Wayne Pierzga wrote:
>Finally, I am considering sand-blasting the car in the areas which are
>rusted. I have received advice that this may not be a wise move as it
>promotes further rusting. I would appreciate sage advice......
I did that on my old sV Alpine. Needed to wear goggle to drive it after
that to keep the sand out of my eyes. Now, the area I hit was in the
footwells, etc., not under the car. YMMV.
STUART_BRENNAN wrote:
> Since we can't agree on TAC, rivets, cooling solutions, brake fluid,
> flywheel tooth counts, or much else, there's no hope of us agreeing
on
> a hat design. Someone will just have to DO IT according to their own
> tastes, then the rest of us will either buy one or not. What's the
> old saying about nothing great ever being done by a committee?
Way to go Stu; that's the spirit! Just tell us when they're ready...
Steve Laifman wrote:
>No product bearing a Chrysler family nane
>will be allowed to surpass any feature or performance of the
Fathercompany.
Not much chance of that, anyhow.
>And lot's of other good things.
If the new group continues Chrysler's trends of retro-look cars, how about
a six-wheeled touring car with little flags on the fenders?
Cool VT wrote:
>I don't think you need this expensive stuff if you are just looking for
sound
>insulation. There shouldn't be any problem with using the foam padding
used
>under house carpet.
Perhaps, but I don't think it approaches the sound issue the same way. The
heavy glue-down stuff like Dynamat is supposed to suppress (?) the
vibrations, the "drumming" of the metal panels in the first place, as
opposed to muffling the sound afterwards. Of course, at the price of foam
padding, I could afford to add a layer of that too, use both methods.
The way my hearing had deteriorated, way should I care, anyhow?
Lawrence R. Wright
Purchasing Analyst
Andrews Office Products, Divison of USOP
PH 301-386-7923 FX 301-386-5333
lrw@aop.com
|