TI-58C and TI-59

[Xorand]

I've been wanting a pair of TI-58C and TI-59 calculators in as pristine condition as I could find. I finally got a very clean 58C the other day (with original box, books, etc.). After fixing a broken battery terminal (common), I popped in a rebuilt battery pack and it works great.



The TI-59 card reader works, but not consistently. I've had it apart a couple times and verified the drive wheel is solid. I had another parts TI-59 with a fairly solid card reader, as well, and swapped them back and forth without much luck. I've found that the flat sandwich wiring they use for those is brittle after all these years and ruined one during that testing. Having a fully working one is still a goal, but I'm not keen on taking the card reader out any more to preserve its wiring.

[Maximilian Hohmann]

Hello!

(03-27-2019 08:46 PM)Xorand Wrote:  The TI-59 card reader works, but not consistently.

I would say that this is the normal behaviour of this card reader. Mine did this from day one when I got the calculator new in 1978... Sometimes it would read the card without problems three times in a row and then it would reject the same card another three times. It always needed regular use of the supplied "drive roller cleaning" and "head cleaning" cards. So I consider mine to be "working" if it is able to occasionalle read a card ...

Regards
Max

[Garth Wilson]

I have fond memories of my 58c which was my first programmable, and later my 59. I never, ever, had any problem with the card reader. 0.00% failure. I also never ran the head-cleaning card. I never touched the magnetic surface with my fingers though.

[Dave Britten]

These are pretty cool machines, and the TI59 is arguably more powerful than the HP67. But of course it's not RPN, and the keyboard is kind of awful.

The TI-66 is a nice modernized version of the 58C, with an LCD screen and much more reliable keyboard, although you can't use the old ROM modules with it.

[Maximilian Hohmann]

Hello!

(03-29-2019 01:46 AM)Garth Wilson Wrote:  I never touched the magnetic surface with my fingers though.

Me neither. That was the era of vinyl records and one knew very well how to treat delicate storage media :-) But I had my father's Hp-67 for comparison whose card reader worked much more consistently than that of my Ti59.

(03-29-2019 01:46 AM)Garth Wilson Wrote:  But of course it's not RPN, and the keyboard is kind of awful.

But it had AOS which I personally prefer over RPN (if I am allowed to write that here...). And the keyboard was indeed a bit bouncy, but no calculator keyboard ever made before or after that time matched that of the pre 1980 HP calculators.

Regards
Max

[Thomas Okken]

(03-29-2019 01:54 PM)Maximilian Hohmann Wrote:  And the keyboard was indeed a bit bouncy, but no calculator keyboard ever made before or after that time matched that of the pre 1980 HP calculators.

I agree as far as the feel is concerned, but not regarding bounciness. The latest HP that I have owned with a really great keyboard feel was a 41CX from 1984, but while the later HPs I have owned did not feel as nice (10C, 16C, 28S, 42S, 48G), none of them were the least bit bouncy.

(The latest HP I own today is a 50g, which I haven't used enough yet to form an opinion about its keyboard quality.)

[Jlouis]

(03-29-2019 05:50 PM)Thomas Okken Wrote:  

(03-29-2019 01:54 PM)Maximilian Hohmann Wrote:  And the keyboard was indeed a bit bouncy, but no calculator keyboard ever made before or after that time matched that of the pre 1980 HP calculators.

I agree as far as the feel is concerned, but not regarding bounciness. The latest HP that I have owned with a really great keyboard feel was a 41CX from 1984, but while the later HPs I have owned did not feel as nice (10C, 16C, 28S, 42S, 48G), none of them were the least bit bouncy.

(The latest HP I own today is a 50g, which I haven't used enough yet to form an opinion about its keyboard quality.)

The HP 48S and SX have a keyboard as nice as the 41, IMHO.

[grsbanks]

(03-29-2019 01:02 PM)Dave Britten Wrote:  The TI-66 is a nice modernized version of the 58C, with an LCD screen and much more reliable keyboard, although you can't use the old ROM modules with it.

But one thing you can do with the TI-66 is go and have a drink while it's crunching numbers. I do have very fond memories of the TI-66, it got me through my "Baccalauréat" some 30+ years ago, but it runs about as fast as molasses in the middle of the night in mid-winter

[Massimo Gnerucci]

(03-29-2019 06:30 PM)Jlouis Wrote:  

(03-29-2019 05:50 PM)Thomas Okken Wrote:  I agree as far as the feel is concerned, but not regarding bounciness. The latest HP that I have owned with a really great keyboard feel was a 41CX from 1984, but while the later HPs I have owned did not feel as nice (10C, 16C, 28S, 42S, 48G), none of them were the least bit bouncy.

(The latest HP I own today is a 50g, which I haven't used enough yet to form an opinion about its keyboard quality.)

The HP 48S and SX have a keyboard as nice as the 41, IMHO.

No, sorry.
While really good, not that good.

[Maximilian Hohmann]

Hello!

