Noticed on Ebay
02-10-2006 | 04:52 PM
#261
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Noticed on Ebay
It took me 2 days of hosing to almost get all the crud out of my 86 CJ's
boxed frame. Needless to say the mud laying in the box had totally
rotted it out.
YJ's are the same up here, especially at the tail end.
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
(More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)
Jerry Bransford wrote:
>
> Dave, I helped a friend do a complete 100% frame-up three-year
> restoration on a '73 CJ5 he had owned and pampered since it was
> brand-new. Yes it has a C channel frame. Even though its frame is a C
> channel, the frame was still well rusted and needed lots of restorative
> reinforcement work and welding despite the fact it had never lived in an
> area where the roads were salted. I will never go along with anyone who
> feels a C channel frame will outlive a fully boxed frame due to rust.
> That's a purely theoretical argument in my book that isn't supported by
> evidence that boxed Jeep frames have any kind of a significant rust
> issue. Besides, a boxed frame is simply inherently much stronger... any
> first-year mechanical engineer knows that. And with entire vehicles
> with boxed frames like the TJ being dipped in rust preventive
> protectants, the argument that an open frame will hold up better than a
> boxed frame is not one I'll ever go along with. To me, the C channel
> thing is just an argument with a hidden agenda.
>
> Jerry
>
> Dave Milne wrote:
> > I'm with Bill on C channel frame rails - I know they have to be heavy to get
> > proper stiffness but they don't rust out so badly as box section.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> > "Simon Juncal" <SPAMERSSUCK@usefirstinitialandlastnameATerols.com > wrote in
> > message news:_6ednfxci-lKC3HenZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@rcn.net...
> >
> >>L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> >>
> >>>Jim, haven't you ever gone to a drag race??????????!!!!!! Pro Stock is
> >>>carburated, gasoline, no nitrous, and run six second over two hundred:
> >>>http://www.allpar.com/racing/nhra/neon-nhra.html 1700 hp Pro Stock
> >>
> >>This is your problem Bill; you seem to think that because you can find
> >>some nich where older technology is still in use, that the older
> >>technology is inherently better than the newer. C channel fram rails,
> >>Diesel, leaf springs, and now you're touting PUSH RODS?!? LOL...
> >>
> >>--
> >>Simon
> >>"I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain." -- Robert A. Heinlein
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Jerry Bransford
> PP-ASEL N6TAY
> See the Geezer Jeep at
> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
boxed frame. Needless to say the mud laying in the box had totally
rotted it out.
YJ's are the same up here, especially at the tail end.
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
(More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)
Jerry Bransford wrote:
>
> Dave, I helped a friend do a complete 100% frame-up three-year
> restoration on a '73 CJ5 he had owned and pampered since it was
> brand-new. Yes it has a C channel frame. Even though its frame is a C
> channel, the frame was still well rusted and needed lots of restorative
> reinforcement work and welding despite the fact it had never lived in an
> area where the roads were salted. I will never go along with anyone who
> feels a C channel frame will outlive a fully boxed frame due to rust.
> That's a purely theoretical argument in my book that isn't supported by
> evidence that boxed Jeep frames have any kind of a significant rust
> issue. Besides, a boxed frame is simply inherently much stronger... any
> first-year mechanical engineer knows that. And with entire vehicles
> with boxed frames like the TJ being dipped in rust preventive
> protectants, the argument that an open frame will hold up better than a
> boxed frame is not one I'll ever go along with. To me, the C channel
> thing is just an argument with a hidden agenda.
>
> Jerry
>
> Dave Milne wrote:
> > I'm with Bill on C channel frame rails - I know they have to be heavy to get
> > proper stiffness but they don't rust out so badly as box section.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> > "Simon Juncal" <SPAMERSSUCK@usefirstinitialandlastnameATerols.com > wrote in
> > message news:_6ednfxci-lKC3HenZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@rcn.net...
> >
> >>L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> >>
> >>>Jim, haven't you ever gone to a drag race??????????!!!!!! Pro Stock is
> >>>carburated, gasoline, no nitrous, and run six second over two hundred:
> >>>http://www.allpar.com/racing/nhra/neon-nhra.html 1700 hp Pro Stock
> >>
> >>This is your problem Bill; you seem to think that because you can find
> >>some nich where older technology is still in use, that the older
> >>technology is inherently better than the newer. C channel fram rails,
> >>Diesel, leaf springs, and now you're touting PUSH RODS?!? LOL...
