[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: spray enamel vs shellack
- To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: spray enamel vs shellack
- From: "Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 07 May 2005 21:33:16 -0600
- Delivered-to: testla@pupman.com
- Delivered-to: tesla@pupman.com
- Old-return-path: <teslalist@twfpowerelectronics.com>
- Resent-date: Sat, 7 May 2005 21:36:29 -0600 (MDT)
- Resent-from: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
- Resent-message-id: <LAvXMD.A.KNG.6kYfCB@poodle>
- Resent-sender: tesla-request@xxxxxxxxxx
Original poster: "Paul B. Brodie" <pbbrodie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Daniel,
Now that is probably the best advice I've gotten. The other thing I've
considered is using the plastic wrap, like Terry. The initial investment
might be a little higher but it appears that one roll will cover 50
secondaries!!!
Paul
Think Positive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tesla list" <<mailto:tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <<mailto:tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 8:18 PM
Subject: Re: spray enamel vs shellack
> Original poster: "Daniel McCauley"
<<mailto:dhmccauley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>dhmccauley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> If you are that concerned over funds, why coat the secondary at all??
> Its not really necessary performance wise.
>
> > I suppose what Steven and I
> > are looking for are the dielectric and electrical properties of clear
> > enamel, since we can't afford much else. Thanks.
> > Paul
> > Think Positive
>
>
>