new jeep - mastershield undercoat
11-24-2003, 01:40 PM
#31
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: new jeep - mastershield undercoat
> Hey Snow! Yes, the steel is thinner today, but it's made of High Strength
Steel which is much stronger and lighter than the older sheet metal. The
automotive steel is treated for corrosion/rust MUCH better than in the past.
Zinc baths and primers make a huge difference.>
Right you are. The galvanized primers and wax injection prevent any small
bits of corrosion from ------ing. That's why you don't see newer cars with
rotted wheel wells, rocker panels, etc.
1973 Chevy pickups, Ramblers, etc. aren't considered "newer"!
Steel which is much stronger and lighter than the older sheet metal. The
automotive steel is treated for corrosion/rust MUCH better than in the past.
Zinc baths and primers make a huge difference.>
Right you are. The galvanized primers and wax injection prevent any small
bits of corrosion from ------ing. That's why you don't see newer cars with
rotted wheel wells, rocker panels, etc.
1973 Chevy pickups, Ramblers, etc. aren't considered "newer"!
11-24-2003, 02:41 PM
#32
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: new jeep - mastershield undercoat
Speaking of '73 Chevy pickups it is among the few years that used
gas tanks outside the frame rails, '72 was inside the cab, and the tank
moved to inside the frame rails by '75. "GM was aware of the problems
inherent with placement of the fuel tanks outside the frame on its
full-size pickup trucks, which exposure could have been significantly
reduced ..., yet it did not implement such modifications because of
economic considerations. This evidence of a knowing endangerment of all
who may come in contact with one of the 5,000,000 GM full-size pickup
trucks still on the road, motivated by economic benefit, was sufficient
to support an award of punitive damages." form:
http://www.citizen.org/congress/civj...les.cfm?ID=919 And of
course, you know that 90% of all Ford and GM pickups ever made are still
on the road. Can you say that about any Japanese car?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Jerry McG wrote:
>
> Right you are. The galvanized primers and wax injection prevent any small
> bits of corrosion from ------ing. That's why you don't see newer cars with
> rotted wheel wells, rocker panels, etc.
>
> 1973 Chevy pickups, Ramblers, etc. aren't considered "newer"!
gas tanks outside the frame rails, '72 was inside the cab, and the tank
moved to inside the frame rails by '75. "GM was aware of the problems
inherent with placement of the fuel tanks outside the frame on its
full-size pickup trucks, which exposure could have been significantly
reduced ..., yet it did not implement such modifications because of
economic considerations. This evidence of a knowing endangerment of all
who may come in contact with one of the 5,000,000 GM full-size pickup
trucks still on the road, motivated by economic benefit, was sufficient
to support an award of punitive damages." form:
http://www.citizen.org/congress/civj...les.cfm?ID=919 And of
course, you know that 90% of all Ford and GM pickups ever made are still
on the road. Can you say that about any Japanese car?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Jerry McG wrote:
>
> Right you are. The galvanized primers and wax injection prevent any small
> bits of corrosion from ------ing. That's why you don't see newer cars with
> rotted wheel wells, rocker panels, etc.
>
> 1973 Chevy pickups, Ramblers, etc. aren't considered "newer"!
11-24-2003, 02:41 PM
#33
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: new jeep - mastershield undercoat
Speaking of '73 Chevy pickups it is among the few years that used
gas tanks outside the frame rails, '72 was inside the cab, and the tank
moved to inside the frame rails by '75. "GM was aware of the problems
inherent with placement of the fuel tanks outside the frame on its
full-size pickup trucks, which exposure could have been significantly
reduced ..., yet it did not implement such modifications because of
economic considerations. This evidence of a knowing endangerment of all
who may come in contact with one of the 5,000,000 GM full-size pickup
trucks still on the road, motivated by economic benefit, was sufficient
to support an award of punitive damages." form:
http://www.citizen.org/congress/civj...les.cfm?ID=919 And of
course, you know that 90% of all Ford and GM pickups ever made are still
on the road. Can you say that about any Japanese car?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Jerry McG wrote:
>
> Right you are. The galvanized primers and wax injection prevent any small
> bits of corrosion from ------ing. That's why you don't see newer cars with
> rotted wheel wells, rocker panels, etc.
>
> 1973 Chevy pickups, Ramblers, etc. aren't considered "newer"!
gas tanks outside the frame rails, '72 was inside the cab, and the tank
moved to inside the frame rails by '75. "GM was aware of the problems
inherent with placement of the fuel tanks outside the frame on its
full-size pickup trucks, which exposure could have been significantly
reduced ..., yet it did not implement such modifications because of
economic considerations. This evidence of a knowing endangerment of all
who may come in contact with one of the 5,000,000 GM full-size pickup
trucks still on the road, motivated by economic benefit, was sufficient
to support an award of punitive damages." form:
http://www.citizen.org/congress/civj...les.cfm?ID=919 And of
course, you know that 90% of all Ford and GM pickups ever made are still
on the road. Can you say that about any Japanese car?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Jerry McG wrote:
>
> Right you are. The galvanized primers and wax injection prevent any small
> bits of corrosion from ------ing. That's why you don't see newer cars with
> rotted wheel wells, rocker panels, etc.
>
> 1973 Chevy pickups, Ramblers, etc. aren't considered "newer"!
11-24-2003, 02:41 PM
#34
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: new jeep - mastershield undercoat
Speaking of '73 Chevy pickups it is among the few years that used
gas tanks outside the frame rails, '72 was inside the cab, and the tank
moved to inside the frame rails by '75. "GM was aware of the problems
inherent with placement of the fuel tanks outside the frame on its
full-size pickup trucks, which exposure could have been significantly
reduced ..., yet it did not implement such modifications because of
economic considerations. This evidence of a knowing endangerment of all
who may come in contact with one of the 5,000,000 GM full-size pickup
trucks still on the road, motivated by economic benefit, was sufficient
to support an award of punitive damages." form:
http://www.citizen.org/congress/civj...les.cfm?ID=919 And of
course, you know that 90% of all Ford and GM pickups ever made are still
on the road. Can you say that about any Japanese car?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Jerry McG wrote:
>
> Right you are. The galvanized primers and wax injection prevent any small
> bits of corrosion from ------ing. That's why you don't see newer cars with
> rotted wheel wells, rocker panels, etc.
>
> 1973 Chevy pickups, Ramblers, etc. aren't considered "newer"!
gas tanks outside the frame rails, '72 was inside the cab, and the tank
moved to inside the frame rails by '75. "GM was aware of the problems
inherent with placement of the fuel tanks outside the frame on its
full-size pickup trucks, which exposure could have been significantly
reduced ..., yet it did not implement such modifications because of
economic considerations. This evidence of a knowing endangerment of all
who may come in contact with one of the 5,000,000 GM full-size pickup
trucks still on the road, motivated by economic benefit, was sufficient
to support an award of punitive damages." form:
http://www.citizen.org/congress/civj...les.cfm?ID=919 And of
course, you know that 90% of all Ford and GM pickups ever made are still
on the road. Can you say that about any Japanese car?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Jerry McG wrote:
>
> Right you are. The galvanized primers and wax injection prevent any small
> bits of corrosion from ------ing. That's why you don't see newer cars with
> rotted wheel wells, rocker panels, etc.
>
> 1973 Chevy pickups, Ramblers, etc. aren't considered "newer"!
11-24-2003, 02:57 PM
#35
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: new jeep - mastershield undercoat
Um Bill? The Chevy pickups had the gas tanks outside the frame rails until
1987. 1988 was the year they changed this with the new body style that ran
until 1998.
Having owned a 1976, 1978, and 1981 model, I can assure you this was the
case.
http://www.frasierlaw.com/gmtrucks.html
http://www.chuckschevytruckpages.com/models.html
Chris
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:3FC25EF6.C660C275@***.net...
