think that the quality of products is better or worse today?

I get the impression that some of the best products from the past are
unbeaten, and that some of the craftsmanship required to build these
products has been lost. But some people may disagree.

Best wishes,

Chris

pyotr filipivich wrote:

The cheap/bad stuff wore out years ago.

The interesting question is, how much of this bad old stuff was there?

There is also the issue of "over engineering". My understanding
is that now adays we can get the numbers crunched closer to optimal,
and the result is that rated capacity tends to be closer to the actual
capacity than in "the old days". E.g. you could run something 120% of
'max' because of the "margin". Or rather you ran it at 80% of
theoretical capacity. Nowadays, you run stuff at 95% of theoretical
capacity, so you can only over load it by 4%.

This is very true. You can build a product which works satisfactorily
when new with a fairly small factor of safety. But abuse or overload the
product and it'll fail, whereas a product with a larger factor of safety
may not. Also, a product with a larger factor of safety will often wear
more slowly under normal use. I think reduced factors of safety are
quite common because computers allow more accurate modelling. In a way,
it is one of the downsides of more advanced modelling techniques.

There is a story that Henry Ford sent engineers out to the junk
yards to find out what ports were not broken on junked Model Ts. Turns
out that it was the king pins. So he figured they were "overbuilt"
and reduced their heft. Saved on production costs (fifty cents time 2
times N units per year= real money), but people are saying "they don't
make them like that anymore".

I wonder if that story is true. There is also a story that Joe Bamford
(of JCB excavator fame) would send out his engineers whenever he heard
that a JCB excavator was broken down nearby. That way he could see what
was broken and do better next time.

Best wishes,

Chris

Don Foreman wrote:

Why? Mostly because CNC machining (and designs to exploit it) can
produce better accuracy at lower cost than previous production
methods.

Interesting. What do people think about machine tools themselves? I got
to use a Sharp lathe a few years back. Built in Taiwan. A real nice
machine which I found it difficult to fault.

Best wishes,

Chris

Gerald Miller wrote:

When was the last time you saw the radiator on an economy car that
lasted more than ten years of rough usage? Think Ford, Model "A". I
just disposed of my beer fridge, having replaced the start switch 25
years ago, it was manufactured in 1955 and I replaced it as an energy
conservation measure. OTOH, I also just replaced my central AC after
23 seasons.

Some new radiators are awful compared to the old copper ones. Even those
which imitate the old copper ones have far less metal in them.

Also, because many modern radiators are aluminium with crimped-on
plastic top and bottom tanks, you can't fix them. When you get a leak,
you've just got to buy a new one.

Best wishes,

Chris

Tim Wescott wrote:
Christopher Tidy wrote:

Hi folks,

I apologise if the title is a bit of a mouthful. But I've been
thinking about this issue for some time, and would like to seek the
opinion of people here. You frequently hear people complain about the
quality of modern products and say things like "They don't make them
like they used to". But it has occurred to me that maybe older
products look good today because only the good products have stood the
test of time, and the poor products have been thrown away years ago.
What do people think? Were products better in general back in the
fifties, say, or were there a mixture of good and bad? I'd be
interested to hear people's opinions, as I'm not old enough to
remember myself.

Best wishes,

Chris

Having experienced some antique furniture that was pure crap from the
day it was made.

I too have seen some pretty awful old furniture.

Best wishes,

Chris

"Christopher Tidy" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"Christopher Tidy" wrote in message
...

Hi folks,

I apologise if the title is a bit of a mouthful. But I've been thinking
about this issue for some time, and would like to seek the opinion of
people here. You frequently hear people complain about the quality of
modern products and say things like "They don't make them like they used
to". But it has occurred to me that maybe older products look good today
because only the good products have stood the test of time, and the poor
products have been thrown away years ago. What do people think? Were
products better in general back in the fifties, say, or were there a
mixture of good and bad? I'd be interested to hear people's opinions, as
I'm not old enough to remember myself.

Best wishes,

Chris


No problem. Some people here are so old that we can't remember, either.
g

It's a mixed bag. Cars are much better, and fishing reels are, too. But
wooden matches have gone to hell. Toasters today are complete crap
compared to the old ones.

