Subject: LRO Mailing List DIGEST * * * * V1 #436

From: [email-masked] (LRO Mailing List DIGEST * * * *)
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 10:06:50 -0400

LRO Mailing List DIGEST * * * * Wednesday, July 4 2001 Volume 01 : Number 436

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 15:53:22 -0400 
From: Easton Trevor A <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: RE: OVLR Birthday Party pictures

Great Pictures, Lori

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 16:18:35 -0400
From: "Larry Smith" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: New vs. old reliability (was long and kinda....)

Pete,

You stated:  There are people out there who collect and restore Nash
Metropolitans.
> Since there are many people that would lift a finger to uglify our streets
> by keeping the dysfunctional Metropolitan running, there certainly will be
> those who will lovingly restore a Geo Metro in 40 years.

I resemble that remark!!  Have a yellow and white 1960 convertible, as well
as two sedans that will be resto'd one day.
Same basic technology as the Land Rover - Austin 1500 engine with a manual
gearbox and Lucas electrics.  Only the Americans had to dumb down the Austin
four speed gear box by blanking off one gear so the "three on the tree"
popular in the US would work vice a four on the floor.  One of the sedans I
have is being converted to use a Datsun B-210 engine and automatic
transmission.

Larry Smith
Chester, VA

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 13:29:08 -0700 
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: 95 Rangie and on...

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 00:12:30 -0400
From: "Perrone Ford" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: RE: Re: 95 Rangie and on...

>Marin,  I agree with most of what you said, but I'd have to disagree in the
last paragraph about avoiding a LWB.... for
about $1500 invested, you could get an AWESOME highway cruiser for about
$15k.  That's a pretty good deal in my book....Certainly not for everyone as you have 
to be willing to get your handsdirty and let people work on your vehicle for tricky 
things, but certainlynot the money pit some people would have you believe.

I don't deny you can modify 
the 4.2 LWB into a less trouble-prone vehicle, but why bother.  With plenty of 
earlier coil-spring Range Rovers around to pick from, even in the US, that would 
make a lot more sense than to waste a lot of time turning an LWB into a different 
vehicle.  And while exchanging the air suspension for coil springs will certainly 
eliminate the potential for high suspension maintenance or repair bills, I rather 
doubt adding some crossbracing in the engine is going to eliminate the 
engine's inherent flaws, which are the result of it's overall weakness for the 
power output.  If the solution to the block flexing was adding a few crossbraces, 
I would have expected Rover to do that.  But instead they virtually redesigned the 
entire bottom end, with thicker walls, heavier webbing and bearing supports, etc., 
etc., etc.

If the LWB was the only Range Rover model available, and one desperately had to have 
a Range Rover, then I could maybe see the justification in modifying it.  But since 
a buyer can go either way, to an older model with a less powerful but more reliable 
engine, or a newer model with a far superior engine and an air suspension that 
works, I don't really see the point of putting any effort into making a bad vehicle 
work better.  Scrap the thing and buy, up or down, a Range Rover model that 
worked right from the outset.

We're not talking about trying to preserve a 
valuable vehicle here, a justification one might make in trying to modify a 
NADA 2.6 litre Land Rover Series IIa to keep it from burning up pistons.  The 4.2 LWB 
Range Rover is the bastard of the Range Rover line.  The stretch makes it 
a bit ugly (to me, anyway), it's got a crappy engine and an iffy suspension.  It's not 
rare, it's not unique, it's not historical, it's just a bad car.  So unless one simply wants 
the challenge of trying to right its wrongs (which some mechanically-minded people 
like to do), why bother messing with it?  99.9999 percent of Range Rover buyers 
aren't buying the vehicle to do major surgery on it.  They simply want 
to own a Range Rover for whatever reason.  They're the ones who need to 
be aware of the 4.2s shortcomings, as they're not going to take the thing apart 
in an attempt to correct them.  They simply need to not buy one in the first place, 
and their Range Rover experience will probably be a lot happier.
___________________________
C. Marin Faure
  (original owner)
  1973 Land Rover Series III-88
  1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
  Seattle

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 04:30:40 -0400
From: "James G.Wolf" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: RE: Aztec

>She wants one of
>those new VW bugs - she thinks they're "cute". 

