[Coco] Remove C66 and c65 or just snip one leg?

[Bruce W. Calkins]

IIRC: If I recall correctly they could be left unconnected when/if the 
CoCo 3 was returned to 128k.

Bruce W.


On 7/8/19 2:37 PM, Ed Snider wrote:
> Along with R22 and R23, they create a small RC delay on the /CAS and 
> /RAS lines
> which probably improves DRAM reliability in the standard 
> configuration.  That wouldn't
> be needed for the SRAM based upgrades.
>
> - Ed
>
>
>
>> On Jul 8, 2019, at 11:17 AM, rietveld rietveld 
>> <rietveldh at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> What is the reason they are needed for a 128k coco but not a 512k or 
>> bigger coco?
>>
>> Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.
>>   Original Message
>> From: Ed Snider
>> Sent: Monday, July 8, 2019 12:10 PM
>> To: CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts
>> Reply To: CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts
>> Subject: Re: [Coco] Remove C66 and c65 or just snip one leg?
>>
>>
>> Not really, but there's no reason to not simply remove them 
>> completely, unless you
>> really want to be able to go back to the original configuration (in a 
>> messy fashion).
>>
>> I'd just clip them out completely.  Seems a bit neater than having some
>> one-legged caps hanging out in there.
>>
>> - Ed
>>
>>
>>> On Jul 8, 2019, at 10:26 AM, rietveld rietveld 
>>> <rietveldh at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I just picked up a vintage PBJ 512 memory upgrade. The instructions 
>>> say to remove c65 and c66.   I have always just snipped one leg of 
>>> each. Is there any difference in removing them?
>>>
>>>
>>> I cut 65 and removed 66.   Everything seems to work fine?
>>>
>>> Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Coco mailing list
>>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>>> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>>
>> -- 
>> Coco mailing list
>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>>
>> -- 
>> Coco mailing list
>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>