6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
#241
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
In article <3F8EF426.253A65B6@***.net>, L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) ------
III <----------@***.net> writes:
> I guess Kaiser Jeep's M-151, (the sole owner of Jeep '53-'70) that
>used four wheel independent suspension, doesn't count:
>http://www.olive-drab.com/idphoto/id_photos_m151.php3 and:
>http://www.off-road.com/~early/m151.html
I was under the impression Ford designed and built those.
* * *
Matt Macchiarolo
www.townpeddler.com
www.wolverine4wd.org
http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html
III <----------@***.net> writes:
> I guess Kaiser Jeep's M-151, (the sole owner of Jeep '53-'70) that
>used four wheel independent suspension, doesn't count:
>http://www.olive-drab.com/idphoto/id_photos_m151.php3 and:
>http://www.off-road.com/~early/m151.html
I was under the impression Ford designed and built those.
* * *
Matt Macchiarolo
www.townpeddler.com
www.wolverine4wd.org
http://wolverine4wd.org/rigs/macchiarolo_ml.html
#242
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 20:04:30 GMT, Lon Stowell
<LonDot.Stowell@ComcastPeriod.Net> shared the following:
>Approximately 10/16/03 12:23, travis uttered for posterity:
>> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 19:10:54 GMT, "Nathan Collier"
>> <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> shared the following:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>1) the stock 4.0 inline 6 produces more power than the stock 304 v8 _ever_
>>>did. thats right, the _most_ the 304 ever produced was 150hp. that was
>>>down to 125hp in '80 and thats LESS than todays 4 cylinder (147hp) joshua.
>>>the numbers are clear http://www.off-road.com/jeep/swb/articles/specgrid.htm
>>>2) those doing v8 swaps are not swapping in lethargic 304's.
>>
>> *gasp* Say it ain't so! :-)
>> No, I know... I looked up the numbers, too. I still want a V8 but
>> probably not for the right reasons. The one in the '76 CJ I'm going
>> to go look at on Saturday should be 150hp, but that's with a 2bbl and
>> I think it's also with single exhaust. I'm just wondering out loud
>> how much hp it would make with an Edelbrock performer intake and a
>> good sized 4bbl carb (600 CFM or so), and some headers and less
>> restrictive exhaust system. I'd wanna beef up the drivetrain before
>> doing anything like that, but do you think you could probably get a
>> good 200 or so hp out of that engine with the changes I listed above?
>
> If you go for "truck" high torque intake manifold and a good 4 barrel
> you might be able to get up to the level of the 4.0 I-6 before it
> has been stroked...
>
> For the 4 barrel you'll want one with fairly small 2 barrel section
> and a good progressive open of the extra barrels. This way you can
> crawl at low RPM with good torque, but out on the highway you can
> also pass vehicles other than those made by Schwinn safely. Except
> for a bad tendency to set fires, the old Quadrajet made a pretty
> good 2-4 conversion with the Edelbrock torquer manifold.
>
> But the newer I-6 gets 195 hp out of the box, and with nothing but
> a good catback you can beat that 200. Add a good header, oversize
> exhaust, low restriction cat [if needed] and muffler and easy in the
> 220 range. Plus it has a larger oil and cooling capability in addition
> to far more torque in the lower rpm.
>
> Then later as you lose your sanity, stroke it or add a blower, or
> both.
I guess I feel like this. I'm about to buy a Jeep. An older CJ. I
have a choice of buying one with a I6 or one with a V8 if I stick
factory options. The V8 puts out more power. To me, more power is a
good thing, that's all. I believe you guys that the I6 is very
capable. I know the newer 4.0 engine puts out more torque/hp than an
old 304. There are going to be very few 4.0 engines in the older CJs
I'm looking at. Actually I haven't seen a single one yet. So my
options are the I6 or the V8. I choose the V8.
--
Travis
http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html
The meek shall inherit the earth. After I'm finished with it.
:wq!
<LonDot.Stowell@ComcastPeriod.Net> shared the following:
>Approximately 10/16/03 12:23, travis uttered for posterity:
>> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 19:10:54 GMT, "Nathan Collier"
>> <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> shared the following:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>1) the stock 4.0 inline 6 produces more power than the stock 304 v8 _ever_
>>>did. thats right, the _most_ the 304 ever produced was 150hp. that was
>>>down to 125hp in '80 and thats LESS than todays 4 cylinder (147hp) joshua.
