Table 3.

Comparison of rate data from various machines.

	[[4]Cu]2+ → [[5]Cu]2+	[[5]Cu]+ → [[4]Cu]+
[Cu(1 & 2)]+ (shuttle)	k298 = 2 × 10−5 s−1 (20 °C; t½ = 9.6 h)	k298 = 1 s−1 (t½ = 0.7 s)
[Cu(5 & 6)]+ (shuttle)	k298 = 1.4 × 10−4 s−1, t½ = 1.4 h	10−4 s−1 ≤ k298 ≤ 10−2 s−1; t½ > 69 s
[Cu(3 & 4)]+ (pirouette)	k298 = 0.007 s−1, t½ = 99 s	k298 = 17 s−1; t½ = 0.04 s
[Cu(75 & 76)]+ (n = 1)	k298 = 5 s−1, t½ = 0.14 s	k298 > 500 s−1, t½ < 1.4 ms
[Cu(75 & 76)]+ (n = 3)	kf = 12 s−1, t½ = 0.06 s (–40 °C)	kb > 1200 s−1, t½ < 0.6 ms (–40 °C)
[Cu(77& 78)]+ (shuttle)	k298 = 0.8 s−1, t½ = 0.9 s	k298 = 50 s−1, t½ = 14 ms
[Cu(79 & 80)]+ (shuttle)	k298 = 2 s−1, t½ = 0.35 s	k298 > 50 s−1, t½ < 14 ms
[Zn(18)]2+ + 85 and [Cu(85)]+ + 18	k298 = 4.3 × 10−3 s−1, t1/2 = 161 s (Zn2+)	k298 = 6.8 × 10−3 s−1
[Cu(81 & 82)]+ (pirouette)	k298 = 620 s−1, t½ < 1.1 ms in CH2Cl2	–
[Cu(83 & 84)]+ (shuttle)	k298 = 2 s−1	–