> >>
> >>--
> >>Simon
> >>"I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain." -- Robert A. Heinlein
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Jerry Bransford
> PP-ASEL N6TAY
> See the Geezer Jeep at
> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
02-10-2006 | 04:52 PM
#262
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Noticed on Ebay
It took me 2 days of hosing to almost get all the crud out of my 86 CJ's
boxed frame. Needless to say the mud laying in the box had totally
rotted it out.
YJ's are the same up here, especially at the tail end.
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
(More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)
Jerry Bransford wrote:
>
> Dave, I helped a friend do a complete 100% frame-up three-year
> restoration on a '73 CJ5 he had owned and pampered since it was
> brand-new. Yes it has a C channel frame. Even though its frame is a C
> channel, the frame was still well rusted and needed lots of restorative
> reinforcement work and welding despite the fact it had never lived in an
> area where the roads were salted. I will never go along with anyone who
> feels a C channel frame will outlive a fully boxed frame due to rust.
> That's a purely theoretical argument in my book that isn't supported by
> evidence that boxed Jeep frames have any kind of a significant rust
> issue. Besides, a boxed frame is simply inherently much stronger... any
> first-year mechanical engineer knows that. And with entire vehicles
> with boxed frames like the TJ being dipped in rust preventive
> protectants, the argument that an open frame will hold up better than a
> boxed frame is not one I'll ever go along with. To me, the C channel
> thing is just an argument with a hidden agenda.
>
> Jerry
>
> Dave Milne wrote:
> > I'm with Bill on C channel frame rails - I know they have to be heavy to get
> > proper stiffness but they don't rust out so badly as box section.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> > "Simon Juncal" <SPAMERSSUCK@usefirstinitialandlastnameATerols.com > wrote in
> > message news:_6ednfxci-lKC3HenZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@rcn.net...
> >
> >>L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> >>
> >>>Jim, haven't you ever gone to a drag race??????????!!!!!! Pro Stock is
> >>>carburated, gasoline, no nitrous, and run six second over two hundred:
> >>>http://www.allpar.com/racing/nhra/neon-nhra.html 1700 hp Pro Stock
> >>
> >>This is your problem Bill; you seem to think that because you can find
> >>some nich where older technology is still in use, that the older
> >>technology is inherently better than the newer. C channel fram rails,
> >>Diesel, leaf springs, and now you're touting PUSH RODS?!? LOL...
> >>
> >>--
> >>Simon
> >>"I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain." -- Robert A. Heinlein
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Jerry Bransford
> PP-ASEL N6TAY
> See the Geezer Jeep at
> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
boxed frame. Needless to say the mud laying in the box had totally
rotted it out.
YJ's are the same up here, especially at the tail end.
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
(More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)
Jerry Bransford wrote:
>
> Dave, I helped a friend do a complete 100% frame-up three-year
> restoration on a '73 CJ5 he had owned and pampered since it was
> brand-new. Yes it has a C channel frame. Even though its frame is a C
> channel, the frame was still well rusted and needed lots of restorative
> reinforcement work and welding despite the fact it had never lived in an
> area where the roads were salted. I will never go along with anyone who
> feels a C channel frame will outlive a fully boxed frame due to rust.
> That's a purely theoretical argument in my book that isn't supported by
> evidence that boxed Jeep frames have any kind of a significant rust
> issue. Besides, a boxed frame is simply inherently much stronger... any
> first-year mechanical engineer knows that. And with entire vehicles
> with boxed frames like the TJ being dipped in rust preventive
> protectants, the argument that an open frame will hold up better than a
> boxed frame is not one I'll ever go along with. To me, the C channel
> thing is just an argument with a hidden agenda.
>
> Jerry
>
> Dave Milne wrote:
> > I'm with Bill on C channel frame rails - I know they have to be heavy to get
> > proper stiffness but they don't rust out so badly as box section.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> > "Simon Juncal" <SPAMERSSUCK@usefirstinitialandlastnameATerols.com > wrote in
> > message news:_6ednfxci-lKC3HenZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@rcn.net...