>>>the numbers are clear http://www.off-road.com/jeep/swb/articles/specgrid.htm
>>>2) those doing v8 swaps are not swapping in lethargic 304's.
>>
>> *gasp* Say it ain't so! :-)
>> No, I know... I looked up the numbers, too. I still want a V8 but
>> probably not for the right reasons. The one in the '76 CJ I'm going
>> to go look at on Saturday should be 150hp, but that's with a 2bbl and
>> I think it's also with single exhaust. I'm just wondering out loud
>> how much hp it would make with an Edelbrock performer intake and a
>> good sized 4bbl carb (600 CFM or so), and some headers and less
>> restrictive exhaust system. I'd wanna beef up the drivetrain before
>> doing anything like that, but do you think you could probably get a
>> good 200 or so hp out of that engine with the changes I listed above?
>
> If you go for "truck" high torque intake manifold and a good 4 barrel
> you might be able to get up to the level of the 4.0 I-6 before it
> has been stroked...
>
> For the 4 barrel you'll want one with fairly small 2 barrel section
> and a good progressive open of the extra barrels. This way you can
> crawl at low RPM with good torque, but out on the highway you can
> also pass vehicles other than those made by Schwinn safely. Except
> for a bad tendency to set fires, the old Quadrajet made a pretty
> good 2-4 conversion with the Edelbrock torquer manifold.
>
> But the newer I-6 gets 195 hp out of the box, and with nothing but
> a good catback you can beat that 200. Add a good header, oversize
> exhaust, low restriction cat [if needed] and muffler and easy in the
> 220 range. Plus it has a larger oil and cooling capability in addition
> to far more torque in the lower rpm.
>
> Then later as you lose your sanity, stroke it or add a blower, or
> both.
I guess I feel like this. I'm about to buy a Jeep. An older CJ. I
have a choice of buying one with a I6 or one with a V8 if I stick
factory options. The V8 puts out more power. To me, more power is a
good thing, that's all. I believe you guys that the I6 is very
capable. I know the newer 4.0 engine puts out more torque/hp than an
old 304. There are going to be very few 4.0 engines in the older CJs
I'm looking at. Actually I haven't seen a single one yet. So my
options are the I6 or the V8. I choose the V8.
--
Travis
http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html
The meek shall inherit the earth. After I'm finished with it.
:wq!
#243
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 20:04:30 GMT, Lon Stowell
<LonDot.Stowell@ComcastPeriod.Net> shared the following:
>Approximately 10/16/03 12:23, travis uttered for posterity:
>> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 19:10:54 GMT, "Nathan Collier"
>> <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> shared the following:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>1) the stock 4.0 inline 6 produces more power than the stock 304 v8 _ever_
>>>did. thats right, the _most_ the 304 ever produced was 150hp. that was
>>>down to 125hp in '80 and thats LESS than todays 4 cylinder (147hp) joshua.
>>>the numbers are clear http://www.off-road.com/jeep/swb/articles/specgrid.htm
>>>2) those doing v8 swaps are not swapping in lethargic 304's.
>>
>> *gasp* Say it ain't so! :-)
>> No, I know... I looked up the numbers, too. I still want a V8 but
>> probably not for the right reasons. The one in the '76 CJ I'm going
>> to go look at on Saturday should be 150hp, but that's with a 2bbl and
>> I think it's also with single exhaust. I'm just wondering out loud
>> how much hp it would make with an Edelbrock performer intake and a
>> good sized 4bbl carb (600 CFM or so), and some headers and less
>> restrictive exhaust system. I'd wanna beef up the drivetrain before
>> doing anything like that, but do you think you could probably get a
>> good 200 or so hp out of that engine with the changes I listed above?
>
> If you go for "truck" high torque intake manifold and a good 4 barrel
> you might be able to get up to the level of the 4.0 I-6 before it
> has been stroked...