> Speaking of '73 Chevy pickups it is among the few years that used
> gas tanks outside the frame rails, '72 was inside the cab, and the tank
> moved to inside the frame rails by '75. "GM was aware of the problems
> inherent with placement of the fuel tanks outside the frame on its
> full-size pickup trucks, which exposure could have been significantly
> reduced ..., yet it did not implement such modifications because of
> economic considerations. This evidence of a knowing endangerment of all
> who may come in contact with one of the 5,000,000 GM full-size pickup
> trucks still on the road, motivated by economic benefit, was sufficient
> to support an award of punitive damages." form:
> http://www.citizen.org/congress/civj...les.cfm?ID=919 And of
> course, you know that 90% of all Ford and GM pickups ever made are still
> on the road. Can you say that about any Japanese car?
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Jerry McG wrote:
> >
> > Right you are. The galvanized primers and wax injection prevent any
small
> > bits of corrosion from ------ing. That's why you don't see newer cars
with
> > rotted wheel wells, rocker panels, etc.
> >
> > 1973 Chevy pickups, Ramblers, etc. aren't considered "newer"!
1987. 1988 was the year they changed this with the new body style that ran
until 1998.
Having owned a 1976, 1978, and 1981 model, I can assure you this was the
case.
http://www.frasierlaw.com/gmtrucks.html
http://www.chuckschevytruckpages.com/models.html
Chris
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:3FC25EF6.C660C275@***.net...
> Speaking of '73 Chevy pickups it is among the few years that used
> gas tanks outside the frame rails, '72 was inside the cab, and the tank
> moved to inside the frame rails by '75. "GM was aware of the problems
> inherent with placement of the fuel tanks outside the frame on its
> full-size pickup trucks, which exposure could have been significantly
> reduced ..., yet it did not implement such modifications because of
> economic considerations. This evidence of a knowing endangerment of all
> who may come in contact with one of the 5,000,000 GM full-size pickup
> trucks still on the road, motivated by economic benefit, was sufficient
> to support an award of punitive damages." form:
> http://www.citizen.org/congress/civj...les.cfm?ID=919 And of
> course, you know that 90% of all Ford and GM pickups ever made are still
> on the road. Can you say that about any Japanese car?
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Jerry McG wrote:
> >
> > Right you are. The galvanized primers and wax injection prevent any
small
> > bits of corrosion from ------ing. That's why you don't see newer cars
with
> > rotted wheel wells, rocker panels, etc.
> >
> > 1973 Chevy pickups, Ramblers, etc. aren't considered "newer"!
11-24-2003, 02:57 PM
#36
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: new jeep - mastershield undercoat
Um Bill? The Chevy pickups had the gas tanks outside the frame rails until
1987. 1988 was the year they changed this with the new body style that ran
until 1998.
Having owned a 1976, 1978, and 1981 model, I can assure you this was the
case.
http://www.frasierlaw.com/gmtrucks.html
http://www.chuckschevytruckpages.com/models.html
Chris
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:3FC25EF6.C660C275@***.net...
> Speaking of '73 Chevy pickups it is among the few years that used
> gas tanks outside the frame rails, '72 was inside the cab, and the tank
> moved to inside the frame rails by '75. "GM was aware of the problems
> inherent with placement of the fuel tanks outside the frame on its
> full-size pickup trucks, which exposure could have been significantly
> reduced ..., yet it did not implement such modifications because of
> economic considerations. This evidence of a knowing endangerment of all
> who may come in contact with one of the 5,000,000 GM full-size pickup
> trucks still on the road, motivated by economic benefit, was sufficient
> to support an award of punitive damages." form:
> http://www.citizen.org/congress/civj...les.cfm?ID=919 And of
> course, you know that 90% of all Ford and GM pickups ever made are still
> on the road. Can you say that about any Japanese car?
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Jerry McG wrote:
> >
> > Right you are. The galvanized primers and wax injection prevent any
small
> > bits of corrosion from ------ing. That's why you don't see newer cars
with
> > rotted wheel wells, rocker panels, etc.
> >
> > 1973 Chevy pickups, Ramblers, etc. aren't considered "newer"!
1987. 1988 was the year they changed this with the new body style that ran
until 1998.
