6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
10-17-2003, 02:07 AM
#361
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
Nathan Collier wrote:
>"GzrGlide" <GzrGlide02@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>news:Uuojb.32214$uz1.51877@news1.mts.net...
>
>
>>Which one would ya like Nate!
>>
>>
>
>your expressed opinion on 4 vs. 6 in a post that i can link to.
>
Ya got mail buddy!
Mike
>"GzrGlide" <GzrGlide02@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
>news:Uuojb.32214$uz1.51877@news1.mts.net...
>
>
>>Which one would ya like Nate!
>>
>>
>
>your expressed opinion on 4 vs. 6 in a post that i can link to.
>
Ya got mail buddy!
Mike
10-17-2003, 05:48 AM
#362
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 15:50:16 -0400, travis
<travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 12:43:45 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
><beerman@yahoo.com> shared the following:
>
>>Why would you want a 150hp V8 that weighs something like 300 lbs, when you
>>can have a 147 hp that weighs in at half that?
>
>Not that I want to do it anytime soon, but I'm sure the V8 would be
>easier to tweak for more power than an I6. Let's not start the
>"substitute for cubic inches" battle again, please. Also, the V8 has
>a "sound" to its exhaust that a 6 will never be able to match.
>
HA! I had a 258 in an AMC Gremlin, and with a Clifford split header,
Offy manifold and 4bbl and uncorked with the throttle wide open that
car sounded downright dangerous.
Also took out a lot of v-8 Mustangs and Camaros in a stop light to
stop light situation.
Got about 26 miles to the gallon, too, if I could keep the back
barrels shut :-)
--
Old Crow 24 hours in a day...
'82 Shovelhead FLT 92" 'Pearl' 24 beers in a case...
'95 Jeep YJ Rio Grande Co-incedence? I think not.
ASE Certified Master Auto Tech + L1
TOMKAT, BS#133, SENS, MAMBM
<travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 12:43:45 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
><beerman@yahoo.com> shared the following:
>
>>Why would you want a 150hp V8 that weighs something like 300 lbs, when you
>>can have a 147 hp that weighs in at half that?
>
>Not that I want to do it anytime soon, but I'm sure the V8 would be
>easier to tweak for more power than an I6. Let's not start the
>"substitute for cubic inches" battle again, please. Also, the V8 has
>a "sound" to its exhaust that a 6 will never be able to match.
>
HA! I had a 258 in an AMC Gremlin, and with a Clifford split header,
Offy manifold and 4bbl and uncorked with the throttle wide open that
car sounded downright dangerous.
Also took out a lot of v-8 Mustangs and Camaros in a stop light to
stop light situation.
Got about 26 miles to the gallon, too, if I could keep the back
barrels shut :-)
--
Old Crow 24 hours in a day...
'82 Shovelhead FLT 92" 'Pearl' 24 beers in a case...
'95 Jeep YJ Rio Grande Co-incedence? I think not.
ASE Certified Master Auto Tech + L1
TOMKAT, BS#133, SENS, MAMBM
10-17-2003, 05:48 AM
#363
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 15:50:16 -0400, travis
<travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 12:43:45 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
><beerman@yahoo.com> shared the following:
>
>>Why would you want a 150hp V8 that weighs something like 300 lbs, when you
>>can have a 147 hp that weighs in at half that?
>
>Not that I want to do it anytime soon, but I'm sure the V8 would be
>easier to tweak for more power than an I6. Let's not start the
>"substitute for cubic inches" battle again, please. Also, the V8 has
>a "sound" to its exhaust that a 6 will never be able to match.
>
HA! I had a 258 in an AMC Gremlin, and with a Clifford split header,
Offy manifold and 4bbl and uncorked with the throttle wide open that
car sounded downright dangerous.
Also took out a lot of v-8 Mustangs and Camaros in a stop light to
stop light situation.
Got about 26 miles to the gallon, too, if I could keep the back
barrels shut :-)
--
Old Crow 24 hours in a day...
'82 Shovelhead FLT 92" 'Pearl' 24 beers in a case...
'95 Jeep YJ Rio Grande Co-incedence? I think not.
ASE Certified Master Auto Tech + L1
TOMKAT, BS#133, SENS, MAMBM
<travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 12:43:45 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
><beerman@yahoo.com> shared the following:
>
>>Why would you want a 150hp V8 that weighs something like 300 lbs, when you
>>can have a 147 hp that weighs in at half that?
>
>Not that I want to do it anytime soon, but I'm sure the V8 would be
>easier to tweak for more power than an I6. Let's not start the
>"substitute for cubic inches" battle again, please. Also, the V8 has
>a "sound" to its exhaust that a 6 will never be able to match.
