Page 1 of 1

Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:24 pm
by Squishy

When did their leather notebook covers get so flimsy? My old one is so much more..."supple" than the new ones I just got. Hmph I feel cheated. :x


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:55 pm
by racer

Squishy wrote:

When did their leather notebook covers get so flimsy? My old one is so much more..."supple" than the new ones I just got. Hmph I feel cheated. :x

When a penny became worth more than it is worth.

(Currently, it costs 3.9 cents to mint a penny)


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 2:40 am
by Radar Identified

Maybe we should do what Australia and New Zealand did and get rid of pennies.


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 2:02 pm
by Squishy

Bring back the two-dollar bill, and have the only coin be the quarter (and perhaps the loonie, being the symbol of our existence and such).

I've converted a lot of coins over to Canadian Tire money. :lol:


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 1:15 am
by racer

Squishy wrote:

Bring back the two-dollar bill, and have the only coin be the quarter (and perhaps the loonie, being the symbol of our existence and such).

I've converted a lot of coins over to Canadian Tire money. :lol:

Yeah, but you forget about the taxation structure of our government. A $100 purchase ($99.99) costs $112.99 after tax. It works even worse for a $75 purchase.


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 4:45 am
by hwybear

Squishy wrote:

When did their leather notebook covers get so flimsy? My old one is so much more..."supple" than the new ones I just got. Hmph I feel cheated. :x

see cheaply made products everyday. pretty much everything has become cheaper only to not last as long. We used to buy solid core tennis balls for our dogs to use. The balls lasted about 3 months, well company cheaped out and changed the composition of the core and now the ball lasts about 6 hrs and it is destroyed. Back to regular tennis balls, at least they last 1 day.


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 1:10 pm
by Bookm

Let me know if you get a line on "quality" tennis balls. Ours last about 18.3 minutes.


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 1:29 pm
by FiReSTaRT

hwybear wrote:

We used to buy solid core tennis balls for our dogs to use. The balls lasted about 3 months, well company cheaped out and changed the composition of the core and now the ball lasts about 6 hrs and it is destroyed. Back to regular tennis balls, at least they last 1 day.

Use hippies instead. I heard there are still a few left over :twisted:


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 10:18 pm
by Radar Identified

hwybear wrote:

see cheaply made products everyday. pretty much everything has become cheaper only to not last as long. We used to buy solid core tennis balls for our dogs to use.

"Wal-Mart effect." Products made cheaper, consumers flock to the lower price, but as always, "you get what they pay for." About the only exception to that are most groceries; local stuff is usually cheaper and decent/better quality because it doesn't have to be brought in from 2000+ miles away, hence lower transportation costs.


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 7:32 pm
by Squishy

It's getting harder to find Made in Canada...I don't think there are any more pens made here. Still, I bought a Merangue pen (remember the old pencil crayons?) so they can get riiiich and build a factory here. :D

I wouldn't mind the thinner Triform cover so much except that it doesn't really fit as well as it used to. The old one (just marked D24C) was a tight fit at first but a few days in my pocket moulded the leather to the size of the notebook. The new one (LD24C) is about 1.5 cm too long and I end up with round corners at the top and bottom, instead of having the leather conform to the notebook with relatively sharp corners. Now I have to adjust the position of the notebook every time I close the clasp. Damn it, Walmart!

Speaking of "made in Canada," the Triform notebooks say "Published in Canada by [Carswell?]..." What does that mean? Same as "Distributed in Canada," or is it like "Printed in Canada"?


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 6:21 pm
by Radar Identified

Squishy wrote:

Speaking of "made in Canada," the Triform notebooks say "Published in Canada by [Carswell?]..." What does that mean? Same as "Distributed in Canada," or is it like "Printed in Canada"?

"Published in Canada" instead of "made in Canada" might have something to do with the recent restrictions on labelling something as "made in Canada," but I can't say for sure, although it's more or less the same thing... I think... That's a weird choice of phraseology.

Squishy wrote:

It's getting harder to find Made in Canada...

No kidding... although I deliberately look for Foodland Ontario symbols or "product of Ontario" at grocery stores; if not available, I look for "product of Canada" or products made by Canadian companies. :D It is harder for stationery products and other things, though... our economy is transitioning to from manufacturing/resources to tech/finance/resources.