Actually, good toasters are out there. I just bought one where all the
parts are individually replaceable and I'm really pleased with it. Here's
a pictu
http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/...t_4ATW-131.jpg

It's a Rowlett Rutland "Regent" 4ATW-131. I got it at more than 50% off.
Not sure if they export to the USA, though.

What I think you'll find is that the quality of goods has risen or fallen
to match the consumers' expectations and desires, with a strong influence
coming from the fact that people don't really *want* things to last that
long anymore.

It's certainly the case that consumers are to blame to some degree. After
all, the market serves up what they want to buy.

It's interesting to try to establish a general trend. What do people
think? In general - that is, if we try to take some kind of average - do
people think that the quality of products is better or worse today?

I get the impression that some of the best products from the past are
unbeaten, and that some of the craftsmanship required to build these
products has been lost. But some people may disagree.

Best wishes,

Chris



NICE toaster!

In my part of the world (Australia), but I'm sure it is the same everywhere,
it seems economy of scale rules. The large companies outprice the smaller
companies, close them down and then when the competition is gone their
drivers are to push the quality (& cost price) as low as the market will
bear. Be it tools, hardware or materials that's what has happened here. That
reminds me I must take back that caulking gun that crapped itself the first
time I used it.....

We buy the crap so we are to blame I guess, nowadays we can pick up an air
compressor + half a dozen air tools for under AU$200, for limited use they
are fine so I guess there is an upside. Another down side is the guys who
sell it to you have absolutely no idea whatsoever what they are selling or
its application.

Christopher Tidy wrote:
Ed Huntress wrote:
"Christopher Tidy" wrote in message
...

Hi folks,

I apologise if the title is a bit of a mouthful. But I've been
thinking about this issue for some time, and would like to seek the
opinion of people here. You frequently hear people complain about
the quality of modern products and say things like "They don't make
them like they used to". But it has occurred to me that maybe older
products look good today because only the good products have stood
the test of time, and the poor products have been thrown away years
ago. What do people think? Were products better in general back in
the fifties, say, or were there a mixture of good and bad? I'd be
interested to hear people's opinions, as I'm not old enough to
remember myself.

Best wishes,

Chris


No problem. Some people here are so old that we can't remember,
either. g

It's a mixed bag. Cars are much better, and fishing reels are, too.
But wooden matches have gone to hell. Toasters today are complete
crap compared to the old ones.

Actually, good toasters are out there. I just bought one where all the
parts are individually replaceable and I'm really pleased with it.
Here's a pictu
http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/...t_4ATW-131.jpg

It's a Rowlett Rutland "Regent" 4ATW-131. I got it at more than 50%
off. Not sure if they export to the USA, though.

Nice toaster Chris. I have seen some quite expensive commercial toasters
in a local kitchen shop and I suspect they were this range
http://www.rowlettrutland.co.uk/comm...rs_esprit.html ,
nice but I don't do that much toast to justify the price but if
catering I would expect it would pay for itself. Shame they don't do
kettles although my old Morphy Richards stainless steel kettle is still
going strong, it came with my house 16 years ago and was 2nd hand then,
its only needed a new connector to the element. I suspect the
replacement elements will be obsolete by the time it goes, if it isn't
already.




What I think you'll find is that the quality of goods has risen or
fallen to match the consumers' expectations and desires, with a
strong influence coming from the fact that people don't really *want*
things to last that long anymore.

It's certainly the case that consumers are to blame to some degree.
After all, the market serves up what they want to buy.

It's interesting to try to establish a general trend. What do people
think? In general - that is, if we try to take some kind of average -
do people think that the quality of products is better or worse today?

I get the impression that some of the best products from the past are
unbeaten, and that some of the craftsmanship required to build these
products has been lost. But some people may disagree.

Best wishes,

Chris

"Christopher Tidy" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:

snip

It's a mixed bag. Cars are much better, and fishing reels are, too. But
wooden matches have gone to hell. Toasters today are complete crap
compared to the old ones.

Actually, good toasters are out there. I just bought one where all the
parts are individually replaceable and I'm really pleased with it. Here's
a pictu
http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/...t_4ATW-131.jpg

Umm....look sturdy, Boris. Not like those weak and effeminate appliances
made by the degenerate capitalist imperialists...


It's a Rowlett Rutland "Regent" 4ATW-131. I got it at more than 50% off.
Not sure if they export to the USA, though.