Was taking to a friend who works at a local independant
auto mechanics, TAKES ALMOST ONE HOUR TO CHANGE THE BATTERY!!!!!

Jim Wolf

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 13:45:43 -0700 
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: New vs. old reliability

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 08:28:13 -0700
From: "Rich & Lori Williams" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: New vs. old reliability (was long and kinda....)

>And who the heck is going to restore a 1999
Subaru Outback?  In 40 years it will likely have been in a scrap heap for a
decade.  The newer autos just aren't that durable, by design none the less.
On the other hand, a '36 Cadillac, '57 Chevy, '67 Rover.........all are
worthy of redos, but a Geo Metro - uh, not a chance.

Don't fall into the nostalgia trap.  In 1957, the Chevy BelAir was just 
another car.  I don't remember being particularly enthralled by it.  I 
remember thinking how dorky the Edsel looked when it first came out 
and I was in high school.  I see one now, and I think, "wow, that's really 
a nice design.  I really like the vertical grill, etc., etc. etc."  I remember 
exactly where I was when I first saw a picture of the new Studebaker 
Avanti- sitting in a wall tent on a hot day on a ranch in Colorado.  
Ugliest damn car I'd ever seen.  Now, I look at it as a brilliant design.  
Same with one my all-time favorites, the Studebaker Golden Hawk.  
I thought the thing was atrocious when you could walk onto a lot and 
buy a new one.  Now I'd love to have one, and I think their lines are 
almost Ferrari (sedan) like.  I remember going for a ride in a used 
1955 or 6 Thunderbird a family friend was thinking of buying in the 
early 1960s.  It was a cute car, but pretty ho-hum to me, as it didn't 
have enough room inside and it had that stupid porthole.  Now it's 
another one of my favorites.

The people who will be drooling over the Geo Metro in forty years 
won't be us, if we're still alive.  We'll still be drooling over the 
'57 Chevy.  The people drooling over the Metro will be the kids 
of today, the one's who don't think much of them now, but will 
come to regard the Metro, and all the rest of today's cars, as 
icons for their own youth.  And trust me, there will be people 
drooling over the Geo.  Remember the Nash Metropolitan, that 
God-awful looking little thing that originated in, I think, England?  
Or the Kaiser?  Or the Jeepster?  Anyone who drove one of those 
back when they were new was immediately labeled an idiot. When 
most of us saw one for the first time, our usual reaction was to never 
want to see one again.  But today, those cars evoke fond memories 
and highish prices.  And they don't look so bad anymore.  I saw 
a Jeepster in the parking lot of our marina the other week, and it 
was a pretty cool little machine.
___________________________
C. Marin Faure
  (original owner)
  1973 Land Rover Series III-88
  1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
  Seattle

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 04:54:18 -0400
From: "James G.Wolf" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: RE: 95 RR

>	Certainly not for everyone as you have to be willing to get your hands
>dirty and let people work on your vehicle for tricky things, but certainly
>not the money pit some people would have you believe.

So, this would be a good deal for the average Series owner. We mostly all do
our own work dirty or not anyway. I am thinking about some comfort while
traveling
to dog shows with one to three dogs in crates. plus all the other stuff
that one needs
when doing a field course.

Jim Wolf

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:08:01 -0700 
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: Heritage misconceptions

Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2001 22:20:11 +0100
From: "Frank Elson" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: Heritage misconceptions  (was Leaf vs Coil....)

>I was with you, cheering on the sidelines Marin, right up until you got into
the retro thing...
why, if up-to-date manufacturers don't want to know about earlier models, do
they then turn around and try to sell modern vehicles on the backs of older
models?

Because the manufacturers primary job is to make money.  Right now, 
the US, Canada, and Europe have a huge group of people, the baby boomers, 
experiencing several things at once.  1. We realize we're getting old, we're 
not going to live forever, and we don't want to let go of our impassioned 
youth.  2.  We have (collectively speaking) a lot of money to spend, either 
from our work or what we've inherited from our parents who had a totally 
different work/life ethic from us.  The car people looked at us and said, 
"Hmm.... a whole bunch of people who don't want to let go of the '50s, '60s, 
and '70s and who have a whole lot of money to spend."  And so we get the retro Mustang, 
the retro T-bird, the retro-VW bug, the retro S-type Jaguar, etc., etc., etc.  
They're not selling these things to us on the backs of the original vehicles, 
they're selling them to us on the backs of our memories.