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:11 pm
by Squishy

Parker used to make several pen models in Canada, but they've stopped. The ones I saw were Made in UK or Taiwan, I think.

I'll need a new bicycle chain by the end of the year...know any Canadian manufacturers? So far it seems like I've found Canadian manufacturers of everything but chains. Lots of frames made here.


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 10:27 am
by Radar Identified

I looked for chain manufacturers but had no such luck. :(


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 9:24 pm
by Squishy

Darn, I'll have to stamp my own chain links out of Canadian Steel. How hard can it be? 8)


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 7:34 am
by hwybear

I know my work shirts are "made in china"


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Wed Sep 30, 2009 3:45 pm
by Proper1

Squishy wrote:

"Published in Canada by [Carswell?]..." What does that mean?

It probably means they're trying to fool us. Carswell is a Canadian publisher that specializes in legal materials. By saying one of their titles is "Published in Canada" they're likely tippy-toeing around making it too clear that it was printed in another country: i.e., they saved fifty cents a copy by seeing to it that no Canadian printer got the work. That's what I think when I see a statement like that on a publication -- but I may be biased because of my 30+ years in the printing business here.


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:11 pm
by Squishy

That's what I was thinking as well, kind of like the "Printed in Canada" labels on things that aren't even printed (just the package).

Bear, does the back of your notebook still say "Complaint" instead of "Compliant" (page 5 of the blue text)? This latest batch fixed that for me, but they've spelled "able to breath" instead of "breathe" in the First Aid notes. No good Canadian would make those kinds of mistakes. :P


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Wed Sep 30, 2009 11:24 pm
by Radar Identified

hwybear wrote:

I know my work shirts are "made in china"

From where I work:

- Uniform is made in Canada, but the fabric is from China :shock:

- Company-issued briefcase is made in Canada, not sure about where the cows are from

- Company manuals are printed in Canada, but the binders are from Taiwan :?

- The airplanes were made in Canada, so were the engines (Bombardier, Pratt & Whitney) :D


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Tue Oct 06, 2009 7:07 pm
by PbFoot

The company I work for (medical equipment) is slowly sliding down the cheapness scale. Manufacturing has gone from Canada (1940-1970), to US, (1970-2006) to Mexico (2006-Present). The competition went from USA to China a few years ago.

-PbFoot


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2009 3:53 pm
by Squishy

I noticed that Canadian Tire has started carrying Pure Energy rechargeables manufactured in Nova Scotia. Relabled as "Green Earth" or something like that and marketed as a green alternative to NiMHs. Good that a Canadian manufacturer is getting more market share, but wow BAD marketing move. I have a feeling that they will get a very bad reputation unless they include some sort of handout on different battery chemistries near the flashlight/battery rack. How many people will even notice that it needs a special alkaline battery charger, much less know the limited applications for such a battery?


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:02 pm
by Radar Identified

Squishy wrote:

How many people will even notice that it needs a special alkaline battery charger, much less know the limited applications for such a battery?

Probably none... heck, I wouldn't even know. If I saw a rechargable battery I'd be inclined to take a quick glance at the fine print and then buy it. That, of course, could result in some really interesting results when I'd try to charge the battery. :shock:


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Sat Oct 10, 2009 9:20 am
by Squishy

I took a look at their battery charger packaging, and it looks exactly like the battery cell packaging. At first I thought it was just a larger "club pack" or something like that.

I think their downfall will be from people stuffing those inside their cameras. They will last about 10 pictures and then leak all over their nice digital camera.

For anyone interested in the differences between chemistries, I shall go into Battery Professor mode:

Alkalines - good for low-drain applications, as internal resistance increases proportionally to current (the higher the current, the less effective capacity remains). In rechargeable cells, they work best if used in a situation where they can be regularly topped up, such as computer mice, electric toothbrushes, etc. For things like clocks and remote controls, while low-drain, you don't really think to take the batteries out and recharge them until they stop working - so I would stick with primary (non-rechargeable) cells. Rechargeable alkalines require a special alkaline charger (some of Pure Energy's chargers can handle both alkalines and NiMHs).

