X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 20:56:30 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [204.13.112.10] (HELO mail1.hometel.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.6) with ESMTPS id 915328 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 06 Jan 2006 09:40:11 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=204.13.112.10; envelope-from=marknlisa@hometel.com Received: (qmail 16111 invoked by uid 90); 6 Jan 2006 14:46:54 -0000 Received: from dsl-stj-204-13-118-2.stj.hometel.com (HELO MARKNLISA) (204.13.118.2) by mail.hometel.com with SMTP; 6 Jan 2006 14:46:54 -0000 From: "Mark & Lisa" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" , "Brent Regan" Subject: RE: Fast-Ons et al. X-Original-Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 08:39:47 -0600 X-Original-Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0000_01C6129C.C00159F0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1506 In-Reply-To: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C6129C.C00159F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Brent, Using only the criterion you expressed below (without regard to the relative merits of each connection technology), crimped on connectors might have the edge. Using a ratcheting crimper to attach terminals to wire ends is much easier than soldering. Because the crimper crimps to the same degree each time your results will be much more uniform than soldering. IMHO, crimping is a no-brainer, soldering is an art (relatively speaking). As regards fast-ons; I've seen a 5lbs weight hung from a wire held at the other end only by a fast-on connector. If appropriate precautions (strain relief, propers "squeeze" on the female end) are taken I believe the fast-ons to be more than adequate. Mark & Lisa Sletten Legacy FG N828LM http://www.legacyfgbuilder.com -----Original Message----- From: Brent Regan [mailto:brent@regandesigns.com] Sent: Friday, January 06, 2006 00:31 Subject: Re: Fast-Ons et al. Personally, I base my component selection decisions on the assumption that the installer is an idiot with two left hands (me). Therefore, if I exceed the low performance requirement for success the remaining margin can be put in the safety bank. ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C6129C.C00159F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Brent,
 
Using=20 only the criterion you expressed below (without regard to the relative = merits of=20 each connection technology), crimped on connectors might have the = edge. =20 Using a ratcheting crimper to attach = terminals to wire=20 ends is much easier than soldering.  Because the crimper crimps to = the same=20 degree each time your results will be much more uniform than = soldering. =20 IMHO, crimping is a no-brainer, soldering is an art (relatively=20 speaking).
 
As=20 regards fast-ons; I've seen a 5lbs weight hung from a wire held at = the=20 other end only by a fast-on connector.  If appropriate precautions = (strain=20 relief, propers "squeeze" on the female end) are taken I believe = the=20 fast-ons to be more than adequate.
 

Mark & Lisa Sletten
Legacy FG N828LM
http://www.legacyfgbuilder.com =

 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Brent Regan=20 [mailto:brent@regandesigns.com]
Sent: Friday, January 06, = 2006=20 00:31
Subject: Re: Fast-Ons et al.

Personally, I base my component selection decisions on = the=20 assumption that the installer is an idiot with two left hands (me). = Therefore,=20 if I exceed the low performance requirement for success the remaining = margin=20 can be put in the safety bank.
 ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C6129C.C00159F0--