>
HA! I had a 258 in an AMC Gremlin, and with a Clifford split header,
Offy manifold and 4bbl and uncorked with the throttle wide open that
car sounded downright dangerous.
Also took out a lot of v-8 Mustangs and Camaros in a stop light to
stop light situation.
Got about 26 miles to the gallon, too, if I could keep the back
barrels shut :-)
--
Old Crow 24 hours in a day...
'82 Shovelhead FLT 92" 'Pearl' 24 beers in a case...
'95 Jeep YJ Rio Grande Co-incedence? I think not.
ASE Certified Master Auto Tech + L1
TOMKAT, BS#133, SENS, MAMBM
10-17-2003, 05:48 AM
#364
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 15:50:16 -0400, travis
<travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 12:43:45 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
><beerman@yahoo.com> shared the following:
>
>>Why would you want a 150hp V8 that weighs something like 300 lbs, when you
>>can have a 147 hp that weighs in at half that?
>
>Not that I want to do it anytime soon, but I'm sure the V8 would be
>easier to tweak for more power than an I6. Let's not start the
>"substitute for cubic inches" battle again, please. Also, the V8 has
>a "sound" to its exhaust that a 6 will never be able to match.
>
HA! I had a 258 in an AMC Gremlin, and with a Clifford split header,
Offy manifold and 4bbl and uncorked with the throttle wide open that
car sounded downright dangerous.
Also took out a lot of v-8 Mustangs and Camaros in a stop light to
stop light situation.
Got about 26 miles to the gallon, too, if I could keep the back
barrels shut :-)
--
Old Crow 24 hours in a day...
'82 Shovelhead FLT 92" 'Pearl' 24 beers in a case...
'95 Jeep YJ Rio Grande Co-incedence? I think not.
ASE Certified Master Auto Tech + L1
TOMKAT, BS#133, SENS, MAMBM
<travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 12:43:45 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
><beerman@yahoo.com> shared the following:
>
>>Why would you want a 150hp V8 that weighs something like 300 lbs, when you
>>can have a 147 hp that weighs in at half that?
>
>Not that I want to do it anytime soon, but I'm sure the V8 would be
>easier to tweak for more power than an I6. Let's not start the
>"substitute for cubic inches" battle again, please. Also, the V8 has
>a "sound" to its exhaust that a 6 will never be able to match.
>
HA! I had a 258 in an AMC Gremlin, and with a Clifford split header,
Offy manifold and 4bbl and uncorked with the throttle wide open that
car sounded downright dangerous.
Also took out a lot of v-8 Mustangs and Camaros in a stop light to
stop light situation.
Got about 26 miles to the gallon, too, if I could keep the back
barrels shut :-)
--
Old Crow 24 hours in a day...
'82 Shovelhead FLT 92" 'Pearl' 24 beers in a case...
'95 Jeep YJ Rio Grande Co-incedence? I think not.
ASE Certified Master Auto Tech + L1
TOMKAT, BS#133, SENS, MAMBM
10-17-2003, 09:19 AM
#365
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
Travis,
The 304 is probably a better choice in an older CJ. I understand, though,
that the 4.2L can be retrofitted with 4.0L heads and fuel injection which
should give more power, reliability, and fuel economy. I'd be inclined to
get the 304 unless the 4.2L was *much* cheaper.
--
Jim
--
98 TJ SE
90 SJ GW
http://www.delawareja.com/gallery/JDJeep98
"travis" <travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8r0uovo5mhokvrcb4lvta6bsmnf931n61t@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 13:41:44 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
> <beerman@yahoo.com> shared the following:
>
> >
> >>
> >> 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.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >The I6 in the year models you are looking at is a 4.2L.
>
> I realize that. It puts out less power than the 304 available in the
> same model year. Someone else mentioned the 4.0 liter, that's why I
> brought it up again. Because it *does* put out more power than the
> old 304s, but it's not an option that was available on the old CJs
> that I'm looking at. If it *was* available on them then I'd probably
> go with one of them rather than the V8. "More power is good" is just
> my personal opinion.
>
>
> --
> Travis
> http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html
> The meek shall inherit the earth. After I'm finished with it.
> :wq!
The 304 is probably a better choice in an older CJ. I understand, though,
that the 4.2L can be retrofitted with 4.0L heads and fuel injection which
should give more power, reliability, and fuel economy. I'd be inclined to
get the 304 unless the 4.2L was *much* cheaper.
--
Jim
--
98 TJ SE
90 SJ GW
http://www.delawareja.com/gallery/JDJeep98
"travis" <travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8r0uovo5mhokvrcb4lvta6bsmnf931n61t@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 13:41:44 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
> <beerman@yahoo.com> shared the following:
>
> >
> >>
> >> 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.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >The I6 in the year models you are looking at is a 4.2L.
