5 ms·

Modern people overestimate how long we have been able to engineer things precisely. I used to use a lot of vintage German cameras. Really right up through the

Modern people overestimate how long we have been able to engineer things precisely. I used to use a lot of vintage German cameras. Really right up through the 1950s the tolerances were wide enough that no two cameras were exactly alike. The parts were all replaceable, and there were often adjustments & shims inside to keep things in spec. For example, one camera might have part A that's a little long so it's matching part B would be a little short to compensate. They'd sort it out at the factory where they have the parts bins and could keep trying different part Bs to match the part A installed until they had a close enough match, then shim it. This was even more so in the 1920s-1940s cameras. The cameras actually had stickers in the film compartment warning you to send it in for professional service for any repairs. Note the implication that the camera needed frequent enough service that they'd actually bother putting a sticker in it! So for some we look back on the era as things being user-serviceable and parts replaceable, but it was that way for reasons of manufacturing ability.

saalweachter 4y ago
One of my favorite YouTube channels, "my mechanics", is a restorer who specializes in restoring beyond the original condition of the item -- he will frequently fill in holes and re-bore them when the initial machining was shoddy and led to a poor alignment of the parts.
anjc 4y ago
> Modern people overestimate how long we have been able to engineer things precisely I think you're underestimating it also. For example, micrometres capable of measuring imperceptible differences have existed for many centuries, same for manufacturing machines (lathes, mills) that can shape objects to imperceptible requirements. Cameras probably just don't require such precision.
- epicide 4y ago
  > Cameras probably just don't require such precision. Depends on the camera. I think if we combine both of your comments, we get a more clear picture of reality: we've had the ability to manufacture one instance of something with precision for a while, but not the ability to do so consistently, reliably, or quickly. i.e. tolerances have shrunk dramatically over the past century or so, along with time needed to produce things with such low tolerances. However, while that is generally true across the board, tolerances haven't all gotten to the same place! Materials involved, costs, time to build, and need for low tolerances still largely affect all of it, of course. And for some things, individual variations are even considered desirable.
- hef19898 4y ago
  Cameras always have been optical appliances. And as such they in deed do require a lot of precision. Especially those with changeable lenses, unless you don't mind your focal plane not being where your film, or nowadays sensor, is.
  - anjc 4y ago
    I presumed OP was talking about winders and so on. If shims were used for critical elements like optical alignment, I'm guessing that it's because this was the cheaper route to precision, rather than due to an inability to measure and manufacture precisely.
    - thfuran 4y ago
      Cost is always a factor in manufacturability.
    - steveBK123 4y ago
      Optics absolutely had shims in this era. Talking 1930-1950 era Leica lenses for example. 50mm lenses that you can’t just swap in a replacement element without adjusting shims because they would match them and shim at factory. I recall some lenses from the era having their actual exact focal length inscribed inside since they weren’t exactly 50mm and the variance was 0.2mm or so. Don’t even get me started on Soviet cameras.
      - hef19898 4y ago