NiMH - good for high-current applications such as digital cameras, electric screwdrivers, flashlights, etc., but they have a high rate of self-discharge, making them inferior to alkalines when used in low-current applications, as the battery will discharge itself before the device gets much use out of them. Thus, you should be recharging them before each use. Some chemistries also like to be conditioned once in a while (full discharge followed by full recharge).

--LSD NiMH - this new type of cell confused the line between the different alkaline/NiMH applications. Low Self-Discharge NiMHs come marked as "hybrid" or "pre-charged" batteries, and can be stored months or even years with a usable charge, just like alkalines, but also have the high-current drain abilities of NiMHs. I would use these for emergency flashlights and anything else you have that is high-current but is inconvenient to recharge before use. There is a slight capacity tradeoff compared to traditional NiMHs.

Lithium, Lithium-Ion, Lithium-Polymer - I've just started playing with these, so don't know much about them yet. My new flashlight uses lithium cobalt ion cells, which supposedly have the energy density of TNT, so I'm doing a lot of research and pointing them away from my face and tender bits for the time being. They seem to behave like NiMHs but have much higher capactiy, as well as a higher voltage. I don't think these are ready for mainstream consumer use yet, as it is very important to keep cells matched - different cells will have different discharge rates, even ones from the same factory but made on different days. Once the voltages are imbalanced, one cell will try to charge the other, overheating it and resulting in a "vent-with-flame" incident, where the cell vents hydrogen gas and ignites it. I have read of one case where a LEO holding a lithium-powered tactical flashlight had it blow up in his hands because his 123A cells were likely imbalanced. Same applies to lithium-powered digital cameras, though laptop batteries and "packs" usually have some sort of cell balancing circuit to prevent this. If you do have a digital camera that takes 123A cells, get them from a flashlight store like 4sevens.ca - you can find them for $1-2 a cell compared to $10 in a department store.


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Sat Oct 10, 2009 2:05 pm
by Proper1

Well done, Dr. Squishy, PhD (Batt.Chem.)! Thanks. I'd happily go into Whatever Professor mode myself in return, if only I were an expert in anything in which anyone here (or, essentially, anywhere else) might have the slightest interest.


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Sat Oct 10, 2009 5:02 pm
by racer

Squishy wrote:

I took a look at their battery charger packaging, and it looks exactly like the battery cell packaging. At first I thought it was just a larger "club pack" or something like that.

I think their downfall will be from people stuffing those inside their cameras. They will last about 10 pictures and then leak all over their nice digital camera.

For anyone interested in the differences between chemistries, I shall go into Battery Professor mode:

Alkalines - good for low-drain applications, as internal resistance increases proportionally to current (the higher the current, the less effective capacity remains). In rechargeable cells, they work best if used in a situation where they can be regularly topped up, such as computer mice, electric toothbrushes, etc. For things like clocks and remote controls, while low-drain, you don't really think to take the batteries out and recharge them until they stop working - so I would stick with primary (non-rechargeable) cells. Rechargeable alkalines require a special alkaline charger (some of Pure Energy's chargers can handle both alkalines and NiMHs).

NiMH - good for high-current applications such as digital cameras, electric screwdrivers, flashlights, etc., but they have a high rate of self-discharge, making them inferior to alkalines when used in low-current applications, as the battery will discharge itself before the device gets much use out of them. Thus, you should be recharging them before each use. Some chemistries also like to be conditioned once in a while (full discharge followed by full recharge).

--LSD NiMH - this new type of cell confused the line between the different alkaline/NiMH applications. Low Self-Discharge NiMHs come marked as "hybrid" or "pre-charged" batteries, and can be stored months or even years with a usable charge, just like alkalines, but also have the high-current drain abilities of NiMHs. I would use these for emergency flashlights and anything else you have that is high-current but is inconvenient to recharge before use. There is a slight capacity tradeoff compared to traditional NiMHs.

