Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/07/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 09:10 AM 7/28/03 -0400, Seth Rosner wrote: > >The usual undocumented - and undocumentable - "for complex reasons." Marc >should produce a single Leica repair person not attached to Solms or >Northvale to state a single complex (or simple) reason that the build >quality of M6's is the best. > I will simply say that these are probably the very people who told me the opposite, Seth. I suspect that they were telling you what you wanted to hear, as all small merchants must do. In my case, I spoke with them at great length concerning engineering standards and the switch from adjustable components to go/no-go components as used in the later cameras. Why not call them back and discuss the changes in engineering approaches between 1937, when the M3 began life, and 1975, when the M4-2 was designed. Specifically, ask them about the longevity impact of that changeover from adjustable to go/no-go components. Don't just ask, "WHAT" is better; seek their referent, and ask "WHY is it better?" One primary example of change was the shift from bronze gears in the M2 through M4 and the steel gears used since the M4-2. Bronze gears lap into themselves fairly readily, and thus we have the buttery smooth advance of an M3. Steel gears take millions of advances to do the same. But the bronze gear will be worn out by the time the steel gear is just getting lapped into smoothness, and the steel gear will outlast the bronze by a factor of 10 or more. Sure, my M6's advance is rougher than my M3's -- but my M6 is only 17 years old, so it hasn't had a chance to be broken in yet. The change in engineering methods is easily documented by anyone who cares to examine the maintenance schedule for a 1953 automobile and for a 2003 automobile and who can then compare the AAA rates on highway break-downs: in olden days, breakdowns were frequent and so was maintenance. Today, maintenance has been reduced and breakdowns as well. The same works for mechanical cameras. (Seth, if you are REALLY interested, I can pass on some Industrial College of the Armed Forces materials on MTBF methodology for your review.) Those interested in this are encouraged to check the archives, as this topic has been discussed to death. I will probably have no more to contribute on this thread, as I've had my say multiple times over during the past ten years. Marc msmall@infionline.net FAX: +540/343-7315 Cha robh bąs fir gun ghrąs fir! - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html