Tapio
Thanks for the update. I apreciate very much your test.
The good thing is the SS is coming "all good" and this will break the edge on those who have tonnes of 99 rubber in favor to the ones not having it.
Once I thought indoor (competition) will be only for the "elite" tanII 99 owners.
_at_Phedon: 10LB..wow! and I thought I was lucky with 1 :).
You have rubber for 5 fold grandchildren generations!
Well still i am lucky and happy, and im spliting my rubber in the 4 guys we probbly go to Serbia in 2012. Still a lot if wel used.
--- In Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com, Tapio Linkosalo <tapio.linkosalo@...> wrote:
>
> On 24.3.2011 21:27, izgo wrote:
>
> > Tapio rubber tests show 09/2009 only 5% less than TanII 05/99, so the
> > may and june batch are a bit superior. hope this one is even closer than
> > that.
>
> Unfortunataly I did not get any 2009/05 or 2009/06 batch to test, but
> the 2009/01 and 2009/09 test quite similar, both within a half procent
> of each less than half procent from the best SS that I had tested
> before, the 2004/04. I actually managed to get a few pounds of 2011/01,
> and this tested ever so slightly better than 04/04. Unfortunately, while
> I was e-mailing FAI model supply, that batch was already sold out...
>
> But to summarize it seems to me that 2009 was consistent in the rubber
> quality, and SS has reached the best level it has ever been, that 5.5%
> below the 1999/05 batch energy return. So you still may see difference
> to Tan II, but I doubt that you could really tell the difference between
> the good batches of SS.
>
> The attached picture includes the test for 11/01. Note that the error
> bars indicate +- one standard deviation within the batch. However, this
> is calculated _before_ temperature correction, and as some TanII batches
> (especially May99) are tested in multiple small batches over a long
> period of time and varying temperatures, the larger standard deviation
> rather reflects the temperature effect. Within each sample batch, the
> variation in the energy return was consistent (less than 1%), so even
> 99/05 does not seem to have any variation to consider within the batch.
>
>
>
> -Tapio-
>
Received on Fri Mar 25 2011 - 06:51:11 CET
This archive was generated by Yannick on Sat Dec 14 2019 - 19:13:46 CET