The prohibition against evidence of subsequent remedial measures extends to corrective or remedial measures and is not limited to "repairs."

Fed. R. Evid. 804(b)(1) advisory committee's note ("The common law did not limit the admissibility of former testimony to that given in an earlier trial of the same case, although it did require identity of issues as a means of insuring that the former handling of the witness was the equivalent of what would now be done if the opportunity...The hearsay exception for former testimony can apply even if the issues in the former proceeding were not the same or were not substantially the same as the issues in the proceeding in which the former testimony is offered.

United States v. Rhodes, 779 F.2d 1019, 1032 (4th Cir. 1985) (convictions for engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise and other controlled substance offenses; defendant challenged the admission of photocopies of the notebook's contents under Federal Rules of Evidence 1003 and 1001(4); convictions...A duplicate of an original is admissible to the same extent as the original if (1) there is no genuine question about the authenticity of the original, and (2) admission of the duplicate in lieu of the original is not unfair.

Fed. R. Evid. 807(B) (statement admissible under Rule 807 only if "the statement is more probative on the point for which it is offered than any other evidence which the proponent can procure through reasonable efforts").The hearsay exception created by Federal Rule of Evidence 807 or a comparable State rule applies only if the the affected statement is more probative on the point for which it is offered than any other evidence which the proponent can procure through reasonable efforts.