That's one reason.  The other reason is that, like movies, there's only so 
much creativity out there.  My wife is forever looking at the youth-oriented 
clothing commercials on TV, and saying, "That was in style in the '50s" or 
"What's so special about that?  My mom used to wear clothes like that."  As 
long as cars have four wheels, an engine, need to have glass to keep the wind 
out, a roof to keep the rain off, and lights to see with, there are only so many 
variations of design.  Eventually, given those requirements, you're going to do 
something over again.  Today's youth weren't around when a lot of the cars we 
remember were, so the designers feel safe in trotting out older looks because 
the young end of the market will think they're brand new.  Or they'll dig the retro
look.  I recall when every year saw a fairly radical change in car designs, maybe 
not under the skin, but certainly enough that every kid I knew could tell a 63 from a 
62.  Today, I don't have a clue what year a modern car is.  Partly because I don't 
care, but partly because I honestly can't see much difference.  For my money, 
the only real design innovator today (outside of the exotics few of us can afford) 
is Audi.  The TT design is brilliant.  Even if you don't like it, you have to credit someone 
there for having the balls to say, "That's what I like, and that's the way we're going to 
build it."

Car commercials are a wonderful way to find out where a manufacturer is aiming 
their product.  Most of the car commercials today are still aimed at the baby 
boomers.  But one manufacturer, Mitsubishi, has abandoned us.  Watch their 
commercials, and you can see that they are focusing (at least right now) 
on the Gen X, Gen Y, whatever the hell the 18-30 year old crowd is called these 
days.  The commercials feature their people, their music, and their visual look.  
There's not a thing in their spots a baby boomer can relate to.
___________________________
C. Marin Faure
  (original owner)
  1973 Land Rover Series III-88
  1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
  Seattle

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:23:27 -0700 
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Heritage misconceptions

To follow up on my previous post, don't forget that while the 
retro cars LOOK like cars from our beloved past, under the 
skin they are as modern as they come.  They all incorporate 
modifications, of course, but under the skin the PT Cruiser is 
a Dodge Neon, the Jaguar S-Type is a Lincoln, the VW Bug 
is a (Jetta or Golf, I can't remember which),  the T-bird is, 
I'm sure, based on a pre-existing production platform, the 
BMW Z-3 (retro to the 507) is an all-new platform, and so on.

One thing that has so far surprised me.  With all the interest in 
retro styling, I wonder why none of the manufacturers have 
introduced a retro pickup?  I have always liked those trucks 
from the late 40s or early 50s, the ones that, like Land Rover's
pickup cab, have the quarter windows in the rear corners of the 
cab.  I would think a retro pickup that incorporated some of those
really nice design elements, like the pointed hood, flared fenders 
with the bullet headlights faired into the front like an MG-TF, 
rear quarter windows, etc. would be quite popular.
___________________________
C. Marin Faure
  (original owner)
  1973 Land Rover Series III-88
  1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
  Seattle

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 17:34:36 -0400
From: Perrone Ford <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: RE: 95 RR

<html><head></head><body>Marin's concerns about the 4.2 engine DO hold though.&nbsp;
If you are going to DOG the thing, then it might do you better to not get
a 4.2.&nbsp; But I have several friends with better than 100k miles on the clock
with no real issues.&nbsp; If you intend to do some towing, or other extreme work,
then get the 3.9 swb like I have.&nbsp; The extra legroom in the back of the LWB
will certainly make for a more comfortable ride. I'm 6 feet tall and I have
room to stretch my legs in the back of one of those.&nbsp; Its really nice.<br>
<br>
Look here for an example:<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://bvlr.com/browse.php?page=os&car=93">http://bvlr.com/browse.php?page=os&amp;car=93</a><br>
<br>
- -Perrone<br>
<br>
James G.Wolf wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:[email-masked]">
  <blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">	Certainly not for everyone as you have to be willing to get your hands<br>dirty and let people work on your vehicle for tricky things, but certainly<br>not the money pit some people would have you believe.<br></pre></blockquote>
    <pre wrap=""><!----><br>So, this would be a good deal for the average Series owner. We mostly all do<br>our own work dirty or not anyway. I am thinking about some comfort while<br>traveling<br>to dog shows with one to three dogs in crates. plus all the other stuff<br>that one needs<br>when doing a field course.<br><br>Jim Wolf<br><br><br><br><br></pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
</body></html>

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 22:31:13 +0100
From: Elwyn York <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: RE: Re: Test

At 02/07/01 Monday 14:48, you wrote:
>Pong...
>Lee
Yeah, I know! Ive got a strange smell here at the flats, one of the 
cleaning lasses reckons it could be a dead body or animal or something. 
We'll get the pest people out to sort it soon.

>-----Original Message-----
>From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On
>Behalf Of KEITH ARMSTRONG
>Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 2:28 PM
>To: [email-masked]
>Cc: Keith Armstrong
>Subject: LRO: Re: Test
>
>
>Ping...
>
>Keith Armstrong
>Des Moines, Iowa

Elwyn York   ICQ: 17087824
S3 Lightweight. West Midlands
http://ltwt.gq.nu/

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 17:39:56 -0400
From: Keith Tanner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Heritage misconceptions

>  the VW Bug
>is a (Jetta or Golf, I can't remember which),

No difference, actually.

>the T-bird is,
>I'm sure, based on a pre-existing production platform,

The Lincoln, I think.

>One thing that has so far surprised me.  With all the interest in
>retro styling, I wonder why none of the manufacturers have
>introduced a retro pickup?

There have been a few retro pickup show cars. It's only a matter of time. 
Right now, the "Judge Dredd" look seems to be in for trucks.

To comment on an earlier comment about how you can't tell one year from 
another like you used to be able to do - I think that's because of the cost 
of retooling. These days, customers would prefer to have more power, a 
smoother transmission or more doodads. Safety is selling more - as is 
price. The fact that the taillights haven't changed this year isn't really 
a problem. Then again, I personally like the Land Rover philosophy of 
changing things that need changing and leaving the rest alone. My 1967 Land 
Rover can use the doors from a 1958 or from a 2001. How cool is that?

Keith
- ------------
Keith's page de home:
    http://keith.miata.net
- ------------

------------------------------

Date: 3 Jul 2001 15:42:53 -0700
From: Bryan Hoult <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Re: New vs. old reliability

On Tue, 03 July 2001, "Faure, Marin" wrote:

>Or the Kaiser?  Or the Jeepster?  >Anyone who drove one of those 
>back when they were new was >immediately labeled an idiot.

Along these lines, I have been utterly dumbfounded by the recent interest many people are expressing in old AMC products like the Pacer and Gremlin.  These cars were truly dorky.

Bryan
62 88
70 109 "Genie"

________________________________________________
PeoplePC:  It's for people. And it's just smart. 
http://www.peoplepc.com 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 17:27:53 -0600
From: Ivan Van Laningham <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Re: New vs. old reliability

Hi All--

Bryan Hoult wrote:
> 
> Along these lines, I have been utterly dumbfounded by the recent interest many people are expressing in old AMC products like the Pacer and Gremlin.  These cars were truly dorky.
> 

Also the Hornet, and earlier Americans.  What they all had going for
them was the same shared, solid, reliable, easy-to-maintain engine and
drive-train system.  Sure they were ugly, but you could fix anything on
them with a good set of hand tools, a big piece of pipe and a
come-along.  These buggers were dead simple, and dead simple mechanics
like me could keep them going for hundreds of thousands of miles.  Like
ugly carpets, they didn't wear out unless you mistreated them horribly.

Chrysler's slant-six engine was the same way.  If I could maintain that,
anybody could.  Cars were better looking than AMC products, though.

<i-still-wouldn't-sit-near-a-pacer-though>-ly y'rs,
Ivan;-)
- ----------------------------------------------
Ivan Van Laningham
Symantec
http://www.pauahtun.org 
http://www.foretec.com/python/workshops/1998-11/proceedings.html
Army Signal Corps:  Cu Chi, Class of '70
Author:  Teach Yourself Python in 24 Hours

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 19:32:56 -0400
From: "Bruce D. Fowler" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Aztec

- -----Original Message-----
From: Jean-Leon Morin 
:

:If you people think an Aztec is a "Marvel of 00 engineering", try removing
:an oil filter on a brand new Kia Sportage. My my, I didn't think I was
:capable of emitting such foul language...
:
:(most serviced part on a automobile other than the dipstick, and it's
:nowhere to be found)
:
Speeking of engineering.......