It looks like something made in a country we're boycotting. But I'll bet it
would stand up in a hurricane.


What I think you'll find is that the quality of goods has risen or fallen
to match the consumers' expectations and desires, with a strong influence
coming from the fact that people don't really *want* things to last that
long anymore.

It's certainly the case that consumers are to blame to some degree. After
all, the market serves up what they want to buy.

It's interesting to try to establish a general trend. What do people
think? In general - that is, if we try to take some kind of average - do
people think that the quality of products is better or worse today?

I get the impression that some of the best products from the past are
unbeaten, and that some of the craftsmanship required to build these
products has been lost. But some people may disagree.

Best wishes,

Chris

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 10:37:51 +0000, Christopher Tidy
wrote:


I too have seen some pretty awful old furniture.


I am making some pretty awful new furniture, DiL2 wants some new
storage cupboards and wants them made from white melamine covered
particleboard. I offered her real solid Jarrah ( used to be called
Swan River Mahogany ), such timber is extremely expensive now and she
knocked it back.

I HATE melamine particleboard, it chips whenever a
saw or other tool gets within 2 metres.

One cupboard is assembled, just waiting on door fitting, 2 more cut
out, waiting assembly.

Did I say I hate chipboard & MDF coated with melamine ?? I DO !

At least, DiL1 did appreciate her Jarrah kitchen wedding present I
built for 5 years until they built a new house about 3 years ago.

Some of the hand tools I use are over 50 years old and in many
instances (but not always) are better than modern stuff but my Dozuki
saws are magnificent.

"Alan" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 10:37:51 +0000, Christopher Tidy
wrote:


I too have seen some pretty awful old furniture.


I am making some pretty awful new furniture, DiL2 wants some new
storage cupboards and wants them made from white melamine covered
particleboard. I offered her real solid Jarrah ( used to be called
Swan River Mahogany ), such timber is extremely expensive now and she
knocked it back.

I HATE melamine particleboard, it chips whenever a
saw or other tool gets within 2 metres.

One cupboard is assembled, just waiting on door fitting, 2 more cut
out, waiting assembly.

Did I say I hate chipboard & MDF coated with melamine ?? I DO !

If you finish it with a router with carbide bit, you'll get nice clean cuts
and you'll learn to hate it less. You won't like it, but it will be better.

I've built some pretty elaborate pieces that way, including the corner
computer desk I'm typing from now. It still looks like something from Ikea,
but at least it doesn't look like something made in a high school shop
class. Setting up a guide for all the cuts was tedious but straightforward,
if you'll forgive the pun.

--
Ed Huntress

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 00:14:21 -0400, with neither quill nor qualm, "Ed
Huntress" quickly quoth:


"Christopher Tidy" wrote in message
...
Hi folks,

I apologise if the title is a bit of a mouthful. But I've been thinking
about this issue for some time, and would like to seek the opinion of
people here. You frequently hear people complain about the quality of
modern products and say things like "They don't make them like they used
to". But it has occurred to me that maybe older products look good today
because only the good products have stood the test of time, and the poor
products have been thrown away years ago. What do people think? Were
products better in general back in the fifties, say, or were there a
mixture of good and bad? I'd be interested to hear people's opinions, as
I'm not old enough to remember myself.

Best wishes,

Chris

No problem. Some people here are so old that we can't remember, either. g

It's a mixed bag. Cars are much better, and fishing reels are, too. But
wooden matches have gone to hell. Toasters today are complete crap compared
to the old ones.

Most appliances are total crap nowadays. If you've moved a washer,
dryer, or fridge since about the year 2000, you'd have noticed that
they're about half the weight of their earlier counterparts; 1/3 the
weight of '50s items (many of which are still kicking.)


What I think you'll find is that the quality of goods has risen or fallen to
match the consumers' expectations and desires, with a strong influence
coming from the fact that people don't really *want* things to last that
long anymore.

I think that's true in a lot of areas. People want to follow the
trends, and all their appliances get swept away, replaced by the new
style/color/feature that's "in" today.

Where it's not true is vehicles, tools, and durable clothing. Everyone
still wants those to last forever. They just don't want to pay the
price for something which does.


Now I'll get out of the way as the blizzard of messages sweeps into this
thread...

