P
Peter W.
Guest
It\'s really not my thing. When people say, \"Just recap anything
suspect\" and there might be fewer than half a dozen to do, the
prospect still fills me with horror. If they only knew how ironic the
\"Just\" bit strikes me in suggestions like that.
The problem with vintage equipment, however well designed and well built, is that parts within it age. Typically, items that are approaching, or exceeding 30 years old will have some marginal parts within. Further, if those parts are \'common\' as in \"many of them\", if one fails the others will not be far behind. Some truisms:
a) As in the Holland America commercials - Time is a precious commodity.
b) Most (not all) hobbyists are not limited by cost constraints for a few parts. So, a US$20-or-equivalent investment to save a valuable item is not outrageous.
c) Most of the effort in repairs is \'getting to it\' - the taking-apart, the testing, documenting, and then reassembly.
d) The actual repairs take very little time.
So, when whatever the device might be, when it is taken apart, *THEN* is the time to refurbish the entirety to the greatest extent possible - to avoid having to repeat the process if nothing else. Analogy: the engine in your vehicle spins one (1) bearing. You would replace _ALL_ of the bearings, as the incremental cost of the additional bearings against the cost of the tear-down is tiny, and the rewards significant. There is a school of thought that suggests that repairs are made only to the minimum necessary. Subscribers to this theory are the ones that one sees stranded on the side of the road in a blinding snowstorm.
Your power-supply went through a traumatic event - and it is supplying a complex and expensive piece of equipment. Consider it in that light.
As to soldering and technique - time and repetition will give you more confidence.
Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA