HOW TO TIGHTEN UP MY CJ FRONT END. TIE ROD, BRACE BOX, WHEEL BEARINGS, STILL A DANCER
#41
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: HOW TO TIGHTEN UP MY CJ FRONT END. TIE ROD, BRACE BOX, WHEEL BEARINGS, STILL A DANCER
Well I'll have to take it on faith from the alignment shop that it was done
properly. How much wear the components have is hard to say. Everything is
still tight with no slop so I guess you could say the wear is minimal.
Then again, if you've got big tires and wobble problems along with a bunch
of sloppy worn out front end components, it's hardly fair to call it a
tire/stabilizer problem.
All I can tell you is my experience. I haven't had a stabilizer for a
couple years now and never missed it when it came off.
"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:426A686E.E4BD3E1F@sympatico.ca...
> Then you have the alignment off or have 'perfect' tires and components
> with no wear yet.
>
> Driving like that is suicide up here in slush country, we get the death
> wobble from slush or snow sticking to rims and that is with 'good'
> stabilizers.
>
properly. How much wear the components have is hard to say. Everything is
still tight with no slop so I guess you could say the wear is minimal.
Then again, if you've got big tires and wobble problems along with a bunch
of sloppy worn out front end components, it's hardly fair to call it a
tire/stabilizer problem.
All I can tell you is my experience. I haven't had a stabilizer for a
couple years now and never missed it when it came off.
"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:426A686E.E4BD3E1F@sympatico.ca...
> Then you have the alignment off or have 'perfect' tires and components
> with no wear yet.
>
> Driving like that is suicide up here in slush country, we get the death
> wobble from slush or snow sticking to rims and that is with 'good'
> stabilizers.
>
#42
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: HOW TO TIGHTEN UP MY CJ FRONT END. TIE ROD, BRACE BOX, WHEEL BEARINGS, STILL A DANCER
Ah yes, the same gentleman who could sit in his easy chair and try to
dictate to me that MY truck couldn't possibly have a 4-pin flat trailer
connector on it, straight from the factory.
The stabilizer was removed due to it's demise at the hands of Trail #9 at
Tellico, along with the front tie rod and drag link. Two of the 3 were
trail salvaged with the help of some angle iron and a BFH. What exactly is
your point? I've replaced exactly one steering box, and that was by
choice, not necessity. I guess if the ability to get around or over most
obstacles rather than bash my way through them makes me a poser, guilty as
charged. You aren't one of those guys that thinks a "real" jeepers' trail
skill begins and ends with the ability to mash the skinny pedal to the floor
and hang on are you?
My 79 Ford F-105 had a stabilizer on it too. What's your point with the
Daimler reference?
And for the record, my '79 QT CJ with a totally unmodified suspension lived
just fine without a stabilizer .
I made a nice civil reply to Mikes' post, doing nothing more than stating an
alternate view, and you feel the need to jump in with accusations,
innuendos, and plain old insults. I don't need it chief.
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:426A69E7.57FE59DB@***.net...
> Tom,
> That's because you welded the new spring perches in at least five
> degrees castor. Now many steering boxes have you replaced, or are you
> poser? Of course, you know all the new Daimler four wheel drives
> products use a damper.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Tom Greening wrote:
> >
> > I'd have to differ on that. My 83 CJ7 is my daily driver and I'm
running
> > 37": MTRs SOA with no stabilizer at all and I have NO wobble problems of
any
> > sort.
dictate to me that MY truck couldn't possibly have a 4-pin flat trailer
connector on it, straight from the factory.
The stabilizer was removed due to it's demise at the hands of Trail #9 at
Tellico, along with the front tie rod and drag link. Two of the 3 were
trail salvaged with the help of some angle iron and a BFH. What exactly is
your point? I've replaced exactly one steering box, and that was by
choice, not necessity. I guess if the ability to get around or over most
obstacles rather than bash my way through them makes me a poser, guilty as
charged. You aren't one of those guys that thinks a "real" jeepers' trail
skill begins and ends with the ability to mash the skinny pedal to the floor
and hang on are you?
