From cube-lovers-errors@mc.lcs.mit.edu Tue Mar 16 17:55:07 1999 Return-Path: Received: from sun28.aic.nrl.navy.mil (sun28.aic.nrl.navy.mil [132.250.84.38]) by mc.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1a/8.9.1-mod) with SMTP id RAA04015 for ; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 17:55:07 -0500 (EST) Precedence: bulk Errors-To: cube-lovers-errors@mc.lcs.mit.edu Message-Id: <714F77ADF9C1D111B8B60000F863155102DD6DAD@tbjexc2.tbj.dec.com> From: Norman Diamond To: cube-lovers@ai.mit.edu Subject: Old 4^3s Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 09:45:38 +0900 Noel Dillabough [noel@mud.ca] didn't write, but his message contained: >[Moderator's note: Has anyone else found aged, unused 4^3s more brittle than > the originals? Even the early ones were usually stiff; I needed to take > them apart and apply wax or other lubricant. And still they broke much > too easily, due to the tiny necks on the face centers. Perhaps the only > advantage aged, used cubes have is that the stiff ones whose owners didn't > lubricate them are long broken. --Dan] Nob Yoshigahara told me that he had designed a correction for the original design of the 4^3 cubes so that they would not fall apart. In my experience, early 4^3s easily fell apart, and then when a cubie hit the floor it easily broke. In my experience, later 4^3s don't easily fall apart. I would guess that the manufacturer accepted Nob-sensei's advice. -- Norman.Diamond@dec-j.co.jp [Speaking for Norman Diamond not for Compaq]