(03-29-2019 06:37 PM)grsbanks Wrote:  But one thing you can do with the TI-66 is go and have a drink while it's crunching numbers. I do have very fond memories of the TI-66, it got me through my "Baccalauréat" some 30+ years ago, but it runs about as fast as molasses in the middle of the night in mid-winter

By today's standards these calculators are definitely slow (The Ti-58/59 even more than your Ti-66). But back then it didn't feel slow at all. The Ti-59 was my first programmable calculator and the alternative would have been to repeatedly type in everything into a non-programmable one. That would really have been slow!

The first time I actually felt a calculator to be slow (and I really don't care about speed in pocket calculators much) was when I added an HP-48SX to my collection. Trying out some of the examples from the manual, especially some computer algebra and graphing, really stressed my patience to the limit.

Cheers
Max

[Gene]

Re: the TI-66, I disagree about it's speed vis a vis the TI-58C / TI-59.

From the loops of addition speed benchmark:

TI-66
Count: 210
Code: + 1 = RST

TI 58C
Count: 387
Code: + 1 = RST

TI-59
Count: 635
Code: 1 + RST


I believe the TI-66 despite having alpha key legends in programs and LCD and two-three years younger was a BIG step back in speed compared to the 58/59.

[Maximilian Hohmann]

Hello Gene!

(03-29-2019 09:58 PM)Gene Wrote:  I believe the TI-66 despite having alpha key legends in programs and LCD and two-three years younger was a BIG step back in speed compared to the 58/59.

Don't remember _that_ kind of a difference... I have a Ti66 somewhere, but probably, as with many boring calculators in my collection, only did a quick test for functionality, removed the batteries and threw it in the "boring calculators" box ;-)

As already written, my Ti-59 never gave me the feeling of being very slow. Until sometimes around 1982 the guy next to me at a univeristy lecture pulled out a brand new Casio fx 601 (or 602). We had some numerical differential equation excercise to do and I remember that this Casio thing took as many seconds to solve the problem than my Ti59 required minutes. And he had plenty of memory left, the batteries lasted for a year and it would not lose it's memory when being turned off.

Regards
Max

[grsbanks]

(03-30-2019 12:35 PM)Maximilian Hohmann Wrote:  As already written, my Ti-59 never gave me the feeling of being very slow.

It was pretty fast for the time. The point I was making was that the TI-66 was really slow, and Gene's test shows that your TI-59 ran 3x as fast as it.

[Gene]

The TI-58C was always my favorite of the bunch. Constant Memory was always better IMO than an unreliable card reader...of course, it had half the memory, but I took that trade off.

The TI-58C is among the three (or four) TI models I recommended all HP collectors have from that side of the competition.

The others were an SR-50 original, the SR-56 and perhaps a TI-30 because of its ground-breaking price / performance point.

This is in my HHC presentation on the SR-56 a couple of years back which can be found via google if anyone is interested.

[Maximilian Hohmann]

Hello!

(03-30-2019 02:13 PM)Gene Wrote:  This is in my HHC presentation on the SR-56 a couple of years back which can be found via google if anyone is interested.

Don't watch that presentation! I warned you ;-) After I saw it I had to get an SR-56 right away... They are rare now, but it should still be possible to find one for something like 50$/Euro.
Very hard to find and expensive is the Ti-58C. Still missing in my collection. I have a Ti-58 and several 59s, but have so far been unable to get a 58C for a price which I am willing to pay.

Regards
Max

NB: If one wants to actually use software from a module (e.g. Aviation or Leisure) then the 58C has no big advantage over the "plain" 58.

[Massimo Gnerucci]

(03-30-2019 02:44 PM)Maximilian Hohmann Wrote:  Very hard to find and expensive is the Ti-58C. Still missing in my collection. I have a Ti-58 and several 59s, but have so far been unable to get a 58C for a price which I am willing to pay.

17 years ago I got one from France, just because it was coupled with a HP-29C. Total amount €30.

:D

[badaze]

I love this series of calculators. I prefer the SR 52.

Since the photo has been shot I owned another boxed TI SR56 I could not let pass since I was the sole bidder and had it for less than 40€. And a blue jeans box boxed TI 57.
The boxed TI 57 on the photograph is the one I bought in 1981.


The TI 58C is mint. User manuals have still their plastic foils. Battery compartment is so neat that I think the machine was never used before.


Another picture.


Link to TI 58C.
http://www.emmella.fr/page2192-2079-7670...-6625.html

[toml_12953]

(03-29-2019 01:46 AM)Garth Wilson Wrote:  I never touched the magnetic surface with my fingers though.

How did you get the cards out of their very tight vinyl sleeves in the storage cases? I always had a bit of finger oil on the edges of my cards from extracting them. I never had a read or write error, though. In fact I still have a 59 and it reads and writes perfectly every time.

[toml_12953]

(03-30-2019 11:25 PM)badaze Wrote:  I love this series of calculators. I prefer the SR 52.

The 52 was my first programmable. It was amazing at the time! It certainly was thick, though! I wasn't pleased with the comparison tests. My friend had an SR-56 and its programs were usually much shorter because of the use of the t register for tests. I then got a TI-59 which used the t register as well. I'll always have a fond memory of the 52, though.

Does your 52 still read and write cards without error?

[badaze]

I have 4 SR 52. None with working card reader. 3 have broken battery terminal but work.