> >
> >>L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> >>
> >>>Jim, haven't you ever gone to a drag race??????????!!!!!! Pro Stock is
> >>>carburated, gasoline, no nitrous, and run six second over two hundred:
> >>>http://www.allpar.com/racing/nhra/neon-nhra.html 1700 hp Pro Stock
> >>
> >>This is your problem Bill; you seem to think that because you can find
> >>some nich where older technology is still in use, that the older
> >>technology is inherently better than the newer. C channel fram rails,
> >>Diesel, leaf springs, and now you're touting PUSH RODS?!? LOL...
> >>
> >>--
> >>Simon
> >>"I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain." -- Robert A. Heinlein
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Jerry Bransford
> PP-ASEL N6TAY
> See the Geezer Jeep at
> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
02-10-2006 | 04:52 PM
#263
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Noticed on Ebay
It took me 2 days of hosing to almost get all the crud out of my 86 CJ's
boxed frame. Needless to say the mud laying in the box had totally
rotted it out.
YJ's are the same up here, especially at the tail end.
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
(More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)
Jerry Bransford wrote:
>
> Dave, I helped a friend do a complete 100% frame-up three-year
> restoration on a '73 CJ5 he had owned and pampered since it was
> brand-new. Yes it has a C channel frame. Even though its frame is a C
> channel, the frame was still well rusted and needed lots of restorative
> reinforcement work and welding despite the fact it had never lived in an
> area where the roads were salted. I will never go along with anyone who
> feels a C channel frame will outlive a fully boxed frame due to rust.
> That's a purely theoretical argument in my book that isn't supported by
> evidence that boxed Jeep frames have any kind of a significant rust
> issue. Besides, a boxed frame is simply inherently much stronger... any
> first-year mechanical engineer knows that. And with entire vehicles
> with boxed frames like the TJ being dipped in rust preventive
> protectants, the argument that an open frame will hold up better than a
> boxed frame is not one I'll ever go along with. To me, the C channel
> thing is just an argument with a hidden agenda.
>
> Jerry
>
> Dave Milne wrote:
> > I'm with Bill on C channel frame rails - I know they have to be heavy to get
> > proper stiffness but they don't rust out so badly as box section.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> > "Simon Juncal" <SPAMERSSUCK@usefirstinitialandlastnameATerols.com > wrote in
> > message news:_6ednfxci-lKC3HenZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@rcn.net...
> >
> >>L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> >>
> >>>Jim, haven't you ever gone to a drag race??????????!!!!!! Pro Stock is
> >>>carburated, gasoline, no nitrous, and run six second over two hundred:
> >>>http://www.allpar.com/racing/nhra/neon-nhra.html 1700 hp Pro Stock
> >>
> >>This is your problem Bill; you seem to think that because you can find
> >>some nich where older technology is still in use, that the older
> >>technology is inherently better than the newer. C channel fram rails,
> >>Diesel, leaf springs, and now you're touting PUSH RODS?!? LOL...
> >>
> >>--
> >>Simon
> >>"I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain." -- Robert A. Heinlein
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Jerry Bransford
> PP-ASEL N6TAY
> See the Geezer Jeep at
> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
boxed frame. Needless to say the mud laying in the box had totally
rotted it out.
YJ's are the same up here, especially at the tail end.
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
(More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)
Jerry Bransford wrote:
>
> Dave, I helped a friend do a complete 100% frame-up three-year
> restoration on a '73 CJ5 he had owned and pampered since it was
> brand-new. Yes it has a C channel frame. Even though its frame is a C
> channel, the frame was still well rusted and needed lots of restorative
> reinforcement work and welding despite the fact it had never lived in an
> area where the roads were salted. I will never go along with anyone who
> feels a C channel frame will outlive a fully boxed frame due to rust.
> That's a purely theoretical argument in my book that isn't supported by
> evidence that boxed Jeep frames have any kind of a significant rust
> issue. Besides, a boxed frame is simply inherently much stronger... any
> first-year mechanical engineer knows that. And with entire vehicles
> with boxed frames like the TJ being dipped in rust preventive
> protectants, the argument that an open frame will hold up better than a
> boxed frame is not one I'll ever go along with. To me, the C channel
> thing is just an argument with a hidden agenda.
>
> Jerry
>
> Dave Milne wrote:
> > I'm with Bill on C channel frame rails - I know they have to be heavy to get
> > proper stiffness but they don't rust out so badly as box section.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> > "Simon Juncal" <SPAMERSSUCK@usefirstinitialandlastnameATerols.com > wrote in
> > message news:_6ednfxci-lKC3HenZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@rcn.net...