        Recently I disassembled a Nikon lens, the first 24-120 with VR as the VR constantly engaged. The plan was to disconnect the VR unit completly and use, interim, without VR. Didn't work, as apparently apperture control (electronic in this lens) and focus (AF and manual, also electronic) go over the same platine. No VR, that worked, but also no focus or apperture. Point of the story, the lens had some shims to get into the proper focal plane relative to the camera. The model in question doesn't have the best sharpness reputation, some people put it on the worst 10 list of Nikon lenses. The sample I had is sharp so (VR didn't engage until 28 mm). My theory now is tgat the lens is sharp, and the bad rep comes from compromises during manufacturing (Thailand instead of Japan, with all the corresponding issues of setting up high precision operations in a new site), and potentially sub-par QC. Not sure if other lenses have shims as well, I'm kind of not inclined to disassemble perfectly working samples just to find out. So no, shims aren't per-se a bad sign but rather one of a certain calibration strategy. If those shims are everywere so, manufavturing quality propably isn't the best. Oh, one word on 50 mm lenses. Those are among the fastes, sharpest lenses ever regardless of manufacturer. And dirt cheap compared to "pro" models. Seems to be quite well understood optics. I do have two pre-AF Nikon lenses, and those are master pieces of precision mechanics, dating back to the late 70s and early 80s.
- riversflow 4y ago
  nit picks on this: Humans are capable of detecting extremely small details with their fingertips[1] anecdotally, this can be trained if you use your finger tips for precision work a lot, you can easily feel things that you can't see without significant magnification. Additionally, I would push back on "many centuries", the Machine age came about in the mid 19th century, so if were being generous, 300 years[2]. [1] https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130916110853.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130916110853.h... [2] https://archive.org/details/englishandameri01roegoog/page/n286/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/englishandameri01roegoog/page/n2... [2] is cited on the wikipedia page for micrometer. Cool book though, might read it.
Damogran6 4y ago
I had a 89 Corvette...designed in the late 70's early 80's before computers were generally used to do so. It was a mass of shims and slotted holes to get things to line up. I had a 1998 Corvette...designed in the early 90's with CADCAM. No shims. Things like a door latch and door made by entirely different companies, the three holes to attach the latch weren't shimmed or slotted, and the replacement fit exactly with no adjustment.
- steveBK123 4y ago
  Cars were exactly the other example I was going to use but cut my comment short. Anyone who has looked in the engine bay of a car from 50s/80s/00s/now can observe how tightly packed & compartmentalized everything is now. Early cars had a lot of room under the hood cuz mechanics were constantly in there tinkering, adjusting or replacing bits and pieces. It's incredible how long a car from a reliable brand lasts now, with minimal maintenance. EVs are another step function in this change as theres even fewer mechanical moving parts and fluid lines to worry about.
- gw99 4y ago
  Same as the old land rovers I used to work on. 2mm was considered miraculous tolerances anywhere. If something didn't line up it usually got hit until it did.
- spaetzleesser 4y ago
  “I had a 89 Corvette...designed in the late 70's early 80's before computers were generally used to do so. It was a mass of shims and slotted holes to get things to line up.” This has nothing to do with computers. Detroit just didn’t care about building decent cars back then. Mercedes and many others were able to build very nicely designed cars long before CAD/CAM was available.
  - dahfizz 4y ago
    Wouldn't you know it, the mercedes door handles from 1985 used slotted holes[1]. As much as you like them, Mercedes cannot transcend the technical abilities of the time. [1] https://www.ebay.com/itm/174693656016 https://www.ebay.com/itm/174693656016
aaaaaaaaaaab 4y ago
Resistor matching is still a thing to this day.
- noizejoy 4y ago
  And also tube matching for us tube guitar amp users.
jollyllama 4y ago
Indeed, Any maker who has attempted certain kinds of projects (involving vacuum, mechanisms, etc.) will understand this.
NikolaNovak 4y ago
That's fascinating, because recently I started thinking that I'm underestimating how long we've been able to craft (which may be different than engineer, or mass manufacture) things precisely. Recently I dug teeny bit into pocket watches, and then wrist watches, which turnst out were a thing way longer than I imagined!
- merely-unlikely 4y ago