>
> For the 4 barrel you'll want one with fairly small 2 barrel section
> and a good progressive open of the extra barrels. This way you can
> crawl at low RPM with good torque, but out on the highway you can
> also pass vehicles other than those made by Schwinn safely. Except
> for a bad tendency to set fires, the old Quadrajet made a pretty
> good 2-4 conversion with the Edelbrock torquer manifold.
>
> But the newer I-6 gets 195 hp out of the box, and with nothing but
> a good catback you can beat that 200. Add a good header, oversize
> exhaust, low restriction cat [if needed] and muffler and easy in the
> 220 range. Plus it has a larger oil and cooling capability in addition
> to far more torque in the lower rpm.
>
> Then later as you lose your sanity, stroke it or add a blower, or
> both.
I guess I feel like this. I'm about to buy a Jeep. An older CJ. I
have a choice of buying one with a I6 or one with a V8 if I stick
factory options. The V8 puts out more power. To me, more power is a
good thing, that's all. I believe you guys that the I6 is very
capable. I know the newer 4.0 engine puts out more torque/hp than an
old 304. There are going to be very few 4.0 engines in the older CJs
I'm looking at. Actually I haven't seen a single one yet. So my
options are the I6 or the V8. I choose the V8.
--
Travis
http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html
The meek shall inherit the earth. After I'm finished with it.
:wq!
<LonDot.Stowell@ComcastPeriod.Net> shared the following:
>Approximately 10/16/03 12:23, travis uttered for posterity:
>> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 19:10:54 GMT, "Nathan Collier"
>> <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> shared the following:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>1) the stock 4.0 inline 6 produces more power than the stock 304 v8 _ever_
>>>did. thats right, the _most_ the 304 ever produced was 150hp. that was
>>>down to 125hp in '80 and thats LESS than todays 4 cylinder (147hp) joshua.
>>>the numbers are clear http://www.off-road.com/jeep/swb/articles/specgrid.htm
>>>2) those doing v8 swaps are not swapping in lethargic 304's.
>>
>> *gasp* Say it ain't so! :-)
>> No, I know... I looked up the numbers, too. I still want a V8 but
>> probably not for the right reasons. The one in the '76 CJ I'm going
>> to go look at on Saturday should be 150hp, but that's with a 2bbl and
>> I think it's also with single exhaust. I'm just wondering out loud
>> how much hp it would make with an Edelbrock performer intake and a
>> good sized 4bbl carb (600 CFM or so), and some headers and less
>> restrictive exhaust system. I'd wanna beef up the drivetrain before
>> doing anything like that, but do you think you could probably get a
>> good 200 or so hp out of that engine with the changes I listed above?
>
> If you go for "truck" high torque intake manifold and a good 4 barrel
> you might be able to get up to the level of the 4.0 I-6 before it
> has been stroked...
>
> For the 4 barrel you'll want one with fairly small 2 barrel section
> and a good progressive open of the extra barrels. This way you can
> crawl at low RPM with good torque, but out on the highway you can
> also pass vehicles other than those made by Schwinn safely. Except
> for a bad tendency to set fires, the old Quadrajet made a pretty
> good 2-4 conversion with the Edelbrock torquer manifold.
>
> But the newer I-6 gets 195 hp out of the box, and with nothing but
> a good catback you can beat that 200. Add a good header, oversize
> exhaust, low restriction cat [if needed] and muffler and easy in the
> 220 range. Plus it has a larger oil and cooling capability in addition
> to far more torque in the lower rpm.
>
> Then later as you lose your sanity, stroke it or add a blower, or
> both.
I guess I feel like this. I'm about to buy a Jeep. An older CJ. I
have a choice of buying one with a I6 or one with a V8 if I stick
factory options. The V8 puts out more power. To me, more power is a
good thing, that's all. I believe you guys that the I6 is very
capable. I know the newer 4.0 engine puts out more torque/hp than an
old 304. There are going to be very few 4.0 engines in the older CJs
I'm looking at. Actually I haven't seen a single one yet. So my
options are the I6 or the V8. I choose the V8.
--
Travis
http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html
The meek shall inherit the earth. After I'm finished with it.
:wq!