Heh heh heh. I just hope it wasn't crossposted to lebenty seben
different groups, too.

--
Once we believe in ourselves, we can risk curiosity, wonder, spontaneous
delight, or any experience that reveals the human spirit.
--e e cummings

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 10:22:16 +0000, Christopher Tidy
wrote:



I get the impression that some of the best products from the past are
unbeaten, and that some of the craftsmanship required to build these
products has been lost. But some people may disagree.

One example might be the Vise-Grip, made by Petersen Mfg Co of
Nebraska. The patent expired in 1941 and there are plenty of
knockoffs available -- but the knockoffs never seem to work as well as
the real thing.

http://www.asktooltalk.com/articles/.../vise-grip.php

"Christopher Tidy" wrote in message
...

Were products better in general back in the fifties, say, or were there a
mixture of good and bad? I'd be interested to hear people's opinions, as I'm
not old enough to remember myself.

In general, they don't make them like they used to and I am glad!

Take cars for example. My first car was a '55 Ford. It was a great car for
its day, but back then any car over 100,000 miles was a worn out wreck. It was
normal for many folks to trade cars annually. A 5 year-old car was considered
(and probably was) junkyard fodder. My Ford did make it to 100,000, but the
pistons were just about swapping cylinders, it was on at least its third
transmission, and its second rear end. Oh yes, my Ford was doing good to manage
about 8 MPG. As fond as my memories are of that car; would I want a car like
that today? Hell No!

Back then, there was at least one television shop in every neighborhood,
because the TVs of the day were lucky to go 6 months without a major breakdown.
Radios were much the same. All of us were amateur radio/TV repairmen. There
was a tube tester in every drug store, so the normal procedure was to pull all
of the tubes, test them, and replace any that tested bad in hopes that would
correct today's symptoms.

I was in the tire business when the first real 20,000 mile tires came out.
That claim was so unbelievable that nobody would believe it at the time. Now
tires go three times as far.

I could go on, but I think you get the picture.

Vaughn

Den wrote:

NICE toaster!

In my part of the world (Australia), but I'm sure it is the same everywhere,
it seems economy of scale rules. The large companies outprice the smaller
companies, close them down and then when the competition is gone their
drivers are to push the quality (& cost price) as low as the market will
bear. Be it tools, hardware or materials that's what has happened here. That
reminds me I must take back that caulking gun that crapped itself the first
time I used it.....

We buy the crap so we are to blame I guess, nowadays we can pick up an air
compressor + half a dozen air tools for under AU$200, for limited use they
are fine so I guess there is an upside. Another down side is the guys who
sell it to you have absolutely no idea whatsoever what they are selling or
its application.

Most times I've bought crappy tools in the past I've kicked myself for
doing it later. So much so that I've pretty much stopped doing it. I'd
rather buy a few good tools than many crappy ones. I want them to
perform well, every time. And the few times they go wrong, I want to be
able to make a phone call and get a new one free with no hassle.

Best wishes,

Chris

"Christopher Tidy" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"Christopher Tidy" wrote in message
...

Ed Huntress wrote:


snip

It's a mixed bag. Cars are much better, and fishing reels are, too. But
wooden matches have gone to hell. Toasters today are complete crap
compared to the old ones.

Actually, good toasters are out there. I just bought one where all the
parts are individually replaceable and I'm really pleased with it. Here's
a pictu
http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/...t_4ATW-131.jpg


Umm....look sturdy, Boris. Not like those weak and effeminate appliances
made by the degenerate capitalist imperialists...


It's a Rowlett Rutland "Regent" 4ATW-131. I got it at more than 50% off.
Not sure if they export to the USA, though.

Damn, I love the evocative, romantic English names for their machines.
"Vincent Black Shadow." "Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud." "Coventry Climax."
"Adrian Squire." And now, "Rowlett Rutland Regent."

It sounds like a fighter plane that saved London from the blitz. How could a
country that names its machines so majestically ever have lost its empire?
g



It looks like something made in a country we're boycotting. But I'll bet
it would stand up in a hurricane.

It does look a bit Eastern Bloc, doesn't it?

You said it, not me. d8-)

But actually it's made in England.

It's a magnificent toaster, Chris. I really do appreciate quality, but it
does evoke images of English craftsmen working in dim shops with little
hammers and steam-powered machinery in the background. There will always be
an England. ggg

You're not boycotting England just yet, are you?