  > Recently I dug teeny bit into pocket watches, and then wrist watches, which turnst out were a thing way longer than I imagined! Weren't these handcrafted by highly skilled and highly paid specialists for a long, long time. In contrast to more modern mass production.
  - NikolaNovak 4y ago
    Yes; so I think that's where scope or intent of statement may come in. I think: * We were able to craft, manually, things much more precisely for much longer than some of us thought * We were able to design/engineer/mass-manufacture precise things for far shorter than many of us thought
    - jandrese 4y ago
      What we have with CAD and robot aided assembly is making precision affordable. Which is probably a good reason the early steam engines didn't take off. You could build something in the lab, but there was no way to affordably mass produce a usefully efficient version.
- hef19898 4y ago
  They were. With the following caveats: non, or limited, interchangeability of parts, horrendous precision of showing the correct time. All of which can be traced back to low precision manifacturing.
grogenaut 4y ago
Modern items have stickers about warranty void if you open it, etc, other warnings like that. My 100% user serviceable coffee machine recommends you send it to them, cars encourage you to go to dealers. I don't see how that sticker is different in the 50s and now. There's a profit motive for them to fix it for you even if they don't charge it's still reputational (they stand behind their work). Having this sticker on my device doesn't make me think that I need to send it in often, it's more that they're covering their ass. The rest of your comment I'd agree with but a lot of things were designed around needing tight tolerances and using tight tolerances when you don't need them is not always a good idea. My earbuds won't charge if there's the tiniest bit of dust in the little recesses the charging pins go into or in the bottom of the well. Lower precision there would make them more reliable.
- 13of40 4y ago
  I think the most egregious one of these I've seen is a digital multimeter I have that says there are no user serviceable parts inside. Pretty standard, but it implies that even the sort of person who uses a multimeter isn't qualified to replace the fuse and 9v battery inside it.
anon_123g987 4y ago
> [...] the camera needed frequent enough service [...] Let's hope that in the future software engineering becomes mature enough that we don't need daily security updates.
- Huh1337 4y ago
  I think that needing legions of Archeologist-Programmers who will continuously tune the systems is much more likely.
  - steveBK123 4y ago
    Shhhh don’t ruin my retirement part time gig plans
    - Huh1337 4y ago
      Don't worry there's going to be a need for literal legions, and it still won't be nearly enough "I had a problem so I thought I'll use Java - now I have a ProblemFactory"
moffkalast 4y ago
Meanwhile the Swiss, making watches machined to an impossibly perfect degree since the 18th century: "I have no such weakness."
HeyLaughingBoy 4y ago
I was going to argue with you but luckily I checked first :-) My argument was that Foundations of Mechanical Accuracy (one of the canonical works of precision engineering literature) was published in the early 1900's, but no, it was actually in 1970. (https://pearl-hifi.com/06_Lit_Archive/15_Mfrs_Publications/Moore_Tools/Foundations_of_Mechanical_Accuracy.pdf https://pearl-hifi.com/06_Lit_Archive/15_Mfrs_Publications/M...) Can't believe that I was that far off! I might have been thinking of Precision Hole Location, but even that wasn't published until the 1940's.
treeman79 4y ago
Mad dad worked in airplane manufacturing. He once told a story about how every part in for something in a wing was in spec. But it was a foot to long all together. Not even close to fitting on the airplane That was in 80s.
- buildsjets 4y ago
  The entire fuselage for the last 737 NG to be built had to be scrapped, and a new one had to be fabricated by the supplier, because certain parts were so out of tolerance that the wings could not be fitted. https://twitter.com/aeroimageschris/status/1152442572553326592?lang=en https://twitter.com/aeroimageschris/status/11524425725533265... https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1427119 https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1427119 edit - “Mad Dad” - that’s either a great typo or great use of alliteration.