Having owned a 1976, 1978, and 1981 model, I can assure you this was the
case.
http://www.frasierlaw.com/gmtrucks.html
http://www.chuckschevytruckpages.com/models.html
Chris
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:3FC25EF6.C660C275@***.net...
> Speaking of '73 Chevy pickups it is among the few years that used
> gas tanks outside the frame rails, '72 was inside the cab, and the tank
> moved to inside the frame rails by '75. "GM was aware of the problems
> inherent with placement of the fuel tanks outside the frame on its
> full-size pickup trucks, which exposure could have been significantly
> reduced ..., yet it did not implement such modifications because of
> economic considerations. This evidence of a knowing endangerment of all
> who may come in contact with one of the 5,000,000 GM full-size pickup
> trucks still on the road, motivated by economic benefit, was sufficient
> to support an award of punitive damages." form:
> http://www.citizen.org/congress/civj...les.cfm?ID=919 And of
> course, you know that 90% of all Ford and GM pickups ever made are still
> on the road. Can you say that about any Japanese car?
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Jerry McG wrote:
> >
> > Right you are. The galvanized primers and wax injection prevent any
small
> > bits of corrosion from ------ing. That's why you don't see newer cars
with
> > rotted wheel wells, rocker panels, etc.
> >
> > 1973 Chevy pickups, Ramblers, etc. aren't considered "newer"!
11-24-2003, 02:57 PM
#37
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: new jeep - mastershield undercoat
Um Bill? The Chevy pickups had the gas tanks outside the frame rails until
1987. 1988 was the year they changed this with the new body style that ran
until 1998.
Having owned a 1976, 1978, and 1981 model, I can assure you this was the
case.
http://www.frasierlaw.com/gmtrucks.html
http://www.chuckschevytruckpages.com/models.html
Chris
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:3FC25EF6.C660C275@***.net...
> Speaking of '73 Chevy pickups it is among the few years that used
> gas tanks outside the frame rails, '72 was inside the cab, and the tank
> moved to inside the frame rails by '75. "GM was aware of the problems
> inherent with placement of the fuel tanks outside the frame on its
> full-size pickup trucks, which exposure could have been significantly
> reduced ..., yet it did not implement such modifications because of
> economic considerations. This evidence of a knowing endangerment of all
> who may come in contact with one of the 5,000,000 GM full-size pickup
> trucks still on the road, motivated by economic benefit, was sufficient
> to support an award of punitive damages." form:
> http://www.citizen.org/congress/civj...les.cfm?ID=919 And of
> course, you know that 90% of all Ford and GM pickups ever made are still
> on the road. Can you say that about any Japanese car?
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Jerry McG wrote:
> >
> > Right you are. The galvanized primers and wax injection prevent any
small
> > bits of corrosion from ------ing. That's why you don't see newer cars
with
> > rotted wheel wells, rocker panels, etc.
> >
> > 1973 Chevy pickups, Ramblers, etc. aren't considered "newer"!
1987. 1988 was the year they changed this with the new body style that ran
until 1998.
Having owned a 1976, 1978, and 1981 model, I can assure you this was the
case.
http://www.frasierlaw.com/gmtrucks.html
http://www.chuckschevytruckpages.com/models.html
Chris
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:3FC25EF6.C660C275@***.net...
> Speaking of '73 Chevy pickups it is among the few years that used
> gas tanks outside the frame rails, '72 was inside the cab, and the tank
> moved to inside the frame rails by '75. "GM was aware of the problems
> inherent with placement of the fuel tanks outside the frame on its
> full-size pickup trucks, which exposure could have been significantly
> reduced ..., yet it did not implement such modifications because of
> economic considerations. This evidence of a knowing endangerment of all
> who may come in contact with one of the 5,000,000 GM full-size pickup
> trucks still on the road, motivated by economic benefit, was sufficient
> to support an award of punitive damages." form:
> http://www.citizen.org/congress/civj...les.cfm?ID=919 And of
> course, you know that 90% of all Ford and GM pickups ever made are still
> on the road. Can you say that about any Japanese car?