My 79 Ford F-105 had a stabilizer on it too. What's your point with the
Daimler reference?
And for the record, my '79 QT CJ with a totally unmodified suspension lived
just fine without a stabilizer .
I made a nice civil reply to Mikes' post, doing nothing more than stating an
alternate view, and you feel the need to jump in with accusations,
innuendos, and plain old insults. I don't need it chief.
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:426A69E7.57FE59DB@***.net...
> Tom,
> That's because you welded the new spring perches in at least five
> degrees castor. Now many steering boxes have you replaced, or are you
> poser? Of course, you know all the new Daimler four wheel drives
> products use a damper.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Tom Greening wrote:
> >
> > I'd have to differ on that. My 83 CJ7 is my daily driver and I'm
running
> > 37": MTRs SOA with no stabilizer at all and I have NO wobble problems of
any
> > sort.
#43
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: HOW TO TIGHTEN UP MY CJ FRONT END. TIE ROD, BRACE BOX, WHEEL BEARINGS, STILL A DANCER
Ah yes, the same gentleman who could sit in his easy chair and try to
dictate to me that MY truck couldn't possibly have a 4-pin flat trailer
connector on it, straight from the factory.
The stabilizer was removed due to it's demise at the hands of Trail #9 at
Tellico, along with the front tie rod and drag link. Two of the 3 were
trail salvaged with the help of some angle iron and a BFH. What exactly is
your point? I've replaced exactly one steering box, and that was by
choice, not necessity. I guess if the ability to get around or over most
obstacles rather than bash my way through them makes me a poser, guilty as
charged. You aren't one of those guys that thinks a "real" jeepers' trail
skill begins and ends with the ability to mash the skinny pedal to the floor
and hang on are you?
My 79 Ford F-105 had a stabilizer on it too. What's your point with the
Daimler reference?
And for the record, my '79 QT CJ with a totally unmodified suspension lived
just fine without a stabilizer .
I made a nice civil reply to Mikes' post, doing nothing more than stating an
alternate view, and you feel the need to jump in with accusations,
innuendos, and plain old insults. I don't need it chief.
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:426A69E7.57FE59DB@***.net...
> Tom,
> That's because you welded the new spring perches in at least five
> degrees castor. Now many steering boxes have you replaced, or are you
> poser? Of course, you know all the new Daimler four wheel drives
> products use a damper.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Tom Greening wrote:
> >
> > I'd have to differ on that. My 83 CJ7 is my daily driver and I'm
running
> > 37": MTRs SOA with no stabilizer at all and I have NO wobble problems of
any
> > sort.
dictate to me that MY truck couldn't possibly have a 4-pin flat trailer
connector on it, straight from the factory.
The stabilizer was removed due to it's demise at the hands of Trail #9 at
Tellico, along with the front tie rod and drag link. Two of the 3 were
trail salvaged with the help of some angle iron and a BFH. What exactly is
your point? I've replaced exactly one steering box, and that was by
choice, not necessity. I guess if the ability to get around or over most
obstacles rather than bash my way through them makes me a poser, guilty as
charged. You aren't one of those guys that thinks a "real" jeepers' trail
skill begins and ends with the ability to mash the skinny pedal to the floor
and hang on are you?
My 79 Ford F-105 had a stabilizer on it too. What's your point with the
Daimler reference?
And for the record, my '79 QT CJ with a totally unmodified suspension lived
just fine without a stabilizer .
I made a nice civil reply to Mikes' post, doing nothing more than stating an
alternate view, and you feel the need to jump in with accusations,
innuendos, and plain old insults. I don't need it chief.
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:426A69E7.57FE59DB@***.net...