Seems the State of Maine isn't very happy with the new Dodge 4X4 pick-ups.
http://www.centralmaine.com/news/stories/010703trucks_m.shtml

Bruce F.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 13:52:39 -1000
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: OVLR Birthday Party pictures

Looks great.  What software did you use.
Pete

> I've put together a slide show of people places and things from my trip to
> the 18th OVLR birthday party. Used a trial version of picture software and
> a new digital camera I'm not used to yet, so please be kind : )

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 16:58:44 -0700
From: "G. Mugele" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Re: Heritage misconceptions

- --============_-1217917765==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

At 2:08 PM -0700 7/3/01, Faure, Marin wrote:
>For my money,
>the only real design innovator today (outside of the exotics few of=20
>us can afford)
>is Audi.  The TT design is brilliant.  Even if you don't like it,=20
>you have to credit someone

Well it may be a brilliant design, though that is clearly a=20
subjective assessment.  However, I don't think that it can=20
legitimately be considered unaffected by the retro trend.

The first time I saw one, my immediate reaction was that it was a=20
cool reflection of the pre-war Audi Grand Prix monsters.  I'm=20
referring to those huge rear-engined V-16 racing trucks that the=20
Reich used, along with the Mercedes W163s and kin, to dominate racing=20
and convince the world of German superiority.  The more TTs I see the=20
more they seem to reflect those lines; particularly the coupe.  In=20
fact, among the German makers, including the Porsche Boxster, only MB=20
seemed to be willing to eschew the retro thing until they announced=20
their new '30s type super luxury sedan the Maybach, named for another=20
pre-war marque.

Land Rovers ain't retro; they're the real thing.
('cept for those owned by latt=E9 drinkers :-D  )

Gerry Mugele
*** "It's not on any map - true places never are."  -- Mark Twain

- --============_-1217917765==_ma============
Content-Type: text/enriched; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

At 2:08 PM -0700 7/3/01, Faure, Marin wrote:

<excerpt>For my money,=20

the only real design innovator today (outside of the exotics few of us
can afford)=20

is Audi.  The TT design is brilliant.  Even if you don't like it, you
have to credit someone=20

</excerpt>

Well it may be a brilliant design, though that is clearly a subjective
assessment.  However, I don't think that it can legitimately be
considered unaffected by the retro trend. =20

The first time I saw one, my immediate reaction was that it was a cool
reflection of the pre-war Audi Grand Prix monsters.  I'm referring to
those huge rear-engined V-16 racing trucks that the Reich used, along
with the Mercedes W163s and kin, to dominate racing and convince the
world of German superiority.  The more TTs I see the more they seem to
reflect those lines; particularly the coupe.  In fact, among the German
makers, including the Porsche Boxster, only MB seemed to be willing to
eschew the retro thing until they announced their new '30s type super
luxury sedan the Maybach, named for another pre-war marque.=20

Land Rovers ain't retro; they're the real thing.

('cept for those owned by latt=E9 drinkers :-D  )

Gerry Mugele

*** <fontfamily><param>Palatino</param><smaller>"It's not on any map -
true places never are."  -- Mark Twain =20
</smaller></fontfamily>

- --============_-1217917765==_ma============--

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 20:18:58 -0400
From: "Lee Jones" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: RE: Aztec

At the site listed below they report:

At times, game wardens and fire control rangers drive over remote unpaved
roads that can be rutted with bumps and holes.

The trucks, which are the 2500 model, are among the most rugged on the
market...

Let's see...  You buy the most "rugged" 4X4 trucks on the market but you
should NEVER take them off road unless the off road is smooth???

Way to go Dodge!

Lee

- -----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On
Behalf Of Bruce D. Fowler
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 7:33 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: LRO: Aztec

Speaking of engineering.......

Seems the State of Maine isn't very happy with the new Dodge 4X4 pick-ups.
http://www.centralmaine.com/news/stories/010703trucks_m.shtml

Bruce F.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 17:24:10 -0700
From: "Rich & Lori Williams" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Lori's OVLR Birthday Party Photos

Way to go - nice slide show Lori!

Makes us want to get in the 109 and head east next summer.....hmmmm.....I
really do need that laptop so that I can take my work on the road!

