EL 10x42 casing deterioration. (6 Viewers)

[dries1]

It is the chemicals that folks forget in their palms over time, it does it's damage.

Andy W.

 

[[email protected]]

"It is so acidic that it will eat holes in metal spectacle frames and some watch bracelets." You sound like the Alien! I am staying away from you!:-O

"In humans, sweat is hypoosmotic relative to plasma (i.e. less concentrated). Sweat is found at moderately acidic to neutral pH levels, typically between 4.5 and 7.0."

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

Dries, post 101,
Is this an hypothesis are is it a fact ? I ask it since I do not believe one word of your statement. If it were true 100 year old military binoculars (and we have quite a collection in our laboratory) would all be destroyed by now despite very intense use..
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

In addition to my post 103: where we find problems is with the cheaper kind of binoculars of which the body is covered with a kind of plastic that becomes very sticky after a period of use and that can only be removed with an organic solvent. We never found that in the better class binoculars like Nikon, Pentax, Canon, Minolta, Leica, Swarovski, Steiner, Zeiss, PZO, Goerz, Bush, Schütz, Krombach, Hensoldt, Hartmann, Meopta, Ross, Bausch and Lomb, Beck, Hertel und Reuss, Optolyth to name a few).
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[Kammerdiner]

In addition to my post 103: where we find problems is with the cheaper kind of binoculars of which the body is covered with a kind of plastic that becomes very sticky after a period of use and that can only be removed with an organic solvent. We never found that in the better class binoculars like Nikon, Pentax, Canon, Minolta, Leica, Swarovski, Steiner, Zeiss, PZO, Goerz, Bush, Schütz, Krombach, Hensoldt, Hartmann, Meopta, Ross, Bausch and Lomb, Beck, Hertel und Reuss, Optolyth to name a few).
Gijs van Ginkel

As I understand it, they add "plastisizers" to some of this plastic/rubber to make it softer. I had a wireless mouse that turned into a gooey mess.

On the other hand, my my 8.5 SV is over ten years old and has zero problems. It's quite obvious the binos in question were heavily/abusively used. Lee, sorry you aren't that abusive. Neither am I.

Mark

 

[Borjam]

There is a solution to clean those degraded armors that get sticky with time.

These radios had the same problem.


https://swling.com/blog/tag/how-to-clean-sticky-radios/

https://swling.com/blog/2018/08/etons-solution-for-sticky-radios/

I tried with part of the body of a Celestron Regal that got disgustingly sticky and it indeed fixed it.

 

[[email protected]]

Dries, post 101,
Is this an hypothesis are is it a fact ? I ask it since I do not believe one word of your statement. If it were true 100 year old military binoculars (and we have quite a collection in our laboratory) would all be destroyed by now despite very intense use..
Gijs van Ginkel

Dries has a valid point. Those 100-year-old military binoculars again do not have the soft, pliable comfortable armoring of the Swaro FP. They were designed for toughness and survival not comfort.

 

[[email protected]]

In addition to my post 103: where we find problems is with the cheaper kind of binoculars of which the body is covered with a kind of plastic that becomes very sticky after a period of use and that can only be removed with an organic solvent. We never found that in the better class binoculars like Nikon, Pentax, Canon, Minolta, Leica, Swarovski, Steiner, Zeiss, PZO, Goerz, Bush, Schütz, Krombach, Hensoldt, Hartmann, Meopta, Ross, Bausch and Lomb, Beck, Hertel und Reuss, Optolyth to name a few).
Gijs van Ginkel

I have read a lot of reviews and comments that say the armor on Cannon's especially the 10x30 IS are prone to becoming sticky with time.

 

[Troubador]

On the other hand the binos that we were discussing didn't have sticky armour, they had falling-apart armour. It makes me wonder whether the rubber had been inadequately cured. Curing is a process that creates the cross-links between the molecules and these cross-links are what give rubber its flexibility and its strength. Curing needs to be done at the right temperature and for the right length of time. Cut the time in order to get more product through the door in the day and the rubber doesn't develop its proper strength or flexibility. Pure speculation on my part of course.

Lee

 

[dries1]

Gijs, it is quite obvious that the covering on my NVA 7X40 or on my 1954 6X24 Kern, or my Notarem 8X32 is not the same material as the Swarovski armor. Also, there could have been a defect in the batch of armor, that is another possibility.
This person obviously treats his glass different than me, that much I do know.