> Tom,
> That's because you welded the new spring perches in at least five
> degrees castor. Now many steering boxes have you replaced, or are you
> poser? Of course, you know all the new Daimler four wheel drives
> products use a damper.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Tom Greening wrote:
> >
> > I'd have to differ on that. My 83 CJ7 is my daily driver and I'm
running
> > 37": MTRs SOA with no stabilizer at all and I have NO wobble problems of
any
> > sort.
#44
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: HOW TO TIGHTEN UP MY CJ FRONT END. TIE ROD, BRACE BOX, WHEEL BEARINGS, STILL A DANCER
Ah yes, the same gentleman who could sit in his easy chair and try to
dictate to me that MY truck couldn't possibly have a 4-pin flat trailer
connector on it, straight from the factory.
The stabilizer was removed due to it's demise at the hands of Trail #9 at
Tellico, along with the front tie rod and drag link. Two of the 3 were
trail salvaged with the help of some angle iron and a BFH. What exactly is
your point? I've replaced exactly one steering box, and that was by
choice, not necessity. I guess if the ability to get around or over most
obstacles rather than bash my way through them makes me a poser, guilty as
charged. You aren't one of those guys that thinks a "real" jeepers' trail
skill begins and ends with the ability to mash the skinny pedal to the floor
and hang on are you?
My 79 Ford F-105 had a stabilizer on it too. What's your point with the
Daimler reference?
And for the record, my '79 QT CJ with a totally unmodified suspension lived
just fine without a stabilizer .
I made a nice civil reply to Mikes' post, doing nothing more than stating an
alternate view, and you feel the need to jump in with accusations,
innuendos, and plain old insults. I don't need it chief.
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:426A69E7.57FE59DB@***.net...
> Tom,
> That's because you welded the new spring perches in at least five
> degrees castor. Now many steering boxes have you replaced, or are you
> poser? Of course, you know all the new Daimler four wheel drives
> products use a damper.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Tom Greening wrote:
> >
> > I'd have to differ on that. My 83 CJ7 is my daily driver and I'm
running
> > 37": MTRs SOA with no stabilizer at all and I have NO wobble problems of
any
> > sort.
dictate to me that MY truck couldn't possibly have a 4-pin flat trailer
connector on it, straight from the factory.
The stabilizer was removed due to it's demise at the hands of Trail #9 at
Tellico, along with the front tie rod and drag link. Two of the 3 were
trail salvaged with the help of some angle iron and a BFH. What exactly is
your point? I've replaced exactly one steering box, and that was by
choice, not necessity. I guess if the ability to get around or over most
obstacles rather than bash my way through them makes me a poser, guilty as
charged. You aren't one of those guys that thinks a "real" jeepers' trail
skill begins and ends with the ability to mash the skinny pedal to the floor
and hang on are you?
My 79 Ford F-105 had a stabilizer on it too. What's your point with the
Daimler reference?
And for the record, my '79 QT CJ with a totally unmodified suspension lived
just fine without a stabilizer .
I made a nice civil reply to Mikes' post, doing nothing more than stating an
alternate view, and you feel the need to jump in with accusations,
innuendos, and plain old insults. I don't need it chief.
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:426A69E7.57FE59DB@***.net...
> Tom,
> That's because you welded the new spring perches in at least five
> degrees castor. Now many steering boxes have you replaced, or are you
> poser? Of course, you know all the new Daimler four wheel drives
> products use a damper.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Tom Greening wrote:
> >
> > I'd have to differ on that. My 83 CJ7 is my daily driver and I'm
running
> > 37": MTRs SOA with no stabilizer at all and I have NO wobble problems of
any
> > sort.
#45
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: HOW TO TIGHTEN UP MY CJ FRONT END. TIE ROD, BRACE BOX, WHEEL BEARINGS, STILL A DANCER
Ah yes, the same gentleman who could sit in his easy chair and try to
dictate to me that MY truck couldn't possibly have a 4-pin flat trailer
connector on it, straight from the factory.