Heck, no. You're one of only three or four countries from which we can buy
something for which we can read the instruction manuals. The other ones are
your former colonies. We'd lose our minds without a *few* of them that were
readable.

It's just the kind of thing that appeals to the kinds of people who read
this newsgroup. It makes us long for the handcranks that came with a Morris
Minor. Forget the fact that you needed the crank because the Morris had a
Lucas battery...

I'll tell you what else that toaster makes me think about. Someday a team of
archaeologists will unearth an English kitchen, and try to figure out what
kinds of rituals went on there. The knives and pots will be ambiguous and it
will remain a mystery -- until they see your Rowlett Rutland Regent sitting
proudly on the altar. Suddenly, it will all fall into place: It's a room for
ritual sacrifice, and the toaster was a machine for making burnt offerings
to the gods...

--
Ed Huntress

David Billington wrote:

Nice toaster Chris. I have seen some quite expensive commercial toasters
in a local kitchen shop and I suspect they were this range
http://www.rowlettrutland.co.uk/comm...rs_esprit.html ,
nice but I don't do that much toast to justify the price but if
catering I would expect it would pay for itself. Shame they don't do
kettles although my old Morphy Richards stainless steel kettle is still
going strong, it came with my house 16 years ago and was 2nd hand then,
its only needed a new connector to the element. I suspect the
replacement elements will be obsolete by the time it goes, if it isn't
already.

I couldn't really have justified it except that it was more than 50%
off. If you keep an eye out, they do come up for sale at reduced prices
sometimes.

Best wishes,

Chris

Ed Huntress wrote:
"Christopher Tidy" wrote in message
...

Ed Huntress wrote:


snip

It's a mixed bag. Cars are much better, and fishing reels are, too. But
wooden matches have gone to hell. Toasters today are complete crap
compared to the old ones.

Actually, good toasters are out there. I just bought one where all the
parts are individually replaceable and I'm really pleased with it. Here's
a pictu
http://www.mythic-beasts.com/~cdt22/...t_4ATW-131.jpg


Umm....look sturdy, Boris. Not like those weak and effeminate appliances
made by the degenerate capitalist imperialists...


It's a Rowlett Rutland "Regent" 4ATW-131. I got it at more than 50% off.
Not sure if they export to the USA, though.


It looks like something made in a country we're boycotting. But I'll bet it
would stand up in a hurricane.

It does look a bit Eastern Bloc, doesn't it? But actually it's made in
England. You're not boycotting England just yet, are you?

Best wishes,

Chris

Don Foreman wrote:
On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 10:22:16 +0000, Christopher Tidy
wrote:



I get the impression that some of the best products from the past are
unbeaten, and that some of the craftsmanship required to build these
products has been lost. But some people may disagree.


One example might be the Vise-Grip, made by Petersen Mfg Co of
Nebraska. The patent expired in 1941 and there are plenty of
knockoffs available -- but the knockoffs never seem to work as well as
the real thing.

http://www.asktooltalk.com/articles/.../vise-grip.php

I don't own a genuine pair of Vise-Grips. The best have always been sold
under the "Mole" brand here in England, and are often generically known
as "mole wrenches".

Actually, I think this is one case in which you can often buy an
imitation and have it work satisfactorily (although I doubt they'll be
as durable). Compare this with cheap screwdrivers and adjustable
spanners, which are never okay, and destroy everything you try to turn
with them.

Personally I've yet to find a better adjustable spanner than the Bahco.

Best wishes,

Chris

Larry Jaques wrote:
On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 00:14:21 -0400, with neither quill nor qualm, "Ed
Huntress" quickly quoth:


"Christopher Tidy" wrote in message
...

Hi folks,

I apologise if the title is a bit of a mouthful. But I've been thinking
about this issue for some time, and would like to seek the opinion of
people here. You frequently hear people complain about the quality of
modern products and say things like "They don't make them like they used
to". But it has occurred to me that maybe older products look good today
because only the good products have stood the test of time, and the poor
products have been thrown away years ago. What do people think? Were
products better in general back in the fifties, say, or were there a
mixture of good and bad? I'd be interested to hear people's opinions, as
I'm not old enough to remember myself.

