Re: Interesting programming description for bank selection

From: silverdr_at_wfmh.org.pl
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 18:37:53 +0200
Message-ID: <etPan.5357ec61.327b23c6.e8@szaman.lan>
------------------------------------------------------
From: Gerrit Heitsch gerrit@laosinh.s.bawue.de

> >>> We call them Torx bits/sockets but they are also known as star
> >>> bits/sockets in other places.
> >>
> >> And I can see a number of advantages using Torx over flathead or
> >> Philips. It's self centering like Philips but allows much higher torque
> >> without slipping.
> >
> > It’s a /major/ advantage. My doubts were always whether the same or almost the same couldn’t  
> be said about “inbus” (I don’t know the proper English name for that but it’s like inverted  
> hexagon head - a hexagonal socket), which was already well established but I tend to believe  
> that Torx allows even more torque than “inbus”. Definitely beyond the range of PH or PZ.  
>  
> Inbus (in USA 'allen key' or 'hex key') doesn't allow as much torque. I
> have ruined more than one of them when applying too much torque. Never
> happened with a Torx so far. It's much more likely that you'll twist off
> the whole head of the screw.
>  
> I have not stripped a single Torx yet. But more than enough PH / PZ or
> inbus...

That confirms my “gut feelings” and I am all for those. It’s something like the switch from flat (which I detest so much) to PH. It was a major positive change. I guess in a few years from now I’ll be looking at PH heads with similar disgust as I do at flat cut heads today.

P. S. - Gerrit - got the PCBs etched. Shall be building the protos soon Let’s see :-)

--  
SD!

       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Received on 2014-04-23 17:01:07

Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.