The stabilizer was removed due to it's demise at the hands of Trail #9 at
Tellico, along with the front tie rod and drag link. Two of the 3 were
trail salvaged with the help of some angle iron and a BFH. What exactly is
your point? I've replaced exactly one steering box, and that was by
choice, not necessity. I guess if the ability to get around or over most
obstacles rather than bash my way through them makes me a poser, guilty as
charged. You aren't one of those guys that thinks a "real" jeepers' trail
skill begins and ends with the ability to mash the skinny pedal to the floor
and hang on are you?
My 79 Ford F-105 had a stabilizer on it too. What's your point with the
Daimler reference?
And for the record, my '79 QT CJ with a totally unmodified suspension lived
just fine without a stabilizer .
I made a nice civil reply to Mikes' post, doing nothing more than stating an
alternate view, and you feel the need to jump in with accusations,
innuendos, and plain old insults. I don't need it chief.
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:426A69E7.57FE59DB@***.net...
> Tom,
> That's because you welded the new spring perches in at least five
> degrees castor. Now many steering boxes have you replaced, or are you
> poser? Of course, you know all the new Daimler four wheel drives
> products use a damper.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Tom Greening wrote:
> >
> > I'd have to differ on that. My 83 CJ7 is my daily driver and I'm
running
> > 37": MTRs SOA with no stabilizer at all and I have NO wobble problems of
any
> > sort.
dictate to me that MY truck couldn't possibly have a 4-pin flat trailer
connector on it, straight from the factory.
The stabilizer was removed due to it's demise at the hands of Trail #9 at
Tellico, along with the front tie rod and drag link. Two of the 3 were
trail salvaged with the help of some angle iron and a BFH. What exactly is
your point? I've replaced exactly one steering box, and that was by
choice, not necessity. I guess if the ability to get around or over most
obstacles rather than bash my way through them makes me a poser, guilty as
charged. You aren't one of those guys that thinks a "real" jeepers' trail
skill begins and ends with the ability to mash the skinny pedal to the floor
and hang on are you?
My 79 Ford F-105 had a stabilizer on it too. What's your point with the
Daimler reference?
And for the record, my '79 QT CJ with a totally unmodified suspension lived
just fine without a stabilizer .
I made a nice civil reply to Mikes' post, doing nothing more than stating an
alternate view, and you feel the need to jump in with accusations,
innuendos, and plain old insults. I don't need it chief.
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:426A69E7.57FE59DB@***.net...
> Tom,
> That's because you welded the new spring perches in at least five
> degrees castor. Now many steering boxes have you replaced, or are you
> poser? Of course, you know all the new Daimler four wheel drives
> products use a damper.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Tom Greening wrote:
> >
> > I'd have to differ on that. My 83 CJ7 is my daily driver and I'm
running
> > 37": MTRs SOA with no stabilizer at all and I have NO wobble problems of
any
> > sort.
#46
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: HOW TO TIGHTEN UP MY CJ FRONT END. TIE ROD, BRACE BOX, WHEELBEARINGS, STILL A DANCER
Tom,
If you weren't senile you would remember, I apologized:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...2224d991314df0
How many steering boxes did you replace on 79 Ford F-100?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Tom Greening wrote:
>
> Ah yes, the same gentleman who could sit in his easy chair and try to
> dictate to me that MY truck couldn't possibly have a 4-pin flat trailer
> connector on it, straight from the factory.
>
> The stabilizer was removed due to it's demise at the hands of Trail #9 at
> Tellico, along with the front tie rod and drag link. Two of the 3 were
> trail salvaged with the help of some angle iron and a BFH. What exactly is
> your point? I've replaced exactly one steering box, and that was by
> choice, not necessity. I guess if the ability to get around or over most
> obstacles rather than bash my way through them makes me a poser, guilty as
> charged. You aren't one of those guys that thinks a "real" jeepers' trail
> skill begins and ends with the ability to mash the skinny pedal to the floor
> and hang on are you?