> >
> >>L.W.(ßill) ------ III wrote:
> >>
> >>>Jim, haven't you ever gone to a drag race??????????!!!!!! Pro Stock is
> >>>carburated, gasoline, no nitrous, and run six second over two hundred:
> >>>http://www.allpar.com/racing/nhra/neon-nhra.html 1700 hp Pro Stock
> >>
> >>This is your problem Bill; you seem to think that because you can find
> >>some nich where older technology is still in use, that the older
> >>technology is inherently better than the newer. C channel fram rails,
> >>Diesel, leaf springs, and now you're touting PUSH RODS?!? LOL...
> >>
> >>--
> >>Simon
> >>"I may be wrong, but I'm not uncertain." -- Robert A. Heinlein
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Jerry Bransford
> PP-ASEL N6TAY
> See the Geezer Jeep at
> http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
02-10-2006 | 05:25 PM
#264
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Noticed on Ebay
Thanks you for bring up leaf springs like Ford switched back to
when strength and stability where needed for their Excursion and Pickups
above truckettes size:
http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/exc...eatures/specs/
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Simon Juncal wrote:
>
> This is your problem Bill; you seem to think that because you can find
> some nich where older technology is still in use, that the older
> technology is inherently better than the newer. C channel fram rails,
> Diesel, leaf springs, and now you're touting PUSH RODS?!? LOL...
>
> --
> Simon
when strength and stability where needed for their Excursion and Pickups
above truckettes size:
http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/exc...eatures/specs/
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Simon Juncal wrote:
>
> This is your problem Bill; you seem to think that because you can find
> some nich where older technology is still in use, that the older
> technology is inherently better than the newer. C channel fram rails,
> Diesel, leaf springs, and now you're touting PUSH RODS?!? LOL...
>
> --
> Simon
02-10-2006 | 05:25 PM
#265
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Noticed on Ebay
Thanks you for bring up leaf springs like Ford switched back to
when strength and stability where needed for their Excursion and Pickups
above truckettes size:
http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/exc...eatures/specs/
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Simon Juncal wrote:
>
> This is your problem Bill; you seem to think that because you can find
> some nich where older technology is still in use, that the older
> technology is inherently better than the newer. C channel fram rails,
> Diesel, leaf springs, and now you're touting PUSH RODS?!? LOL...
>
> --
> Simon
when strength and stability where needed for their Excursion and Pickups
above truckettes size:
http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/exc...eatures/specs/
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Simon Juncal wrote:
>
> This is your problem Bill; you seem to think that because you can find
> some nich where older technology is still in use, that the older
> technology is inherently better than the newer. C channel fram rails,
> Diesel, leaf springs, and now you're touting PUSH RODS?!? LOL...
>
> --
> Simon
02-10-2006 | 05:25 PM
#266
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Noticed on Ebay
Thanks you for bring up leaf springs like Ford switched back to
when strength and stability where needed for their Excursion and Pickups
above truckettes size:
http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/exc...eatures/specs/
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Simon Juncal wrote:
>
> This is your problem Bill; you seem to think that because you can find
> some nich where older technology is still in use, that the older
> technology is inherently better than the newer. C channel fram rails,
> Diesel, leaf springs, and now you're touting PUSH RODS?!? LOL...
>
> --
> Simon
when strength and stability where needed for their Excursion and Pickups
above truckettes size:
http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/exc...eatures/specs/
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Simon Juncal wrote:
>
> This is your problem Bill; you seem to think that because you can find
> some nich where older technology is still in use, that the older
> technology is inherently better than the newer. C channel fram rails,
> Diesel, leaf springs, and now you're touting PUSH RODS?!? LOL...
>
> --
> Simon
02-10-2006 | 05:25 PM
#267
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Noticed on Ebay
Thanks you for bring up leaf springs like Ford switched back to
when strength and stability where needed for their Excursion and Pickups
above truckettes size:
http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/exc...eatures/specs/
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Simon Juncal wrote:
>
> This is your problem Bill; you seem to think that because you can find
> some nich where older technology is still in use, that the older
> technology is inherently better than the newer. C channel fram rails,
> Diesel, leaf springs, and now you're touting PUSH RODS?!? LOL...
