I understand the request for posting answers to the list, but all too
often, this opens the door to those who wish to argue, "set you straight,"
even though they are working often with incomplete info. but always have
an answer.
Remember, the NEWEST of these beasts is now 20 years old, many
at least 40 years old, with many of the folks who now have them, weren't
even born when the cars were built! For the most part, these cars, with
few exceptions, suffer from the dreaded "PO" syndrome, ranging from kids
who could not afford gas, much less oil, and just hoped the car ran until
they got to high school, to the well-meaning, who just did not realize
that the new bearing needed to be packed. Some listers have attributed
problems to "manufacturing variations," when the real problem was sloppy
mechanic's work, either amateur or "professional."
I once had a guy wanted to argue with me over ball bearing torques,
because his GRANDFATHER was a great "wrench spinner" from the 30's and
40's, when neither the writer and his grandfather had a clue about bearing
design, uses, engineering, directional forces, load-bearing
considerations or anything else relating to this.
This is not meant to denigrate knowledge or skill that ONLY comes from
experience gained by doing the work, or that these folks have excellent
insight that comes from such experience, but this is not a basis for
argueing with engineering science.
I tend to answer directly to the writer, if I think I might have an
answer, because often additional info is needed from that person in order
to provide a meaningful answer, and I'm not going to write a five page,
"check this, then that, then the other," type missive and clutter up the
list.
Cheers.
On Wed, 28 Jun 2000, JC wrote:
>
> Here's my support.... (i.e. another "me too")
>
> It is very frustrating to go back through archives to find
> the question that you need answered only to see that the answer
> was never posted.
>
> Thanks to all those who do post their answers!
>
> JC
>
James A. Ruffner
|