>
> My 79 Ford F-105 had a stabilizer on it too. What's your point with the
> Daimler reference?
>
> And for the record, my '79 QT CJ with a totally unmodified suspension lived
> just fine without a stabilizer .
>
> I made a nice civil reply to Mikes' post, doing nothing more than stating an
> alternate view, and you feel the need to jump in with accusations,
> innuendos, and plain old insults. I don't need it chief.
If you weren't senile you would remember, I apologized:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...2224d991314df0
How many steering boxes did you replace on 79 Ford F-100?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Tom Greening wrote:
>
> Ah yes, the same gentleman who could sit in his easy chair and try to
> dictate to me that MY truck couldn't possibly have a 4-pin flat trailer
> connector on it, straight from the factory.
>
> The stabilizer was removed due to it's demise at the hands of Trail #9 at
> Tellico, along with the front tie rod and drag link. Two of the 3 were
> trail salvaged with the help of some angle iron and a BFH. What exactly is
> your point? I've replaced exactly one steering box, and that was by
> choice, not necessity. I guess if the ability to get around or over most
> obstacles rather than bash my way through them makes me a poser, guilty as
> charged. You aren't one of those guys that thinks a "real" jeepers' trail
> skill begins and ends with the ability to mash the skinny pedal to the floor
> and hang on are you?
>
> My 79 Ford F-105 had a stabilizer on it too. What's your point with the
> Daimler reference?
>
> And for the record, my '79 QT CJ with a totally unmodified suspension lived
> just fine without a stabilizer .
>
> I made a nice civil reply to Mikes' post, doing nothing more than stating an
> alternate view, and you feel the need to jump in with accusations,
> innuendos, and plain old insults. I don't need it chief.
#47
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: HOW TO TIGHTEN UP MY CJ FRONT END. TIE ROD, BRACE BOX, WHEELBEARINGS, STILL A DANCER
Tom,
If you weren't senile you would remember, I apologized:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...2224d991314df0
How many steering boxes did you replace on 79 Ford F-100?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Tom Greening wrote:
>
> Ah yes, the same gentleman who could sit in his easy chair and try to
> dictate to me that MY truck couldn't possibly have a 4-pin flat trailer
> connector on it, straight from the factory.
>
> The stabilizer was removed due to it's demise at the hands of Trail #9 at
> Tellico, along with the front tie rod and drag link. Two of the 3 were
> trail salvaged with the help of some angle iron and a BFH. What exactly is
> your point? I've replaced exactly one steering box, and that was by
> choice, not necessity. I guess if the ability to get around or over most
> obstacles rather than bash my way through them makes me a poser, guilty as
> charged. You aren't one of those guys that thinks a "real" jeepers' trail
> skill begins and ends with the ability to mash the skinny pedal to the floor
> and hang on are you?
>
> My 79 Ford F-105 had a stabilizer on it too. What's your point with the
> Daimler reference?
>
> And for the record, my '79 QT CJ with a totally unmodified suspension lived
> just fine without a stabilizer .
>
> I made a nice civil reply to Mikes' post, doing nothing more than stating an
> alternate view, and you feel the need to jump in with accusations,
> innuendos, and plain old insults. I don't need it chief.
If you weren't senile you would remember, I apologized:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...2224d991314df0
How many steering boxes did you replace on 79 Ford F-100?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Tom Greening wrote:
>
> Ah yes, the same gentleman who could sit in his easy chair and try to
> dictate to me that MY truck couldn't possibly have a 4-pin flat trailer
> connector on it, straight from the factory.