#244
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 20:04:30 GMT, Lon Stowell
<LonDot.Stowell@ComcastPeriod.Net> shared the following:
>Approximately 10/16/03 12:23, travis uttered for posterity:
>> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 19:10:54 GMT, "Nathan Collier"
>> <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> shared the following:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>1) the stock 4.0 inline 6 produces more power than the stock 304 v8 _ever_
>>>did. thats right, the _most_ the 304 ever produced was 150hp. that was
>>>down to 125hp in '80 and thats LESS than todays 4 cylinder (147hp) joshua.
>>>the numbers are clear http://www.off-road.com/jeep/swb/articles/specgrid.htm
>>>2) those doing v8 swaps are not swapping in lethargic 304's.
>>
>> *gasp* Say it ain't so! :-)
>> No, I know... I looked up the numbers, too. I still want a V8 but
>> probably not for the right reasons. The one in the '76 CJ I'm going
>> to go look at on Saturday should be 150hp, but that's with a 2bbl and
>> I think it's also with single exhaust. I'm just wondering out loud
>> how much hp it would make with an Edelbrock performer intake and a
>> good sized 4bbl carb (600 CFM or so), and some headers and less
>> restrictive exhaust system. I'd wanna beef up the drivetrain before
>> doing anything like that, but do you think you could probably get a
>> good 200 or so hp out of that engine with the changes I listed above?
>
> If you go for "truck" high torque intake manifold and a good 4 barrel
> you might be able to get up to the level of the 4.0 I-6 before it
> has been stroked...
>
> For the 4 barrel you'll want one with fairly small 2 barrel section
> and a good progressive open of the extra barrels. This way you can
> crawl at low RPM with good torque, but out on the highway you can
> also pass vehicles other than those made by Schwinn safely. Except
> for a bad tendency to set fires, the old Quadrajet made a pretty
> good 2-4 conversion with the Edelbrock torquer manifold.
>
> But the newer I-6 gets 195 hp out of the box, and with nothing but
> a good catback you can beat that 200. Add a good header, oversize
> exhaust, low restriction cat [if needed] and muffler and easy in the
> 220 range. Plus it has a larger oil and cooling capability in addition
> to far more torque in the lower rpm.
>
> Then later as you lose your sanity, stroke it or add a blower, or
> both.
I guess I feel like this. I'm about to buy a Jeep. An older CJ. I
have a choice of buying one with a I6 or one with a V8 if I stick
factory options. The V8 puts out more power. To me, more power is a
good thing, that's all. I believe you guys that the I6 is very
capable. I know the newer 4.0 engine puts out more torque/hp than an
old 304. There are going to be very few 4.0 engines in the older CJs
I'm looking at. Actually I haven't seen a single one yet. So my
options are the I6 or the V8. I choose the V8.
--
Travis
http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html
The meek shall inherit the earth. After I'm finished with it.
:wq!
<LonDot.Stowell@ComcastPeriod.Net> shared the following:
>Approximately 10/16/03 12:23, travis uttered for posterity:
>> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 19:10:54 GMT, "Nathan Collier"
>> <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> shared the following:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>1) the stock 4.0 inline 6 produces more power than the stock 304 v8 _ever_
>>>did. thats right, the _most_ the 304 ever produced was 150hp. that was
>>>down to 125hp in '80 and thats LESS than todays 4 cylinder (147hp) joshua.
>>>the numbers are clear http://www.off-road.com/jeep/swb/articles/specgrid.htm
>>>2) those doing v8 swaps are not swapping in lethargic 304's.
>>
>> *gasp* Say it ain't so! :-)
>> No, I know... I looked up the numbers, too. I still want a V8 but
>> probably not for the right reasons. The one in the '76 CJ I'm going
>> to go look at on Saturday should be 150hp, but that's with a 2bbl and
>> I think it's also with single exhaust. I'm just wondering out loud
>> how much hp it would make with an Edelbrock performer intake and a
>> good sized 4bbl carb (600 CFM or so), and some headers and less
>> restrictive exhaust system. I'd wanna beef up the drivetrain before
>> doing anything like that, but do you think you could probably get a
>> good 200 or so hp out of that engine with the changes I listed above?