Best wishes,

Chris

No problem. Some people here are so old that we can't remember, either. g

It's a mixed bag. Cars are much better, and fishing reels are, too. But
wooden matches have gone to hell. Toasters today are complete crap compared
to the old ones.


Most appliances are total crap nowadays. If you've moved a washer,
dryer, or fridge since about the year 2000, you'd have noticed that
they're about half the weight of their earlier counterparts; 1/3 the
weight of '50s items (many of which are still kicking.)

This is definitely true. I've taken plenty of appliances apart to see.
Washing machine outer drums are now plastic as opposed to enamelled
steel. Poly-V belts have replaced the more traditional V-belts, and the
latest pulleys are incredibly thin die castings. Commutator motors have
replaced induction motors (some of the early washing machines even had a
gearbox attached to the induction motor - now that was cool). Die
castings have replaced sand castings. And there's less metal in pretty
much every part!

My parents chucked out an AEG washing machine which was about 14 years
old a while back. It was much heavier than most modern machines.
Unfortunately it was the electronics which killed it. You don't actually
need electronics in a washing machine.

Best wishes,

Chris

"Christopher Tidy" wrote in message
...
But again, when modern TVs do break they're often impossible to repair.

Don't confuse "impossible to repair" with "uneconomical to repair" They are
two very different things. I can't prove it, but I have little doubt that most
TVs are junked with fairly minor problems, easily repaired by someone with the
proper skills and knowledge and with access to the proper parts and information.
The problem is, even that simple repair would cost vaguely as much as a new TV.
Therefore, TV repair shops (except for warranty service depots) are a dying
breed.

Vaughn

Vaughn Simon wrote:
"Christopher Tidy" wrote in message
...

Were products better in general back in the fifties, say, or were there a
mixture of good and bad? I'd be interested to hear people's opinions, as I'm
not old enough to remember myself.


In general, they don't make them like they used to and I am glad!

Take cars for example. My first car was a '55 Ford. It was a great car for
its day, but back then any car over 100,000 miles was a worn out wreck. It was
normal for many folks to trade cars annually. A 5 year-old car was considered
(and probably was) junkyard fodder. My Ford did make it to 100,000, but the
pistons were just about swapping cylinders, it was on at least its third
transmission, and its second rear end. Oh yes, my Ford was doing good to manage
about 8 MPG. As fond as my memories are of that car; would I want a car like
that today? Hell No!

This is interesting. I get the impression that there are two distinct
trends here, and they're pulling in opposite directions. Cars are
becoming more reliable and durable during their intended lifetime, due
to a number of factors such as better manufacturing accuracy, better
lubricants, electronic engine management, etc. But outside their
intended lifetime they are far harder to maintain. Which would you
prefer to have to maintain in 50 years time: a 2008 car filled with
electronics, or a 1927 Ford Model T?

Back then, there was at least one television shop in every neighborhood,
because the TVs of the day were lucky to go 6 months without a major breakdown.
Radios were much the same. All of us were amateur radio/TV repairmen. There
was a tube tester in every drug store, so the normal procedure was to pull all
of the tubes, test them, and replace any that tested bad in hopes that would
correct today's symptoms.

I believe this is largely due to the introduction of integrated
circuits. But again, when modern TVs do break they're often impossible
to repair. And I prefer analogue knobs for volume controls, etc. Buttons
annoy me!

I was in the tire business when the first real 20,000 mile tires came out.
That claim was so unbelievable that nobody would believe it at the time. Now
tires go three times as far.

I could go on, but I think you get the picture.

I remember someone saying that with modern tyres, you could leave a car
in a field and even in hundreds of years time, when the car has rusted
away, the tyres will still be there. Tyre technology has certainly advanced.

But there has nevertheless been a reduction in the amount of metal in
many products. Sometimes parts have just been made using less metal,
making them weaker and more likely to break. Other times they've been
replaced with plastic parts. Weak metal parts are bad because they break
more easily. But plastic parts are worse, because when they break you
stand no chance of satisfactorily repairing them. So there are certainly
ways in which we're going backwards, too.

Thanks for the thoughts. It has been an interesting discussion.

Best wishes,

Chris

Ed Huntress wrote:

It's a magnificent toaster, Chris. I really do appreciate quality, but it
does evoke images of English craftsmen working in dim shops with little
hammers and steam-powered machinery in the background. There will always be
an England. ggg

You're not boycotting England just yet, are you?


