Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

WernHofter t1_j0z4bek wrote

By any chance you are selling it?

−2

thepokemonGOAT t1_j0z5vxy wrote

I’m looking for a star but I don’t see one. I see something that looks like an anvil with the letters CCCP above it. Is it meant to be a star?

19

daanikp OP t1_j0zcakk wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#982,790)

No cracking and discolouring of plastic. Turning mechanism has no rust. I just appreciate vintage stuff given what we have available to us today

3

Generation-WinVista t1_j101gkc wrote

I'm curious where precisely this was made. The USSR had some incredible accomplishments but since the war I've been learning that Ukraine, Belarus and Georgia to an extent were the "heavy lifters" of the USSR in many ways. Russia today has only a limited claim to any good that could be attributed to the USSR.

2

theplushpairing t1_j104kf5 wrote

Fun fact, soviets needed brands to identify which factory made what. They experimented with removing all branding and quality went downhill fast because you didn’t know which factory was slacking or making inferior parts.

92

SoItWasYouAllAlong t1_j10czbu wrote

Replying to Generation-WinVista (#984,877)

You should ease off the propaganda, bud. The following is the list of USSR Nobel laureates in science. Of a total of 8, Lev Landau is the only one I can identify as non-Russian (I'm not sure about it - he was born in Baku, which was in the Russian Empire at the time, but today is in Azerbaijan so I thought I'd count him as non-Russian).

​ Physics:

  • 1958 Pavel Cherenkov, Ilya Frank, Igor Tamm
  • 1962 Lev Landau
  • 1964 Nikolay Basov, Aleksandr Prokhorov
  • 1978 Pyotr Kapitsa

Chemistry:

  • 1956 Nikolai Semenov
−3

Fyvrfg t1_j10kp0x wrote

Replying to DiaMat2040 (#986,144)

It would create cheap crap so they could reach their quota. Soviet cars were pieces of shit you had to wait 5 years and more to buy. Even then everyone wanted a western one. Same thing with household appliances and clothes. "Soviet quality" is a myth carried by russian nationalists. Nobody wanted to make quality stuff, it just had to be acceptable

2

thiswilldefend t1_j10ksv5 wrote

its a freaking magnifying glass.... its not exactly something that ever needs to be replaced they are not exactly known for suddenly not working.

7

GumbertShpampboltz t1_j10wxng wrote

Oh my gosh, I still have one of these. Actually I had two different sizes. Smaller and bigger one

1

Cinemaphreak t1_j10xh2m wrote

>a state quality mark of the USSR which works as a certification of quality.

But does it denote quality....?. /s

0

CharlesDeBerry t1_j118pdr wrote

Replying to professor__doom (#987,753)

I find that in the past this was true, but many products I find today are made very very cheaply, even good quality brands I have bought before are breaking. It feels like we ended up with the same result just with more steps and more waste. So I am thinking maybe there needs to be some oversight in quality of consumer goods again to decrease waste and increase durability.

1

BoilerButtSlut t1_j11dr86 wrote

Replying to DiaMat2040 (#984,902)

No it would not have. My family in Hungary had soviet-made junk in the 80s.

It was all garbage. It's why it all disappeared as soon as the economies opened up. No one wanted a TV that takes 10+ minutes to warm up before it can show you a picture. No one wanted a deathtrap car made of cotton composite, no matter how easily it could be fixed with a screwdriver or how long it would last.

To be clear: they were capable of making quality stuff, but that was for export. That typically wasn't available for the average person.

0

lardcore t1_j11fiu2 wrote

Heh, this brings back memories of the smell of burning... well, everything - paper, wood, etc. Bought one as a kid back in my Soviet childhood. It was black, made of plastic but looked identical to this one. See that indent on the inside of the ring, a bit above the handle? It could be used to unscrew the inner ring and remove the glass lens, though it would the usually end up chipped due to falling on hard surfaces.

Fun times.

7

back-in-1999 t1_j11gsh4 wrote

Oh, man. I remember my grandma had one of these exact ones. Felt like heavy-duty machinery piece in my hands back in the 80's.

1

BoilerButtSlut t1_j11x70b wrote

Replying to DiaMat2040 (#986,144)

Planned obsolescence isn't a thing.

Source: am engineer.

To answer your question, they made junk because there wasn't any incentive to make anything good: the economy was closed. You couldn't import anything, so there was no competition. If there were only two TV makers, and no one got fired or lost their jobs because one TV was worse than the other, well it's just a race to the bottom to make it as shitty as possible.

I've used soviet-era stuff. My family lived with it for decades. It was garbage. It's not a coincidence it disappeared or broke shortly after everything opened up.

0

professor__doom t1_j120egz wrote

Replying to CharlesDeBerry (#988,204)

It's not like consumer goods manufacturers are making insane margins. Single digit operating profit is pretty normal in that industry.

The question is just "do consumers want to pay more for quality," and the answer is virtually always "not really."

The bulletproof appliances at your grandparents' house cost a FORTUNE back then compared to what people earned: https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/appliance-shopping-1959-vs-2012/

The cost of a washer/dryer set in 1959 represented 181.8 hours of work at the average hourly wage.

A washer/dryer set in 2012 represented 31 hours of work at the average hourly wage.

The newer model might only last 5-10 years instead of a lifetime. But businesses realized that that's fine for most consumers. Maybe even preferable - "I'll move before then; I don't want to pay extra so the next owner doesn't have to buy a washer and dryer."

3

seeker_of_knowledge t1_j14uaug wrote

Aesthetically beautiful AND built like a tank. What a wonderful item.

1