Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Tape\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Tape\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. Tape (score: 1): Author: n4zr@contesting.com (Pete Smith); Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 06:16:34 -0700; Typically, the cognoscenti recommend using Scotch 88 or other, more exotic products to seal coax connections. The other day, I was talking with the people at the local electrical supply about tape, a; /archives//html/Towertalk/1996-10/msg00278.html (7,078 bytes)
2. Tape (score: 1): Author: seay@alaska.net (Del Seay); Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 07:01:43 -0700; Pete: I checked and '88' is still being made by MMM. And no - '33+ is a poor replacement. I don't have access to all the specs, but try it in the cold and you will see it is not even close. '88 is no; /archives//html/Towertalk/1996-10/msg00279.html (7,229 bytes)
3. Tape (score: 1): Author: K7LXC@aol.com (K7LXC@aol.com); Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 11:28:37 -0400; Hi, Pete -- The Scotch Super 33+ and Super 88 have identical formulations, specs and performance. The ONLY difference is that 33 is 7.0 mils thick and the 88 is 8.5 mils thick; that's it. Some of the; /archives//html/Towertalk/1996-10/msg00281.html (8,045 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]