LizzieMaine
Bartender
- Messages
- 33,699
- Location
- Where The Tourists Meet The Sea
dhermann1 said:Lizzie, that $149.00 in 1954 would be about equal to about $2,000 today. And as nice as the inside of the TV looks, I recall vividly that having the TV repairman come to your house (like a doctor!) was a way of life back then. Tubes burned out like nobody's business. The vertical hold would go bananas, or the horizintal, or both. Old TV's are nifty artifacts, but really a modern TV is an infinitely better value than the old ones were.
Ah, but there's the point -- when it broke down it *was* repairable. If you want to go value-for-value, the JVC monitor that went south on us at work cost us about $2000 -- and after only five years of use, it's gone. Pffft. Dead. Unrepairable. I've got a word for that, and it isn't "value."
dhermann1 said:The fridge, on the other hand, I would imagine is like iron. But what about the insulation level and energy efficiency?
You'd be surprised. I was curious about that myself and kept track of how long it was on and off for an average month, and then calculated based on its rated wattage, that it used about 675 KWH a year. That's less than half of what the average modern fridge, with all its doodads, will use, and even less than a modern "Energy Star" unit.
As long as the door seal is tight, you won't have any problems with insulation loss. And door seals can be replaced if necessary. The compressor is heremetically sealed in a permanent oil bath, and has never, and will never require service. All I've had to do with it since I've owned it is replace the thermostat, which cost me about fifteen dollars and half an hour of time. In 1989.