Heck, no. You're one of only three or four countries from which we can buy
something for which we can read the instruction manuals. The other ones are
your former colonies. We'd lose our minds without a *few* of them that were
readable.

There wasn't a manual with it. I think they figure you can make toast
without a manual!

Best wishes,

Chris

Vaughn Simon wrote:
"Christopher Tidy" wrote in message
...
But again, when modern TVs do break they're often impossible to repair.

Don't confuse "impossible to repair" with "uneconomical to repair" They are
two very different things. I can't prove it, but I have little doubt that most
TVs are junked with fairly minor problems, easily repaired by someone with the
proper skills and knowledge and with access to the proper parts and information.
The problem is, even that simple repair would cost vaguely as much as a new TV.
Therefore, TV repair shops (except for warranty service depots) are a dying
breed.

And by the time they fail, the owner is often
ready to buy a new one. The 21" NEC in my bedroom
still works perfectly (the remote has been repaired
several times though) and it was purchased before
my 21 year old daughter was born.

If it fails, the decision to repair it will
probably be based on how much trouble it is
to throw it away (:

Larry Jaques wrote:

Most appliances are total crap nowadays. If you've moved a washer,
dryer, or fridge since about the year 2000, you'd have noticed that
they're about half the weight of their earlier counterparts; 1/3 the
weight of '50s items (many of which are still kicking.)


I guess thats why I found a concrete block in the back of one I
had to open up some time ago. :-)
...lew...

"Ed Huntress" wrote:

No problem. Some people here are so old that we can't remember, either. g

It's a mixed bag. Cars are much better, and fishing reels are, too. But
wooden matches have gone to hell. Toasters today are complete crap compared
to the old ones.

I'm with you on all of that. I'd love to have a decent strike everywhere match.


What I think you'll find is that the quality of goods has risen or fallen to
match the consumers' expectations and desires, with a strong influence
coming from the fact that people don't really *want* things to last that
long anymore.

Well I think it has fallen to match the abilty of customers to actually fix things tha
that break.


Now I'll get out of the way as the blizzard of messages sweeps into this
thread...

I'll sit back and watch too.

Wes

Larry Jaques wrote:

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 00:14:21 -0400, with neither quill nor qualm, "Ed
Huntress" quickly quoth:


"Christopher Tidy" wrote in message
...

Hi folks,

I apologise if the title is a bit of a mouthful. But I've been thinking
about this issue for some time, and would like to seek the opinion of
people here. You frequently hear people complain about the quality of
modern products and say things like "They don't make them like they used
to". But it has occurred to me that maybe older products look good today
because only the good products have stood the test of time, and the poor
products have been thrown away years ago. What do people think? Were
products better in general back in the fifties, say, or were there a
mixture of good and bad? I'd be interested to hear people's opinions, as
I'm not old enough to remember myself.

Best wishes,

Chris

No problem. Some people here are so old that we can't remember, either. g

It's a mixed bag. Cars are much better, and fishing reels are, too. But
wooden matches have gone to hell. Toasters today are complete crap compared
to the old ones.


Most appliances are total crap nowadays. If you've moved a washer,
dryer, or fridge since about the year 2000, you'd have noticed that
they're about half the weight of their earlier counterparts; 1/3 the
weight of '50s items (many of which are still kicking.)



Aw shucks, even web sites ain't what they used to be...

The Secret Life Of Machines videos seem to ahve disappeared.
I wanted to cite the video because it actually SHOWED teh huge block of
concrete in the bottom of the old washing machines.

Which might have had an effect on weight


http://www.secretlifeofmachines.com/..._machine.shtml


Richard

Don Foreman wrote:
On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 10:22:16 +0000, Christopher Tidy
wrote:


I get the impression that some of the best products from the past are
unbeaten, and that some of the craftsmanship required to build these
products has been lost. But some people may disagree.