Rich
'60 SII 109sw

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 20:45:09 -0400
From: Lori Sickley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Re: OVLR Birthday Party pictures

Hi Pete,

Thanks!
First time using a digital camera and didn't know what to do with the 
pictures on the card!

Have a MX-1200 1.3 megapixel Fuji camera and used the E-Z autocam software 
to reduce the files from http://www.beausoft.com/

My one month trial just expired : )

Don't have the tunes your video has though ; )
How about a longer version?

Lori in NE Pennsylvania
http://www.simplerthyme.com/pics/OVLR_BP2001enter.html

At 07:52 PM 7/3/01, Pete wrote:
>Looks great.  What software did you use.
>Pete
>
>
> > I've put together a slide show of people places and things from my trip to
> > the 18th OVLR birthday party. Used a trial version of picture software and
> > a new digital camera I'm not used to yet, so please be kind : )

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 21:11:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: OVLR Birthday Party pictures

On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Lori Sickley wrote:

> I've put together a slide show of people places and things from my trip to 
> the 18th OVLR birthday party. 

Very nice...  I like the nice pink sticker...

> Anyone know the missing name for a red 88 on the RTV?

Sadly, no...

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 21:43:11 EDT
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: LRO: Re: New vs. old reliability

the only old AMC product i like is the AMX with the 401 V8.  those things are 
pretty cool.  uh oh more specs from cars that went out of production long 
before i was born... : )

adam

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 21:47:54 EDT
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: LRO: Aztec

In a message dated 7/3/01 7:32:28 PM, [email-masked] writes:

>http://www.centralmaine.com/news/stories/010703trucks_m.shtml

okay now, if you took your land rover off the road every time it shimmied or 
shook after going over a bump, you wouldnt be going anywhere very often now 
would you? my advice to them is to check the front suspension bushes.

adam

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 22:32:56 -0400
From: "Bruce D. Fowler" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: OVLR Birthday Party pictures

- -----Original Message-----
From: Lori Sickley

:
:I've put together a slide show of people places and things from my trip to
:the 18th OVLR birthday party
:
:Hope you enjoy!
:
Yes I did, great job!!!

Bruce F.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 22:46:17 -0400
From: "Bruce D. Fowler" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Aztec

- -----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]

:>http://www.centralmaine.com/news/stories/010703trucks_m.shtml
:
:okay now, if you took your land rover off the road every time it shimmied
or
:shook after going over a bump, you wouldnt be going anywhere very often now
:would you?

You are joking?... right?

Think I can count on one hand the times my rovers have been removed from
service because of front end problems, and yes... I'm going all the way back
to 1979 when I bought my first series rover.

May I ask how many times your rover has been down due to front end
problems since you have owned it, and how many miles do you put on your
vehicle each year?

my advice to them is to check the front suspension bushes.
:
I think you advice will land you a very high paying job with Daimler
Chrysler,
Give them a call!!

Bruce F.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 23:02:34 -0400
From: "Jean-Leon Morin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Dodge front ends

Unfortunately, the problems are not limited to Dodge vehicles only. Ford
seems to be having major reliablility problems with their F250's.
Interestingly, this winter, I came into work, and was met by a beautiful
example of a Ford F250, nice Western plow, backrack, delta toolboxes, and a
thoroughly broken tie rod.

The owner had gotten the truck towed overnight, after blowing the tie rod
plowing. We checked the front end, and to the owner's dismay, at 50 000 kms,
the ENTIRE front end needed overhauling - end to end. The guy was raging. He
had blown 50 000$ on a beautiful landscape-mobile, replacing a 1 1/4 ton
chevy pickup (ex mil). After playing phone tag with the local ford dealers
to get a price on some suspension parts, the guy, red as a tomato, got the
truck flat towed to the nearest dealer. Would NOT want to be the sales
manager on at the time.

This is not an isolated incident. 2wd, 4wd, today's work truck fleet is
getting weaker and weaker. Front end parts seem to wear out extremely
quickly - and this is not extreme use! A one ton snowplow prepped pickup
ought to be able to handle a small western plow for a season. I know a rover
could push one for a decade at least...

J-L

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 23:14:55 -0400
From: Lori Sickley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: OVLR Birthday Party pictures

: )

Have you checked the Big Green Beastie lately? <EG>

At 09:11 PM 7/3/01, Dixon wrote:

>Very nice...  I like the nice pink sticker...