>
> If you go for "truck" high torque intake manifold and a good 4 barrel
> you might be able to get up to the level of the 4.0 I-6 before it
> has been stroked...
>
> For the 4 barrel you'll want one with fairly small 2 barrel section
> and a good progressive open of the extra barrels. This way you can
> crawl at low RPM with good torque, but out on the highway you can
> also pass vehicles other than those made by Schwinn safely. Except
> for a bad tendency to set fires, the old Quadrajet made a pretty
> good 2-4 conversion with the Edelbrock torquer manifold.
>
> But the newer I-6 gets 195 hp out of the box, and with nothing but
> a good catback you can beat that 200. Add a good header, oversize
> exhaust, low restriction cat [if needed] and muffler and easy in the
> 220 range. Plus it has a larger oil and cooling capability in addition
> to far more torque in the lower rpm.
>
> Then later as you lose your sanity, stroke it or add a blower, or
> both.
I guess I feel like this. I'm about to buy a Jeep. An older CJ. I
have a choice of buying one with a I6 or one with a V8 if I stick
factory options. The V8 puts out more power. To me, more power is a
good thing, that's all. I believe you guys that the I6 is very
capable. I know the newer 4.0 engine puts out more torque/hp than an
old 304. There are going to be very few 4.0 engines in the older CJs
I'm looking at. Actually I haven't seen a single one yet. So my
options are the I6 or the V8. I choose the V8.
--
Travis
http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html
The meek shall inherit the earth. After I'm finished with it.
:wq!
#245
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
You're right, Nate, the MUTT is not a Jeep. The MUTT is a dangerous attempt
at updating the Jeep with independent suspension. It flips easily and is
unstable and doesn't have any flexibility. Other than being a curiosity, it
has no intrinsic value as an off road vehicle.
I wonder... Does DC own the horizontal slot grill trademark, too?
--
Jim
--
98 TJ SE
90 SJ GW
http://www.delawareja.com/gallery/JDJeep98
"Nathan Collier" <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> wrote in message
news:WPCjb.12376$kZ5.106@twister.southeast.rr.com. ..
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:3F8EF426.253A65B6@***.net...
> > I guess Kaiser Jeep's M-151, (the sole owner of Jeep '53-'70) that
> > used four wheel independent suspension, doesn't count:
>
> youre right bill, it doesnt count. the m151 MUTT is not a jeep.
>
>
> --
> Nathan W. Collier
> http://7SlotGrille.com
>
>
>
>
at updating the Jeep with independent suspension. It flips easily and is
unstable and doesn't have any flexibility. Other than being a curiosity, it
has no intrinsic value as an off road vehicle.
I wonder... Does DC own the horizontal slot grill trademark, too?
--
Jim
--
98 TJ SE
90 SJ GW
http://www.delawareja.com/gallery/JDJeep98
"Nathan Collier" <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> wrote in message
news:WPCjb.12376$kZ5.106@twister.southeast.rr.com. ..
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:3F8EF426.253A65B6@***.net...
> > I guess Kaiser Jeep's M-151, (the sole owner of Jeep '53-'70) that
> > used four wheel independent suspension, doesn't count:
>
> youre right bill, it doesnt count. the m151 MUTT is not a jeep.
>
>
> --
> Nathan W. Collier
> http://7SlotGrille.com
>
>
>
>
#246
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
You're right, Nate, the MUTT is not a Jeep. The MUTT is a dangerous attempt
at updating the Jeep with independent suspension. It flips easily and is
unstable and doesn't have any flexibility. Other than being a curiosity, it
has no intrinsic value as an off road vehicle.
I wonder... Does DC own the horizontal slot grill trademark, too?
--
Jim
--
98 TJ SE
90 SJ GW
http://www.delawareja.com/gallery/JDJeep98
"Nathan Collier" <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> wrote in message
news:WPCjb.12376$kZ5.106@twister.southeast.rr.com. ..
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:3F8EF426.253A65B6@***.net...
> > I guess Kaiser Jeep's M-151, (the sole owner of Jeep '53-'70) that
> > used four wheel independent suspension, doesn't count:
>
> youre right bill, it doesnt count. the m151 MUTT is not a jeep.
