The Model M 1391401 is pulling me away from my ergo boards

[vivalarevolución]

I'm not sure how I feel about this development.  I love my ergo boards.  But the solid feel of the 1391401 is causing some deep changes in my keyboard preferences.  I might have to retreat into the depths of my mind and do some serious introspection about priorities.

I did not feel this way about 52G9658, and I parted with that board without a struggle.  IBM did it right with the 1391401.

When I get my converter working for my F122, I'm afraid the ergo boards will be furloughed, and it will have nothing to do with a government shutdown.

I'm scared.  Changes are happening that are making me uncomfortable.

[fohat.digs]

Like driving a pickup truck after years of sports compacts.

[Tony]

Take a deep breath and relax. Polygamy is allowed.

[dorkvader]

I have a lexmark made 1391401 from 1992 and it's not THAT much more solid (compared to my modern unicomp). I much prefer my 1390120 from march 1986.

That said, I do enjoy my buckling springs (of any sort), and completely understand. For a week or so I put away my ergoDOX and brought out said 1390120. I ended up leaving the M at work and forcing myself to make do with the ergodox at home 'cause it's good for me (I'm finally learning proper typing habits)

[vivalarevolución]

I have a lexmark made 1391401 from 1992 and it's not THAT much more solid (compared to my modern unicomp). I much prefer my 1390120 from march 1986.

That said, I do enjoy my buckling springs (of any sort), and completely understand. For a week or so I put away my ergoDOX and brought out said 1390120. I ended up leaving the M at work and forcing myself to make do with the ergodox at home 'cause it's good for me (I'm finally learning proper typing habits)

The pre-Lexmark 1391401's have a heavier plate, right?

[fohat.digs]

I have a lexmark made 1391401 from 1992 and it's not THAT much more solid (compared to my modern unicomp). I much prefer my 1390120 from march 1986.

That said, I do enjoy my buckling springs (of any sort), and completely understand. For a week or so I put away my ergoDOX and brought out said 1390120. I ended up leaving the M at work and forcing myself to make do with the ergodox at home 'cause it's good for me (I'm finally learning proper typing habits)

The pre-Lexmark 1391401's have a heavier plate, right?

the heavy plates stopped about early-1989

[rowdy]

IBM certainly did do something right with the Model M!

[TimIsABat]

This is how I feel but reverse with my HHKB.

[heissler]

Traitor! Quick, hide before the staggered wrath of tp4 strikes thee who turned themselves away from the almighty Dox! 

[tipo33]

YES!  I knew I lit a flame

[1391406]

I have a lexmark made 1391401 from 1992 and it's not THAT much more solid (compared to my modern unicomp). I much prefer my 1390120 from march 1986.

That said, I do enjoy my buckling springs (of any sort), and completely understand. For a week or so I put away my ergoDOX and brought out said 1390120. I ended up leaving the M at work and forcing myself to make do with the ergodox at home 'cause it's good for me (I'm finally learning proper typing habits)

The pre-Lexmark 1391401's have a heavier plate, right?

the heavy plates stopped about early-1989

I'm not sure how much the heavier plates contribute to the overall weight of the keyboard, but I can't detect any noticeable difference in weight between my 1987 and 1992 Model M's, both of which were manufactured by IBM. The keys of the '87 are a little stiffer to type on but that's another story.

[ch_123]

The original heavy tempered steel plates disappeared some time between 87 and 89 (they probably switched in 87, and used up the stock as they went along, this is probably why you also see a mixture of Ms that have wire stabilizers on the vertical keys, and those which have the black stabilizer inserts in the barrels). I think they also thinned the plates again when they brought out the 42H1292 in the mid 90s as Ms lost about 200g in weight around then.

[snoopy]

The original heavy tempered steel plates disappeared some time between 87 and 89 (they probably switched in 87, and used up the stock as they went along, this is probably why you also see a mixture of Ms that have wire stabilizers on the vertical keys, and those which have the black stabilizer inserts in the barrels). I think they also thinned the plates again when they brought out the 42H1292 in the mid 90s as Ms lost about 200g in weight around then.

Do you know if there is also a difference between early ssks and later ones? They first appeared in 87, so I wonder if there are differences.

[vivalarevolución]

The original heavy tempered steel plates disappeared some time between 87 and 89 (they probably switched in 87, and used up the stock as they went along, this is probably why you also see a mixture of Ms that have wire stabilizers on the vertical keys, and those which have the black stabilizer inserts in the barrels). I think they also thinned the plates again when they brought out the 42H1292 in the mid 90s as Ms lost about 200g in weight around then.

Do you know if there is also a difference between early ssks and later ones? They first appeared in 87, so I wonder if there are differences.

I was wondering this exact same question and considered starting a new thread on it.

[ch_123]

The original heavy tempered steel plates disappeared some time between 87 and 89 (they probably switched in 87, and used up the stock as they went along, this is probably why you also see a mixture of Ms that have wire stabilizers on the vertical keys, and those which have the black stabilizer inserts in the barrels). I think they also thinned the plates again when they brought out the 42H1292 in the mid 90s as Ms lost about 200g in weight around then.

Do you know if there is also a difference between early ssks and later ones? They first appeared in 87, so I wonder if there are differences.

I've never seen an SSK with the older style plate, and given that the thin plates appeared in 1987, I'd say that they may have just used the new style with the SSK.

EDIT: Managed to put the reply in the quote box