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 23:25:49 -0400
From: "Jean-Leon Morin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: OVLR Birthday Party pictures

Thanks, Lori... The pictures are great!

Funny how you referred to Valdez as "the" Valdez... I'd better not mumble
that when driving, it might start thinking it's got some kind of title - as
in it is "the" one and only...

It might get stuckup and develop an air of superiority...  And be more of a
PITA that is is currently.

For those who are wondering what Kieth Elliot, Kieth Tanner, and Ted Rose
are doing unsupervised around my truck, they were having a little tach
removing session - seems a 4 cyl tach is pretty useless with a 6 cyl
motor...

And yes they had permission...

J-L

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Lori Sickley <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 3:00 PM
Subject: LRO: OVLR Birthday Party pictures

> I've put together a slide show of people places and things from my trip to
> the 18th OVLR birthday party. Used a trial version of picture software and
> a new digital camera I'm not used to yet, so please be kind : )
> A different script would have been preferred, but that's it for now.
>
> It takes about ten minutes on my cup and string connection. If you choose
> to view it, hopefully it will work for you too. Let the pictures load
first
> or the comments won't match!
>
> Anyone know the missing name for a red 88 on the RTV?
>
> OVLR knows how to put on an event. The best bargain around too!
>
> Thanks to all involved for their hard work and great food. You know who
you
> are.
>
>
> Caution : )
>
> There are coilers, leafers, people, ferrets! and even a Unimog all getting
> along equally well for those easily offended ; )
>
> http://www.simplerthyme.com/pics/OVLR_BP2001enter.html
>
>
> Hope you enjoy!
>
> Lori in NE Pennsylvania
> http://www.simplerthyme.com/store/LR.html
>
>

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 23:35:44 -0400
From: "Jean-Leon Morin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Aztec

Uhh,

Since when does Dodge have suspension bushes in the front end? They are the
only truck that still uses a straight axle on a 4x4 3/4 ton... Uppy and
lowey ball joints are found on the pivots... NOT bushes. Granted, the susp.
arms have bushes, but I'd be willing to bet the front end is COMPLTELY SHOT
on those trucks. We are not talking about a 1 ounce shake here - I suspect
if a professional mechanic advises to remove a vehicle from the road, it is
not merely a technicality, but major front end wear. Been there, seen that.

Land-Rovers? Shake after a bump? I have been behind the wheel of some pretty
worn out trucks and equipment, I must say that there is no vehicle on the
planet that I feel has a stronger front end on it than a rover. Besides,
this only reaffirms the obvious - there is no other vehicle that allows you
to laugh at ANY truck owner than a L-R. It's the real thing.

J-L

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Bruce D. Fowler <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 10:46 PM
Subject: Re: LRO: Aztec

>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked]
>
> :>http://www.centralmaine.com/news/stories/010703trucks_m.shtml
> :
> :okay now, if you took your land rover off the road every time it shimmied
> or
> :shook after going over a bump, you wouldnt be going anywhere very often
now
> :would you?
>
> You are joking?... right?
>
> Think I can count on one hand the times my rovers have been removed from
> service because of front end problems, and yes... I'm going all the way
back
> to 1979 when I bought my first series rover.
>
> May I ask how many times your rover has been down due to front end
> problems since you have owned it, and how many miles do you put on your
> vehicle each year?
>
> my advice to them is to check the front suspension bushes.
> :
> I think you advice will land you a very high paying job with Daimler
> Chrysler,
> Give them a call!!
>
> Bruce F.
>
>

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 00:21:23 EDT
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: LRO: Aztec

yes, i was joking.  seems i forgot to put the little ": )" in there.

adam

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 00:24:23 EDT
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: LRO: Aztec

JL, Ford also uses a straight front axle on the F250.  and dodge uses coil springs, which have quite a few bushes.  notice i said SUSPENSION bushes, not axle bushes.

adam

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2001 21:40:09 -0700
From: "Monika & Steve Rochna" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: T-case question

All:

Does anyone know if a Fairey overdrive will fit on the T-case used on the
IIB FC?  I know the trans. brake drum is much larger and might need to be
changed with the smaller 88/109 one but I'm wondering if the overdrive gear
will actually mesh with the t-case gear since the case has a lower hi-range
gearing than the 88/109 case.  Any info would be helpful and may save me
quite a few hours of wasted sweat and grunt labor.