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Jerry McG wrote:
> >
> > Right you are. The galvanized primers and wax injection prevent any
small
> > bits of corrosion from ------ing. That's why you don't see newer cars
with
> > rotted wheel wells, rocker panels, etc.
> >
> > 1973 Chevy pickups, Ramblers, etc. aren't considered "newer"!
11-24-2003, 03:30 PM
#38
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: new jeep - mastershield undercoat
On 24 Nov 2003 10:41 AM, L.W.(?ill) ------ III posted the following:
> Speaking of '73 Chevy pickups it is among the few years that used
> gas tanks outside the frame rails, '72 was inside the cab, and the
> tank moved to inside the frame rails by '75.
Wrongamundo. They had the side tank conflagration configuration until
87. My '78 (the cab from which now sits on my '73) also had the side
tanks. I'm planning to build another tank which will sit under the bed
in the space formerly occupied by the spare tire, but that will be in
addition to, not in replacement of the standard tanks. At 10 mpg, I
need all the fuel capacity I can get.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
> Speaking of '73 Chevy pickups it is among the few years that used
> gas tanks outside the frame rails, '72 was inside the cab, and the
> tank moved to inside the frame rails by '75.
Wrongamundo. They had the side tank conflagration configuration until
87. My '78 (the cab from which now sits on my '73) also had the side
tanks. I'm planning to build another tank which will sit under the bed
in the space formerly occupied by the spare tire, but that will be in
addition to, not in replacement of the standard tanks. At 10 mpg, I
need all the fuel capacity I can get.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
11-24-2003, 03:30 PM
#39
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: new jeep - mastershield undercoat
On 24 Nov 2003 10:41 AM, L.W.(?ill) ------ III posted the following:
> Speaking of '73 Chevy pickups it is among the few years that used
> gas tanks outside the frame rails, '72 was inside the cab, and the
> tank moved to inside the frame rails by '75.
Wrongamundo. They had the side tank conflagration configuration until
87. My '78 (the cab from which now sits on my '73) also had the side
tanks. I'm planning to build another tank which will sit under the bed
in the space formerly occupied by the spare tire, but that will be in
addition to, not in replacement of the standard tanks. At 10 mpg, I
need all the fuel capacity I can get.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
> Speaking of '73 Chevy pickups it is among the few years that used
> gas tanks outside the frame rails, '72 was inside the cab, and the
> tank moved to inside the frame rails by '75.
Wrongamundo. They had the side tank conflagration configuration until
87. My '78 (the cab from which now sits on my '73) also had the side
tanks. I'm planning to build another tank which will sit under the bed
in the space formerly occupied by the spare tire, but that will be in
addition to, not in replacement of the standard tanks. At 10 mpg, I
need all the fuel capacity I can get.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
11-24-2003, 03:30 PM
#40
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: new jeep - mastershield undercoat
On 24 Nov 2003 10:41 AM, L.W.(?ill) ------ III posted the following:
> Speaking of '73 Chevy pickups it is among the few years that used
> gas tanks outside the frame rails, '72 was inside the cab, and the
> tank moved to inside the frame rails by '75.
Wrongamundo. They had the side tank conflagration configuration until
87. My '78 (the cab from which now sits on my '73) also had the side
tanks. I'm planning to build another tank which will sit under the bed
in the space formerly occupied by the spare tire, but that will be in
addition to, not in replacement of the standard tanks. At 10 mpg, I
need all the fuel capacity I can get.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/
> Speaking of '73 Chevy pickups it is among the few years that used
> gas tanks outside the frame rails, '72 was inside the cab, and the
> tank moved to inside the frame rails by '75.
Wrongamundo. They had the side tank conflagration configuration until
87. My '78 (the cab from which now sits on my '73) also had the side
tanks. I'm planning to build another tank which will sit under the bed
in the space formerly occupied by the spare tire, but that will be in
addition to, not in replacement of the standard tanks. At 10 mpg, I
need all the fuel capacity I can get.
----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins- del@_kills_spammers_rawlinsbrothers.org
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/