oivind.enger at im.uib.no
Sat Oct 10 08:15:03 EST 1998
We have them both (plus an old 9600) There are two main differences as far
as I can see:
1) The 2400 can run a maximum of 24 samples in one run while the 9700 works
In a 96 tubes format.
2) The 2400 is based on a traditional cooling machine like in your
refrigerator, while the 9700 is based on Peltier technology (which Cetus in
fact condemned just a few years ago claiming that the traditional technology
was much more durable.
It is my experience that I very rarely need the pover of the 96 tuybes
formate, and in fact buying two (or ever three!) 2400's would make you much
more flexible. Then you can run them at different temperatures and perform
your temperature optimalization much faster.
all the best
Michael Black, Ph.D. wrote in message
<361eb9ab.4349423 at news.ld.centuryinter.net>...
>Hello everyone, another query about thermocyclers.
>I have quotes for a Perkin-Elmer 2400 and 9700, and am trying to
>justify the $4200 USD price difference. Does anyone have experience
>with these two machines? Aside from the interchangable block
>configuration on the 9700, is it really any better a machine than the
>2400? Any inside info would be appreciated.
>Michael Black, Ph.D.
>Univ. Texas at Austin
>Marine Science Institute
>mblack at utmsi.utexas.edu
>* opinions expressed are, as far *
>* as I know, just my own. *
More information about the Methods