Andy W.

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

The Swarovski coverings falling apart all had been exposed for a longer period to DEET and that causes a lot of damage.
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

Dries, post 110,
I fully agree that the coverings of the binoculars you mention are not the same as the ones from Swarovski, Zeiss, Leica etc. I find the coverings of these binoculars not soft, but they feel pleasant in my hands and are up to now very tough. Obviously very intense and hard use must affect coverings, but that looks to me as a normal process . The tires of my bike also become thinner and more vulnerabe in the course of the years of use.
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[dries1]

Swaro

The Swarovski coverings falling apart all had been exposed for a longer period to DEET and that causes a lot of damage.
Gijs van Ginkel

I tend to agree with this statement, though many will say, no I didn't get any on the binocular, I swear.

Andy W.

 

[Rob Hunt]

The Swarovski coverings falling apart all had been exposed for a longer period to DEET and that causes a lot of damage.
Gijs van Ginkel

I never use DEET and the armouring on my Swarovskis has been replaced twice and needs to be replaced again. This is in under 8 years of use. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I have not had problems with the armouring of Zeiss, Nikon and Bausch and Lomb binoculars which I have used previously.
One of the reasons I chose Swarovski binoculars was because of their excellent after sale service. However, I didn’t expect to have to return them, at my cost, every two years. Also of course I have to get along without them for the time of the repair.

 

[[email protected]]

I tend to agree with this statement, though many will say, no I didn't get any on the binocular, I swear.

Andy W.

You know that DEET will dissolve rubber and plastic when they use it to clean and restore headlights. Also, I have heard sunscreen can dissolve rubber. "The primary agents that cause rubber and plastics to deteriorate are radiation, high humidity, high temperature, oxygen and pollutant gases, and stress and other direct physical forces." Interesting article on rubber deterioration in the link below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTk9L2y5s20
https://www.canada.ca/en/conservati...tion-institute-notes/care-rubber-plastic.html

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

Rob Hunt, post 114,
In eight years time you have to replace the armoring of your Swarovski binoculars 3x? That is a lot. And you never had that problem with Zeiss, Nikon and Bausch and Lomb and you used these binoculars with the same frequency and with the same care? Remarkable.
I have used binoculars of different brands now for almost 50 years and some of them with great frequency and under very harsh circomstances and never ever was it necessary to replace any armoring.
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

Rob Hunt, post 114,
In addition to my post 116: I asked Jan van Daalen from House of Outdoor about his experiences with regard to repairing armoring of Swarovski compared to other binocular brands. His response was that there is no differene between Swarovski and other brands, but the cost difference is immense, since only Swarovski replaces the armor without cost. So Rob Hunt, you are a lucky/wise person by making the right choice to buy Swarovski.
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[dries1]

You know that DEET will dissolve rubber and plastic when they use it to clean and restore headlights. Also, I have heard sunscreen can dissolve rubber. "The primary agents that cause rubber and plastics to deteriorate are radiation, high humidity, high temperature, oxygen and pollutant gases, and stress and other direct physical forces." Interesting article on rubber deterioration in the link below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTk9L2y5s20
https://www.canada.ca/en/conservati...tion-institute-notes/care-rubber-plastic.html

Dennis,

Yes all potential causes and likely the reason the OP having to replace the armor so frequently, a combination of the above factors.

Andy W.

 

[tenex]

As to any possible issues with Swarovski armor specifically, Swaro's decision (when exactly?) to use more environmentally friendly chemicals in their armor has been mentioned here before, though not in this thread. When the $3k+ NL is sold with soap and a brush, someone in Absam must be aware of a real problem developing.

 

[NDhunter]

As to any possible issues with Swarovski armor specifically, Swaro's decision (when exactly?) to use more environmentally friendly chemicals in their armor has been mentioned here before, though not in this thread. When the $3k+ NL is sold with soap and a brush, someone in Absam must be aware of a real problem developing.

Good point, I do hope it is not because of the lost cause state of California that slaps a cancer warning sticker on many products, including Swaro. optics.

The armor on a binocular is not going to cause cancer in anything, even in a lab rat.

The photos of the really bad armor issues on this thread is not a good thing, and would dissuade me from buying a new Swarovski, if that is what they are putting on their new binoculars.

I hope the company understands that.

I do like Swarovski, I have around 12 of their binoculars, at the present time.
Jerry