Thanks - Steve Rochna, Fallon, NV.

1972 88"
1968 110"

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 09:15:42 +0200
From: Paul Oxley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Re: Defender/D-90 info

Frank Elson wrote:
 
> uk-lro deals with all Land Rovers, no fear or favour, no elitism, all
> welcome...

As does the za-lro (Hell! They even put up with me).

Regards

Paul Oxley
AfricanAdrenalin.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 12:54:48 -0000
From: "N Forbes" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Re: OVLR Birthday Party pictures

Hey Lori, those pictures were great. Thanks for sharing.

Niall Forbes
66 IIa 88SW - The Red Zit
Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
The Nova Scotian Rover - http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/forbes/intro.htm

"See the happy moron,
He doesn't give a damn.
I wish I were a moron.
My God! Perhaps I am!"
- --author unknown

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 13:01:17 -0000
From: "N Forbes" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Dodge front ends

>This is not an isolated incident. 2wd, 4wd, today's work truck fleet is
>getting weaker and weaker. Front end parts seem to wear out extremely
>quickly - and this is not extreme use! A one ton snowplow prepped pickup
>ought to be able to handle a small western plow for a season. I know a 
>rover
>could push one for a decade at least...

The problem is the SUV craze. Everyone wants a car but they think they want 
a truck. So they buy a truck and are dismayed to learn it is a truck and not 
a car. Eventually the auto makers caught on and turned all the trucks into 
cars that look like trucks. Now, you can't buy a real truck any more but 
there are lots of cars available.

Niall Forbes
66 IIa 88SW - The Red Zit
Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
The Nova Scotian Rover - http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/forbes/intro.htm

"See the happy moron,
He doesn't give a damn.
I wish I were a moron.
My God! Perhaps I am!"
- --author unknown

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 08:58:53 -0700
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: LRO: Dodge front ends

On Tue, 3 Jul 2001 23:02:34 -0400 "Jean-Leon Morin"
<[email-masked]> writes:
> Unfortunately, the problems are not limited to Dodge vehicles only. 
> Ford
> seems to be having major reliablility problems with their F250's. 
> J-L
Seems the big three have heard the customer and softened there truck
lines to make them more appealing to the biggest customer.  What I see is
you have to get 1 ton or bigger now to get the strength of the early
eighty's 3\4 ton's.  Ford has expanded its heavy duty line in resent
years, I believe to satisfy its old customers.  If the customer
understands that the utility of the trucks has been moved up the line so
that the old F250 buyer nows needs to buy  a 350 or 450, he will be well
served, if not he wares it out quick.  The good name of the old 3\4 tones
has been used to create the modern cod piece.

Kind of like grade inflation.

Chris hall

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 09:44:59 -0400
From: "M. Tompkins" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Dodge front ends

There are people that want to drive these so-called
SUVs like sports cars and wonder why they tip
over. I never heard of a sports car driver taking
his car off-road and suing a car manufacturer
because it failed to perform adequately.

So what can you drive off a dealer's showroom
floor that can be still considered a real off-road
vehicle? For practical purposes let's assume
the only thing you are changing are the tires.

Oh and a Happy 4th!

Cheers,
Mike
'66 Hybrid Coiler 109" SW
http://www.geocities.com/Baja/Trails/6623/

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 15:10:08 +0100
From: Ian Stuart <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Dodge front ends

On Wednesday 04 July 2001 14:44, you wrote:
> So what can you drive off a dealer's showroom
> floor that can be still considered a real off-road
> vehicle? For practical purposes let's assume
> the only thing you are changing are the tires.
Defender, Discovery, Range Rover

Freelander is a bit dodgy for anything more that rough fields and 
graded tracks (though someone did try to use one at the 1999 Scottish 
Hillrally)

- -- 
           --==**==--
Ian Stuart - EDINA, DataLibrary, University computing services.
- ---------------------------------
A man depriving some village, somewhere, of a first-class idiot
- ---------------------------------
http://lucas.ucs.ed.ac.uk/

------------------------------

End of LRO Mailing List DIGEST * * * * V1 #436
**********************************************