Lithium, Lithium-Ion, Lithium-Polymer - I've just started playing with these, so don't know much about them yet. My new flashlight uses lithium cobalt ion cells, which supposedly have the energy density of TNT, so I'm doing a lot of research and pointing them away from my face and tender bits for the time being. They seem to behave like NiMHs but have much higher capactiy, as well as a higher voltage. I don't think these are ready for mainstream consumer use yet, as it is very important to keep cells matched - different cells will have different discharge rates, even ones from the same factory but made on different days. Once the voltages are imbalanced, one cell will try to charge the other, overheating it and resulting in a "vent-with-flame" incident, where the cell vents hydrogen gas and ignites it. I have read of one case where a LEO holding a lithium-powered tactical flashlight had it blow up in his hands because his 123A cells were likely imbalanced. Same applies to lithium-powered digital cameras, though laptop batteries and "packs" usually have some sort of cell balancing circuit to prevent this. If you do have a digital camera that takes 123A cells, get them from a flashlight store like 4sevens.ca - you can find them for $1-2 a cell compared to $10 in a department store.

Alkaline rechargeables can give you a decent performance even in cameras. They are higher capacity than NiCad batteries actually, but worse than NiMH.

Anyone remember the Sony fiasco when 10 million laptops were recalled due to fear of explosion? Or the recent iPhone 3GS exploding on people while in phone call? Those are Lithium-types though.


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Sat Oct 10, 2009 5:18 pm
by racer

Here, I found something about the issues with exploding 123 lithium batteris too :lol:

http://www.engadget.com/2007/07/18/coun ... re-hazard/

Unfortunately for those 4,400 or so owners of the Xenon Aluminum flashlight sold at Sportsman's Warehouse, the recall wagon has come your way, and unless you have no fear of exploding batteries, we'd suggest you power it off at your earliest convenience. Interestingly enough, this case involves more than just a faulty design, as the Panasonic CR123A Industrial Lithium batteries packed within are believed to be counterfeits, and it comes as no surprise that these knockoffs "can overheat and rupture, posing a fire and burn hazard to consumers."


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 12:29 am
by Squishy

Alkalines will work well in a camera only if you use it without a flash, or your flash charges with a low current drain. An alkaline's capacity varies based on current drain, so a few repeated high-current flash charges will deplete the battery pretty quickly and eventually make it leak..

I remember those recalls. Sony makes one of the better Li-Ion cells, but I think most of the problems were caused by shorts internal to the pack (external to the cell), bypassing the protection circuit. "Pack" problems are relatively rare due to the protection circuits, but cameras and flashlights use individual cells. Most of those consumer-level cells have a small protection circuit built into the negative end of the cell, but you can get unprotected cells if you specifically order them, or if you go with cheap, off-brand cells. Those cells can give off more current, but require extra care and periodic testing.

Panasonic has the only 123A manufacturing facility in North America, so I imagine they have the most counterfeits for the "Made in USA" label. That link forgets to mention that the cells can explode whether the device is on or not, so it would be best to completely remove suspect cells instead of just turning it off.

This is the recent LEO incident I was talking about:

http://www.khou.com/news/local/stories/ ... 746a5.html

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/met ... 52786.html


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 11:23 am
by Radar Identified

Squishy wrote:

Once the voltages are imbalanced, one cell will try to charge the other, overheating it and resulting in a "vent-with-flame" incident, where the cell vents hydrogen gas and ignites it.

That's also why there are restrictions on carrying lithium batteries onto passenger aircraft. :shock:


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 5:58 pm
by Greatest Canadian

In 2007-8, nickel was at $20 to $25 a pound. Nickel coins today are not make of pure nickel, however, certain older nickel coins still in cirulation are.

A 5 cent nickel coin was worth 20 cents, or whatever it was, due to the nickel content. Most nickel coins in the USA are still pure or almost pure nickel.

Wise guys were melting down the nickel coins and making a large profit on resale of the nickel community.

The US government (and maybe even Canadian) passed a law making it illegal to melt down their coins.

racer wrote:

Squishy wrote:

When did their leather notebook covers get so flimsy? My old one is so much more..."supple" than the new ones I just got. Hmph I feel cheated. :x

When a penny became worth more than it is worth.

(Currently, it costs 3.9 cents to mint a penny)


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:26 am
by Reflections

Greatest Canadian wrote:

The US government (and maybe even Canadian) passed a law making it illegal to melt down their coins.

As long as I remember, it has always been illegal to willfully destroy currency of any type.


Re: Triform using cheaper cows?

Posted: Tue Oct 13, 2009 6:37 pm
by racer

Reflections wrote:

As long as I remember, it has always been illegal to willfully destroy currency of any type.

Hey, what about lighting up a fat Cuban cigar with a Benjamin Franklin?