saalweachter 4y ago

One of my favorite YouTube channels, "my mechanics", is a restorer who specializes in restoring beyond the original condition of the item -- he will frequently fill in holes and re-bore them when the initial machining was shoddy and led to a poor alignment of the parts.

anjc 4y ago

> Modern people overestimate how long we have been able to engineer things precisely I think you're underestimating it also. For example, micrometres capable of measuring imperceptible differences have existed for many centuries, same for manufacturing machines (lathes, mills) that can shape objects to imperceptible requirements. Cameras probably just don't require such precision.

epicide 4y ago
> Cameras probably just don't require such precision. Depends on the camera. I think if we combine both of your comments, we get a more clear picture of reality: we've had the ability to manufacture one instance of something with precision for a while, but not the ability to do so consistently, reliably, or quickly. i.e. tolerances have shrunk dramatically over the past century or so, along with time needed to produce things with such low tolerances. However, while that is generally true across the board, tolerances haven't all gotten to the same place! Materials involved, costs, time to build, and need for low tolerances still largely affect all of it, of course. And for some things, individual variations are even considered desirable.
hef19898 4y ago
Cameras always have been optical appliances. And as such they in deed do require a lot of precision. Especially those with changeable lenses, unless you don't mind your focal plane not being where your film, or nowadays sensor, is.
- anjc 4y ago
  I presumed OP was talking about winders and so on. If shims were used for critical elements like optical alignment, I'm guessing that it's because this was the cheaper route to precision, rather than due to an inability to measure and manufacture precisely.
  - thfuran 4y ago
    Cost is always a factor in manufacturability.
  - steveBK123 4y ago
    Optics absolutely had shims in this era. Talking 1930-1950 era Leica lenses for example. 50mm lenses that you can’t just swap in a replacement element without adjusting shims because they would match them and shim at factory. I recall some lenses from the era having their actual exact focal length inscribed inside since they weren’t exactly 50mm and the variance was 0.2mm or so. Don’t even get me started on Soviet cameras.
    - hef19898 4y ago
      Recently I disassembled a Nikon lens, the first 24-120 with VR as the VR constantly engaged. The plan was to disconnect the VR unit completly and use, interim, without VR. Didn't work, as apparently apperture control (electronic in this lens) and focus (AF and manual, also electronic) go over the same platine. No VR, that worked, but also no focus or apperture. Point of the story, the lens had some shims to get into the proper focal plane relative to the camera. The model in question doesn't have the best sharpness reputation, some people put it on the worst 10 list of Nikon lenses. The sample I had is sharp so (VR didn't engage until 28 mm). My theory now is tgat the lens is sharp, and the bad rep comes from compromises during manufacturing (Thailand instead of Japan, with all the corresponding issues of setting up high precision operations in a new site), and potentially sub-par QC. Not sure if other lenses have shims as well, I'm kind of not inclined to disassemble perfectly working samples just to find out. So no, shims aren't per-se a bad sign but rather one of a certain calibration strategy. If those shims are everywere so, manufavturing quality propably isn't the best. Oh, one word on 50 mm lenses. Those are among the fastes, sharpest lenses ever regardless of manufacturer. And dirt cheap compared to "pro" models. Seems to be quite well understood optics. I do have two pre-AF Nikon lenses, and those are master pieces of precision mechanics, dating back to the late 70s and early 80s.
riversflow 4y ago
nit picks on this: Humans are capable of detecting extremely small details with their fingertips[1] anecdotally, this can be trained if you use your finger tips for precision work a lot, you can easily feel things that you can't see without significant magnification. Additionally, I would push back on "many centuries", the Machine age came about in the mid 19th century, so if were being generous, 300 years[2]. [1] https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130916110853.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130916110853.h... [2] https://archive.org/details/englishandameri01roegoog/page/n286/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/englishandameri01roegoog/page/n2... [2] is cited on the wikipedia page for micrometer. Cool book though, might read it.

Damogran6 4y ago

I had a 89 Corvette...designed in the late 70's early 80's before computers were generally used to do so. It was a mass of shims and slotted holes to get things to line up. I had a 1998 Corvette...designed in the early 90's with CADCAM. No shims. Things like a door latch and door made by entirely different companies, the three holes to attach the latch weren't shimmed or slotted, and the replacement fit exactly with no adjustment.

steveBK123 4y ago
Cars were exactly the other example I was going to use but cut my comment short. Anyone who has looked in the engine bay of a car from 50s/80s/00s/now can observe how tightly packed & compartmentalized everything is now. Early cars had a lot of room under the hood cuz mechanics were constantly in there tinkering, adjusting or replacing bits and pieces. It's incredible how long a car from a reliable brand lasts now, with minimal maintenance. EVs are another step function in this change as theres even fewer mechanical moving parts and fluid lines to worry about.
gw99 4y ago
Same as the old land rovers I used to work on. 2mm was considered miraculous tolerances anywhere. If something didn't line up it usually got hit until it did.
spaetzleesser 4y ago
“I had a 89 Corvette...designed in the late 70's early 80's before computers were generally used to do so. It was a mass of shims and slotted holes to get things to line up.” This has nothing to do with computers. Detroit just didn’t care about building decent cars back then. Mercedes and many others were able to build very nicely designed cars long before CAD/CAM was available.
- dahfizz 4y ago
  Wouldn't you know it, the mercedes door handles from 1985 used slotted holes[1]. As much as you like them, Mercedes cannot transcend the technical abilities of the time. [1] https://www.ebay.com/itm/174693656016 https://www.ebay.com/itm/174693656016

aaaaaaaaaaab 4y ago

Resistor matching is still a thing to this day.

noizejoy 4y ago
And also tube matching for us tube guitar amp users.

jollyllama 4y ago

Indeed, Any maker who has attempted certain kinds of projects (involving vacuum, mechanisms, etc.) will understand this.