One example might be the Vise-Grip, made by Petersen Mfg Co of
Nebraska. The patent expired in 1941 and there are plenty of
knockoffs available -- but the knockoffs never seem to work as well as
the real thing.

http://www.asktooltalk.com/articles/.../vise-grip.php

Soon to be "Made in China":

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26531610/

David

Ed Huntress wrote:

Damn, I love the evocative, romantic English names for their machines.
"Vincent Black Shadow." "Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud." "Coventry Climax."
"Adrian Squire." And now, "Rowlett Rutland Regent."


http://www.last.fm/music/The+Del+McCoury+Band/_/1952+Vincent+Black+Lightning


--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html

aioe.org, Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white
listed, or I will not see your messages.

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm


There are two kinds of people on this earth:
The crazy, and the insane.
The first sign of insanity is denying that you're crazy.

"Den" wrote in message


NICE toaster!

Some retailers actually offer it for sale or lease.


--

Reply in group, but if emailing add another
zero, and remove the last word.

I missed the Staff meeting, but the Memos showed that Christopher Tidy
wrote on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 10:31:31 +0000
in rec.crafts.metalworking :
pyotr filipivich wrote:

The cheap/bad stuff wore out years ago.

The interesting question is, how much of this bad old stuff was there?

Well, considering that, according to Sturgeon's Law "90% of
everything is crap" - I'd say about one item in ten wasn't.
There is also the issue of "what it was made of". Stuff which
rotted, regardless of quality, is more often lost than the tuff which
doesn't.

there is also the "favorite tee-short" issue. That is to say,
have you ever noticed that your favorite tee-shirt, which you wear
daily, turns to rags long before the crappy one you never wear?

tschus
pyotr
--
pyotr filipivich
"I had just been through hell and must have looked like death warmed
over walking into the saloon, because when I asked the bartender
whether they served zombies he said, ‘Sure, what'll you have?'"
from I Hear America Swinging by Peter DeVries

I had a knockoff - found a round file for it.
I have a large set of Vice-Grips. C lamps and such. Nice quality.

Martin

Martin H. Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
TSRA, Endowed; NRA LOH & Patron Member, Golden Eagle, Patriot's Medal.
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
IHMSA and NRA Metallic Silhouette maker & member.
http://lufkinced.com/


Christopher Tidy wrote:
Don Foreman wrote:
On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 10:22:16 +0000, Christopher Tidy
wrote:



I get the impression that some of the best products from the past are
unbeaten, and that some of the craftsmanship required to build these
products has been lost. But some people may disagree.


One example might be the Vise-Grip, made by Petersen Mfg Co of
Nebraska. The patent expired in 1941 and there are plenty of
knockoffs available -- but the knockoffs never seem to work as well as
the real thing.
http://www.asktooltalk.com/articles/.../vise-grip.php

I don't own a genuine pair of Vise-Grips. The best have always been sold
under the "Mole" brand here in England, and are often generically known
as "mole wrenches".

Actually, I think this is one case in which you can often buy an
imitation and have it work satisfactorily (although I doubt they'll be
as durable). Compare this with cheap screwdrivers and adjustable
spanners, which are never okay, and destroy everything you try to turn
with them.

Personally I've yet to find a better adjustable spanner than the Bahco.

Best wishes,

Chris



----== Posted via Pronews.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.pronews.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
m...

Ed Huntress wrote:

Damn, I love the evocative, romantic English names for their machines.
"Vincent Black Shadow." "Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud." "Coventry Climax."
"Adrian Squire." And now, "Rowlett Rutland Regent."


http://www.last.fm/music/The+Del+McCoury+Band/_/1952+Vincent+Black+Lightning

I guess a few people still remember it. A 150 mph production motorcycle
certainly stood out in the early '50s.

--
Ed Huntress

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 15:18:15 -0600, the infamous Lew Hartswick
scrolled the following:

Larry Jaques wrote:

Most appliances are total crap nowadays. If you've moved a washer,
dryer, or fridge since about the year 2000, you'd have noticed that
they're about half the weight of their earlier counterparts; 1/3 the
weight of '50s items (many of which are still kicking.)


I guess thats why I found a concrete block in the back of one I
had to open up some time ago. :-)

It seems that someone learned how to skimp on parts way early on, eh?

--
Once we believe in ourselves, we can risk curiosity, wonder, spontaneous
delight, or any experience that reveals the human spirit.
--e e cummings

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 19:20:03 -0400, Wes wrote:

I'm with you on all of that. I'd love to have a decent strike everywhere match.

http://www.riverjunction.com/catalog...n/matches.html