>
>
> --
> Nathan W. Collier
> http://7SlotGrille.com
>
>
>
>
at updating the Jeep with independent suspension. It flips easily and is
unstable and doesn't have any flexibility. Other than being a curiosity, it
has no intrinsic value as an off road vehicle.
I wonder... Does DC own the horizontal slot grill trademark, too?
--
Jim
--
98 TJ SE
90 SJ GW
http://www.delawareja.com/gallery/JDJeep98
"Nathan Collier" <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> wrote in message
news:WPCjb.12376$kZ5.106@twister.southeast.rr.com. ..
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:3F8EF426.253A65B6@***.net...
> > I guess Kaiser Jeep's M-151, (the sole owner of Jeep '53-'70) that
> > used four wheel independent suspension, doesn't count:
>
> youre right bill, it doesnt count. the m151 MUTT is not a jeep.
>
>
> --
> Nathan W. Collier
> http://7SlotGrille.com
>
>
>
>
#247
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
You're right, Nate, the MUTT is not a Jeep. The MUTT is a dangerous attempt
at updating the Jeep with independent suspension. It flips easily and is
unstable and doesn't have any flexibility. Other than being a curiosity, it
has no intrinsic value as an off road vehicle.
I wonder... Does DC own the horizontal slot grill trademark, too?
--
Jim
--
98 TJ SE
90 SJ GW
http://www.delawareja.com/gallery/JDJeep98
"Nathan Collier" <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> wrote in message
news:WPCjb.12376$kZ5.106@twister.southeast.rr.com. ..
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:3F8EF426.253A65B6@***.net...
> > I guess Kaiser Jeep's M-151, (the sole owner of Jeep '53-'70) that
> > used four wheel independent suspension, doesn't count:
>
> youre right bill, it doesnt count. the m151 MUTT is not a jeep.
>
>
> --
> Nathan W. Collier
> http://7SlotGrille.com
>
>
>
>
at updating the Jeep with independent suspension. It flips easily and is
unstable and doesn't have any flexibility. Other than being a curiosity, it
has no intrinsic value as an off road vehicle.
I wonder... Does DC own the horizontal slot grill trademark, too?
--
Jim
--
98 TJ SE
90 SJ GW
http://www.delawareja.com/gallery/JDJeep98
"Nathan Collier" <JeepMail@7SlotGrille.com> wrote in message
news:WPCjb.12376$kZ5.106@twister.southeast.rr.com. ..
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:3F8EF426.253A65B6@***.net...
> > I guess Kaiser Jeep's M-151, (the sole owner of Jeep '53-'70) that
> > used four wheel independent suspension, doesn't count:
>
> youre right bill, it doesnt count. the m151 MUTT is not a jeep.
>
>
> --
> Nathan W. Collier
> http://7SlotGrille.com
>
>
>
>
#248
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
No, and if they keep suing people and companies over the vertical 7 slot
one, they might end up not owning that one either. I guess they dropped
the suit against GM completely.
TJim wrote:
> I wonder... Does DC own the horizontal slot grill trademark, too?
>
--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry
http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________
one, they might end up not owning that one either. I guess they dropped
the suit against GM completely.
TJim wrote:
> I wonder... Does DC own the horizontal slot grill trademark, too?
>
--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry
http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________
#249
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
No, and if they keep suing people and companies over the vertical 7 slot
one, they might end up not owning that one either. I guess they dropped
the suit against GM completely.
TJim wrote:
> I wonder... Does DC own the horizontal slot grill trademark, too?
>
--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry
http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________
one, they might end up not owning that one either. I guess they dropped
the suit against GM completely.
TJim wrote:
> I wonder... Does DC own the horizontal slot grill trademark, too?
>
--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry
http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________
#250
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
No, and if they keep suing people and companies over the vertical 7 slot
one, they might end up not owning that one either. I guess they dropped
the suit against GM completely.
TJim wrote:
> I wonder... Does DC own the horizontal slot grill trademark, too?
>
--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry
http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________
one, they might end up not owning that one either. I guess they dropped
the suit against GM completely.
TJim wrote:
> I wonder... Does DC own the horizontal slot grill trademark, too?
>
--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry
http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________