NikolaNovak 4y ago

That's fascinating, because recently I started thinking that I'm underestimating how long we've been able to craft (which may be different than engineer, or mass manufacture) things precisely. Recently I dug teeny bit into pocket watches, and then wrist watches, which turnst out were a thing way longer than I imagined!

merely-unlikely 4y ago
> Recently I dug teeny bit into pocket watches, and then wrist watches, which turnst out were a thing way longer than I imagined! Weren't these handcrafted by highly skilled and highly paid specialists for a long, long time. In contrast to more modern mass production.
- NikolaNovak 4y ago
  Yes; so I think that's where scope or intent of statement may come in. I think: * We were able to craft, manually, things much more precisely for much longer than some of us thought * We were able to design/engineer/mass-manufacture precise things for far shorter than many of us thought
  - jandrese 4y ago
    What we have with CAD and robot aided assembly is making precision affordable. Which is probably a good reason the early steam engines didn't take off. You could build something in the lab, but there was no way to affordably mass produce a usefully efficient version.
hef19898 4y ago
They were. With the following caveats: non, or limited, interchangeability of parts, horrendous precision of showing the correct time. All of which can be traced back to low precision manifacturing.

grogenaut 4y ago

Modern items have stickers about warranty void if you open it, etc, other warnings like that. My 100% user serviceable coffee machine recommends you send it to them, cars encourage you to go to dealers. I don't see how that sticker is different in the 50s and now. There's a profit motive for them to fix it for you even if they don't charge it's still reputational (they stand behind their work). Having this sticker on my device doesn't make me think that I need to send it in often, it's more that they're covering their ass. The rest of your comment I'd agree with but a lot of things were designed around needing tight tolerances and using tight tolerances when you don't need them is not always a good idea. My earbuds won't charge if there's the tiniest bit of dust in the little recesses the charging pins go into or in the bottom of the well. Lower precision there would make them more reliable.

13of40 4y ago
I think the most egregious one of these I've seen is a digital multimeter I have that says there are no user serviceable parts inside. Pretty standard, but it implies that even the sort of person who uses a multimeter isn't qualified to replace the fuse and 9v battery inside it.

anon_123g987 4y ago

> [...] the camera needed frequent enough service [...] Let's hope that in the future software engineering becomes mature enough that we don't need daily security updates.

Huh1337 4y ago
I think that needing legions of Archeologist-Programmers who will continuously tune the systems is much more likely.
- steveBK123 4y ago
  Shhhh don’t ruin my retirement part time gig plans
  - Huh1337 4y ago
    Don't worry there's going to be a need for literal legions, and it still won't be nearly enough "I had a problem so I thought I'll use Java - now I have a ProblemFactory"

moffkalast 4y ago

Meanwhile the Swiss, making watches machined to an impossibly perfect degree since the 18th century: "I have no such weakness."

HeyLaughingBoy 4y ago

I was going to argue with you but luckily I checked first :-) My argument was that Foundations of Mechanical Accuracy (one of the canonical works of precision engineering literature) was published in the early 1900's, but no, it was actually in 1970. (https://pearl-hifi.com/06_Lit_Archive/15_Mfrs_Publications/Moore_Tools/Foundations_of_Mechanical_Accuracy.pdf https://pearl-hifi.com/06_Lit_Archive/15_Mfrs_Publications/M...) Can't believe that I was that far off! I might have been thinking of Precision Hole Location, but even that wasn't published until the 1940's.

treeman79 4y ago

Mad dad worked in airplane manufacturing. He once told a story about how every part in for something in a wing was in spec. But it was a foot to long all together. Not even close to fitting on the airplane That was in 80s.

buildsjets 4y ago
The entire fuselage for the last 737 NG to be built had to be scrapped, and a new one had to be fabricated by the supplier, because certain parts were so out of tolerance that the wings could not be fitted. https://twitter.com/aeroimageschris/status/1152442572553326592?lang=en https://twitter.com/aeroimageschris/status/11524425725533265... https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1427119 https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1427119 edit - “Mad Dad” - that’s either a great typo or great use of alliteration.