>
> I realize that. It puts out less power than the 304 available in the
> same model year. Someone else mentioned the 4.0 liter, that's why I
> brought it up again. Because it *does* put out more power than the
> old 304s, but it's not an option that was available on the old CJs
> that I'm looking at. If it *was* available on them then I'd probably
> go with one of them rather than the V8. "More power is good" is just
> my personal opinion.
>
>
> --
> Travis
> http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html
> The meek shall inherit the earth. After I'm finished with it.
> :wq!
10-17-2003, 09:19 AM
#366
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
Travis,
The 304 is probably a better choice in an older CJ. I understand, though,
that the 4.2L can be retrofitted with 4.0L heads and fuel injection which
should give more power, reliability, and fuel economy. I'd be inclined to
get the 304 unless the 4.2L was *much* cheaper.
--
Jim
--
98 TJ SE
90 SJ GW
http://www.delawareja.com/gallery/JDJeep98
"travis" <travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8r0uovo5mhokvrcb4lvta6bsmnf931n61t@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 13:41:44 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
> <beerman@yahoo.com> shared the following:
>
> >
> >>
> >> 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.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >The I6 in the year models you are looking at is a 4.2L.
>
> I realize that. It puts out less power than the 304 available in the
> same model year. Someone else mentioned the 4.0 liter, that's why I
> brought it up again. Because it *does* put out more power than the
> old 304s, but it's not an option that was available on the old CJs
> that I'm looking at. If it *was* available on them then I'd probably
> go with one of them rather than the V8. "More power is good" is just
> my personal opinion.
>
>
> --
> Travis
> http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html
> The meek shall inherit the earth. After I'm finished with it.
> :wq!
The 304 is probably a better choice in an older CJ. I understand, though,
that the 4.2L can be retrofitted with 4.0L heads and fuel injection which
should give more power, reliability, and fuel economy. I'd be inclined to
get the 304 unless the 4.2L was *much* cheaper.
--
Jim
--
98 TJ SE
90 SJ GW
http://www.delawareja.com/gallery/JDJeep98
"travis" <travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8r0uovo5mhokvrcb4lvta6bsmnf931n61t@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 13:41:44 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
> <beerman@yahoo.com> shared the following:
>
> >
> >>
> >> 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.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >The I6 in the year models you are looking at is a 4.2L.
>
> I realize that. It puts out less power than the 304 available in the
> same model year. Someone else mentioned the 4.0 liter, that's why I
> brought it up again. Because it *does* put out more power than the
> old 304s, but it's not an option that was available on the old CJs
> that I'm looking at. If it *was* available on them then I'd probably
> go with one of them rather than the V8. "More power is good" is just
> my personal opinion.
>
>
> --
> Travis
> http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html
> The meek shall inherit the earth. After I'm finished with it.
> :wq!
10-17-2003, 09:19 AM
#367
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
Travis,
The 304 is probably a better choice in an older CJ. I understand, though,
that the 4.2L can be retrofitted with 4.0L heads and fuel injection which
should give more power, reliability, and fuel economy. I'd be inclined to
get the 304 unless the 4.2L was *much* cheaper.
--
Jim
--
98 TJ SE
90 SJ GW
http://www.delawareja.com/gallery/JDJeep98
"travis" <travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8r0uovo5mhokvrcb4lvta6bsmnf931n61t@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 13:41:44 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
> <beerman@yahoo.com> shared the following:
>
> >
> >>
> >> 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.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >The I6 in the year models you are looking at is a 4.2L.
>
> I realize that. It puts out less power than the 304 available in the
> same model year. Someone else mentioned the 4.0 liter, that's why I
> brought it up again. Because it *does* put out more power than the
> old 304s, but it's not an option that was available on the old CJs
> that I'm looking at. If it *was* available on them then I'd probably
> go with one of them rather than the V8. "More power is good" is just
> my personal opinion.
>
>
> --
> Travis
> http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html
> The meek shall inherit the earth. After I'm finished with it.
> :wq!
The 304 is probably a better choice in an older CJ. I understand, though,
that the 4.2L can be retrofitted with 4.0L heads and fuel injection which
should give more power, reliability, and fuel economy. I'd be inclined to
get the 304 unless the 4.2L was *much* cheaper.
--
Jim
--
98 TJ SE
90 SJ GW
http://www.delawareja.com/gallery/JDJeep98
"travis" <travist34removethis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8r0uovo5mhokvrcb4lvta6bsmnf931n61t@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 13:41:44 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
> <beerman@yahoo.com> shared the following:
>
> >
> >>
> >> 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.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >The I6 in the year models you are looking at is a 4.2L.