>
> The stabilizer was removed due to it's demise at the hands of Trail #9 at
> Tellico, along with the front tie rod and drag link. Two of the 3 were
> trail salvaged with the help of some angle iron and a BFH. What exactly is
> your point? I've replaced exactly one steering box, and that was by
> choice, not necessity. I guess if the ability to get around or over most
> obstacles rather than bash my way through them makes me a poser, guilty as
> charged. You aren't one of those guys that thinks a "real" jeepers' trail
> skill begins and ends with the ability to mash the skinny pedal to the floor
> and hang on are you?
>
> My 79 Ford F-105 had a stabilizer on it too. What's your point with the
> Daimler reference?
>
> And for the record, my '79 QT CJ with a totally unmodified suspension lived
> just fine without a stabilizer .
>
> I made a nice civil reply to Mikes' post, doing nothing more than stating an
> alternate view, and you feel the need to jump in with accusations,
> innuendos, and plain old insults. I don't need it chief.
#48
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: HOW TO TIGHTEN UP MY CJ FRONT END. TIE ROD, BRACE BOX, WHEELBEARINGS, STILL A DANCER
Tom,
If you weren't senile you would remember, I apologized:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...2224d991314df0
How many steering boxes did you replace on 79 Ford F-100?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Tom Greening wrote:
>
> Ah yes, the same gentleman who could sit in his easy chair and try to
> dictate to me that MY truck couldn't possibly have a 4-pin flat trailer
> connector on it, straight from the factory.
>
> The stabilizer was removed due to it's demise at the hands of Trail #9 at
> Tellico, along with the front tie rod and drag link. Two of the 3 were
> trail salvaged with the help of some angle iron and a BFH. What exactly is
> your point? I've replaced exactly one steering box, and that was by
> choice, not necessity. I guess if the ability to get around or over most
> obstacles rather than bash my way through them makes me a poser, guilty as
> charged. You aren't one of those guys that thinks a "real" jeepers' trail
> skill begins and ends with the ability to mash the skinny pedal to the floor
> and hang on are you?
>
> My 79 Ford F-105 had a stabilizer on it too. What's your point with the
> Daimler reference?
>
> And for the record, my '79 QT CJ with a totally unmodified suspension lived
> just fine without a stabilizer .
>
> I made a nice civil reply to Mikes' post, doing nothing more than stating an
> alternate view, and you feel the need to jump in with accusations,
> innuendos, and plain old insults. I don't need it chief.
If you weren't senile you would remember, I apologized:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...2224d991314df0
How many steering boxes did you replace on 79 Ford F-100?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Tom Greening wrote:
>
> Ah yes, the same gentleman who could sit in his easy chair and try to
> dictate to me that MY truck couldn't possibly have a 4-pin flat trailer
> connector on it, straight from the factory.
>
> The stabilizer was removed due to it's demise at the hands of Trail #9 at
> Tellico, along with the front tie rod and drag link. Two of the 3 were
> trail salvaged with the help of some angle iron and a BFH. What exactly is
> your point? I've replaced exactly one steering box, and that was by
> choice, not necessity. I guess if the ability to get around or over most
> obstacles rather than bash my way through them makes me a poser, guilty as
> charged. You aren't one of those guys that thinks a "real" jeepers' trail
> skill begins and ends with the ability to mash the skinny pedal to the floor
> and hang on are you?
>
> My 79 Ford F-105 had a stabilizer on it too. What's your point with the
> Daimler reference?
>
> And for the record, my '79 QT CJ with a totally unmodified suspension lived
> just fine without a stabilizer .
>
> I made a nice civil reply to Mikes' post, doing nothing more than stating an
> alternate view, and you feel the need to jump in with accusations,
> innuendos, and plain old insults. I don't need it chief.
#49
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: HOW TO TIGHTEN UP MY CJ FRONT END. TIE ROD, BRACE BOX, WHEELBEARINGS, STILL A DANCER
Tom,
If you weren't senile you would remember, I apologized:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...2224d991314df0
How many steering boxes did you replace on 79 Ford F-100?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Tom Greening wrote:
>
> Ah yes, the same gentleman who could sit in his easy chair and try to
> dictate to me that MY truck couldn't possibly have a 4-pin flat trailer
> connector on it, straight from the factory.