>
> --
> Simon
when strength and stability where needed for their Excursion and Pickups
above truckettes size:
http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/exc...eatures/specs/
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Simon Juncal wrote:
>
> This is your problem Bill; you seem to think that because you can find
> some nich where older technology is still in use, that the older
> technology is inherently better than the newer. C channel fram rails,
> Diesel, leaf springs, and now you're touting PUSH RODS?!? LOL...
>
> --
> Simon
02-10-2006 | 08:53 PM
#268
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Noticed on Ebay
Excursion only:
http://www.fordvehicles.com/trucks/s...eatures/specs/
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:43ED12C4.3201EF19@***.net...
> Thanks you for bring up leaf springs like Ford switched back to
> when strength and stability where needed for their Excursion and Pickups
> above truckettes size:
> http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/exc...eatures/specs/
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Simon Juncal wrote:
>>
>> This is your problem Bill; you seem to think that because you can find
>> some nich where older technology is still in use, that the older
>> technology is inherently better than the newer. C channel fram rails,
>> Diesel, leaf springs, and now you're touting PUSH RODS?!? LOL...
>>
>> --
>> Simon
http://www.fordvehicles.com/trucks/s...eatures/specs/
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:43ED12C4.3201EF19@***.net...
> Thanks you for bring up leaf springs like Ford switched back to
> when strength and stability where needed for their Excursion and Pickups
> above truckettes size:
> http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/exc...eatures/specs/
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Simon Juncal wrote:
>>
>> This is your problem Bill; you seem to think that because you can find
>> some nich where older technology is still in use, that the older
>> technology is inherently better than the newer. C channel fram rails,
>> Diesel, leaf springs, and now you're touting PUSH RODS?!? LOL...
>>
>> --
>> Simon
02-10-2006 | 08:53 PM
#269
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Noticed on Ebay
Excursion only:
http://www.fordvehicles.com/trucks/s...eatures/specs/
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:43ED12C4.3201EF19@***.net...
> Thanks you for bring up leaf springs like Ford switched back to
> when strength and stability where needed for their Excursion and Pickups
> above truckettes size:
> http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/exc...eatures/specs/
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Simon Juncal wrote:
>>
>> This is your problem Bill; you seem to think that because you can find
>> some nich where older technology is still in use, that the older
>> technology is inherently better than the newer. C channel fram rails,
>> Diesel, leaf springs, and now you're touting PUSH RODS?!? LOL...
>>
>> --
>> Simon
http://www.fordvehicles.com/trucks/s...eatures/specs/
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:43ED12C4.3201EF19@***.net...
> Thanks you for bring up leaf springs like Ford switched back to
> when strength and stability where needed for their Excursion and Pickups
> above truckettes size:
> http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/exc...eatures/specs/
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Simon Juncal wrote:
>>
>> This is your problem Bill; you seem to think that because you can find
>> some nich where older technology is still in use, that the older
>> technology is inherently better than the newer. C channel fram rails,
>> Diesel, leaf springs, and now you're touting PUSH RODS?!? LOL...
>>
>> --
>> Simon
02-10-2006 | 08:53 PM
#270
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Noticed on Ebay
Excursion only:
http://www.fordvehicles.com/trucks/s...eatures/specs/
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:43ED12C4.3201EF19@***.net...
> Thanks you for bring up leaf springs like Ford switched back to
> when strength and stability where needed for their Excursion and Pickups
> above truckettes size:
> http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/exc...eatures/specs/
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Simon Juncal wrote:
>>
>> This is your problem Bill; you seem to think that because you can find
>> some nich where older technology is still in use, that the older
>> technology is inherently better than the newer. C channel fram rails,
>> Diesel, leaf springs, and now you're touting PUSH RODS?!? LOL...
>>
>> --
>> Simon
http://www.fordvehicles.com/trucks/s...eatures/specs/
"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:43ED12C4.3201EF19@***.net...
> Thanks you for bring up leaf springs like Ford switched back to
> when strength and stability where needed for their Excursion and Pickups
> above truckettes size:
> http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/exc...eatures/specs/
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Simon Juncal wrote:
>>
>> This is your problem Bill; you seem to think that because you can find
>> some nich where older technology is still in use, that the older
>> technology is inherently better than the newer. C channel fram rails,
>> Diesel, leaf springs, and now you're touting PUSH RODS?!? LOL...
>>
>> --
>> Simon