>
> I realize that. It puts out less power than the 304 available in the
> same model year. Someone else mentioned the 4.0 liter, that's why I
> brought it up again. Because it *does* put out more power than the
> old 304s, but it's not an option that was available on the old CJs
> that I'm looking at. If it *was* available on them then I'd probably
> go with one of them rather than the V8. "More power is good" is just
> my personal opinion.
>
>
> --
> Travis
> http://jeepadventures.dyndns.org/jeep.html
> The meek shall inherit the earth. After I'm finished with it.
> :wq!
10-17-2003, 09:22 AM
#368
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
They seem to be making themselves into a pain in *everyone's* a$$ recently,
don't they?
Nate, any word on Dennis' situation?
--
Jim
--
98 TJ SE
90 SJ GW
http://www.delawareja.com/gallery/JDJeep98
"twaldron" <twaldron@sbcOBVIOUSglobal.net> wrote in message
news:coDjb.242$gk.238@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com.. .
> No, and if they keep suing people and companies over the vertical 7 slot
> one, they might end up not owning that one either. I guess they dropped
> the suit against GM completely.
>
> TJim wrote:
>
>
> > I wonder... Does DC own the horizontal slot grill trademark, too?
> >
>
> --
> __________________________________________________ _________
> tw
> 03 TJ Rubicon
> 01 XJ Sport
>
> There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
> -- Dave Barry
>
> http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
> (Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
> __________________________________________________ _________
>
don't they?
Nate, any word on Dennis' situation?
--
Jim
--
98 TJ SE
90 SJ GW
http://www.delawareja.com/gallery/JDJeep98
"twaldron" <twaldron@sbcOBVIOUSglobal.net> wrote in message
news:coDjb.242$gk.238@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com.. .
> No, and if they keep suing people and companies over the vertical 7 slot
> one, they might end up not owning that one either. I guess they dropped
> the suit against GM completely.
>
> TJim wrote:
>
>
> > I wonder... Does DC own the horizontal slot grill trademark, too?
> >
>
> --
> __________________________________________________ _________
> tw
> 03 TJ Rubicon
> 01 XJ Sport
>
> There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
> -- Dave Barry
>
> http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
> (Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
> __________________________________________________ _________
>
10-17-2003, 09:22 AM
#369
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
They seem to be making themselves into a pain in *everyone's* a$$ recently,
don't they?
Nate, any word on Dennis' situation?
--
Jim
--
98 TJ SE
90 SJ GW
http://www.delawareja.com/gallery/JDJeep98
"twaldron" <twaldron@sbcOBVIOUSglobal.net> wrote in message
news:coDjb.242$gk.238@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com.. .
> No, and if they keep suing people and companies over the vertical 7 slot
> one, they might end up not owning that one either. I guess they dropped
> the suit against GM completely.
>
> TJim wrote:
>
>
> > I wonder... Does DC own the horizontal slot grill trademark, too?
> >
>
> --
> __________________________________________________ _________
> tw
> 03 TJ Rubicon
> 01 XJ Sport
>
> There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
> -- Dave Barry
>
> http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
> (Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
> __________________________________________________ _________
>
don't they?
Nate, any word on Dennis' situation?
--
Jim
--
98 TJ SE
90 SJ GW
http://www.delawareja.com/gallery/JDJeep98
"twaldron" <twaldron@sbcOBVIOUSglobal.net> wrote in message
news:coDjb.242$gk.238@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com.. .
> 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)
> __________________________________________________ _________
>
10-17-2003, 09:22 AM
#370
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 6 cyl. YJ or 4 cyl. TJ?????????
They seem to be making themselves into a pain in *everyone's* a$$ recently,
don't they?
Nate, any word on Dennis' situation?
--
Jim
--
98 TJ SE
90 SJ GW
http://www.delawareja.com/gallery/JDJeep98
"twaldron" <twaldron@sbcOBVIOUSglobal.net> wrote in message
news:coDjb.242$gk.238@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com.. .
> No, and if they keep suing people and companies over the vertical 7 slot
> one, they might end up not owning that one either. I guess they dropped
> the suit against GM completely.
>
> TJim wrote:
>
>
> > I wonder... Does DC own the horizontal slot grill trademark, too?
> >
>
> --
> __________________________________________________ _________
> tw
> 03 TJ Rubicon
> 01 XJ Sport
>
> There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
> -- Dave Barry
>
> http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
> (Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
> __________________________________________________ _________
>
don't they?
Nate, any word on Dennis' situation?
--
Jim
--
98 TJ SE
90 SJ GW
http://www.delawareja.com/gallery/JDJeep98
"twaldron" <twaldron@sbcOBVIOUSglobal.net> wrote in message
news:coDjb.242$gk.238@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com.. .
> 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)
> __________________________________________________ _________
>