>
> The stabilizer was removed due to it's demise at the hands of Trail #9 at
> Tellico, along with the front tie rod and drag link. Two of the 3 were
> trail salvaged with the help of some angle iron and a BFH. What exactly is
> your point? I've replaced exactly one steering box, and that was by
> choice, not necessity. I guess if the ability to get around or over most
> obstacles rather than bash my way through them makes me a poser, guilty as
> charged. You aren't one of those guys that thinks a "real" jeepers' trail
> skill begins and ends with the ability to mash the skinny pedal to the floor
> and hang on are you?
>
> My 79 Ford F-105 had a stabilizer on it too. What's your point with the
> Daimler reference?
>
> And for the record, my '79 QT CJ with a totally unmodified suspension lived
> just fine without a stabilizer .
>
> I made a nice civil reply to Mikes' post, doing nothing more than stating an
> alternate view, and you feel the need to jump in with accusations,
> innuendos, and plain old insults. I don't need it chief.
If you weren't senile you would remember, I apologized:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...2224d991314df0
How many steering boxes did you replace on 79 Ford F-100?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Tom Greening wrote:
>
> Ah yes, the same gentleman who could sit in his easy chair and try to
> dictate to me that MY truck couldn't possibly have a 4-pin flat trailer
> connector on it, straight from the factory.
>
> The stabilizer was removed due to it's demise at the hands of Trail #9 at
> Tellico, along with the front tie rod and drag link. Two of the 3 were
> trail salvaged with the help of some angle iron and a BFH. What exactly is
> your point? I've replaced exactly one steering box, and that was by
> choice, not necessity. I guess if the ability to get around or over most
> obstacles rather than bash my way through them makes me a poser, guilty as
> charged. You aren't one of those guys that thinks a "real" jeepers' trail
> skill begins and ends with the ability to mash the skinny pedal to the floor
> and hang on are you?
>
> My 79 Ford F-105 had a stabilizer on it too. What's your point with the
> Daimler reference?
>
> And for the record, my '79 QT CJ with a totally unmodified suspension lived
> just fine without a stabilizer .
>
> I made a nice civil reply to Mikes' post, doing nothing more than stating an
> alternate view, and you feel the need to jump in with accusations,
> innuendos, and plain old insults. I don't need it chief.
#50
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: HOW TO TIGHTEN UP MY CJ FRONT END. TIE ROD, BRACE BOX, WHEEL BEARINGS, STILL A DANCER
Still with the insults eh Bill? Is that the only way you know to
carry on a conversation when someone contradicts you? Either way,
whether you apologized or not makes no difference because it doesn't
change the fact that then, just as now, you are butting in with an
insulting manner.
The box on the F-150 (attention to detail, my bust) outlasted numerous
sets of tires, one transfer case, and much abuse ranging from the
desert and dunes around southern california to the backwoods logging
trails of northern maine. The stabilizer itself gave up the ghost in a
mudhole by the river outside of yuma arizona.
It really would be nice if you would stop trying to tell me I'm full of
sh*t about gear I've owned/worked on for years and you've never laid
eyes on.
carry on a conversation when someone contradicts you? Either way,
whether you apologized or not makes no difference because it doesn't
change the fact that then, just as now, you are butting in with an
insulting manner.
The box on the F-150 (attention to detail, my bust) outlasted numerous
sets of tires, one transfer case, and much abuse ranging from the
desert and dunes around southern california to the backwoods logging
trails of northern maine. The stabilizer itself gave up the ghost in a
mudhole by the river outside of yuma arizona.
It really would be nice if you would stop trying to tell me I'm full of
sh*t about gear I've owned/worked on for years and you've never laid
eyes on.