HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Re: 305 torque
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 03:15:57 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Monday, Jan 11 22:15:51
X-Sequence: 3374
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu

Eric Webb on the Hotrod List (hotrod@dixie.com) wrote:
: 
: Good point.  You could even buy a complete 383 (400 crank, 5.7" rods) for
: about $2300 from RHS.  Then you could sell your 305 to recoup some of your
: investment.  Now a 383 is a strokin' small block!  Pulls boats, trailers,
: small trees....

Ha!  Actually I have been considering one of these 383s for my truck.  The
truck needs the extra 'inches and will pull trailers... maybe even trees!  :^)
I will probably build it myself though, since I already have the 350 short
block.

The Camaro needs a little more economy so that is why I decided to build a
clean, efficient, 305 torque mouse.

DER

-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 Don Robinson    (602) 752-6466     Internet:  vlsiphx!donr@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
   ** Any resemblance between the above views and those of my employer, **
   ** my terminal, or the view out my window are purely coincidental.   **

----------
Posted by: emory!marble.UUCP!donr (Don Robinson)
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Re: Chainsaws (Oh NO!)
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 93 22:18:12 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Thursday, Jan 07 17:18:08
X-Sequence: 3248
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu


 This sounds like OLD GROWTH TIMBER.......and SPOTTED OWLS!!!!
A word from the Great NorthWest :-)
Not to be taken seriously, JGD!!!
----------
Posted by: Bill Ingram <emory!sequent.com!ingram>
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Re: iron to aluminum glide conversion
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 93 09:29:24 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Tuesday, Jan 05 04:29:07
X-Sequence: 3175
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu


looper@cco.caltech.edu (Mark D. Looper) writes:

>hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List) writes:

>> That reminds me.  When did Chevrolet drop the straddle mount
>>configuration?

>The side engine mounts were introduced in '58.

>> The front bolt bosses came back in '68 on the 350 so they could mount
>>the power steering and stuff more easily, so there were only a few years
>>there without the front bosses.





>> I think the mounting holes on the front of the cylinder heads also
>>appeared in '68.  (?)

>The long water pump came out in '69 on most passenger cars; its belt
>configuration allowed the alternator to be mounted forward of the head
>instead of over the valve cover.  Presumably, the bolt holes necessary
>for the alternator bracket were introduced at the same time.

>I haven't found any info about the timing of the switch from bellhousing
>to block for the starter mounts; all my references say "some early blocks"
>had the bellhousing mount, or something equally unspecific.

Yes, and some early blocks were drilled for a two-bolt type starter.
These were used with turboglide trans *what a fine piece that was*
the problem is that the inner bolt hole is 1/2 a-bolt-hole out of
place to fit ANY newer starter. Just ask me how I know.

Jim Davies

----------
Posted by: emory!fraser.sfu.ca!jimd (Jim Davies)
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Re: 351C trivia...
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 93 06:06:22 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Saturday, Jan 09 01:06:05
X-Sequence: 3324
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu

In article <pp1r+8f@dixie.com> Dave Williams writes:
>
>-> G'day Dave,
>-> [Still having fun casting?? :-)]
>
> It's been too cold and rainy lately.  I'm debating whether to cast up
>a Hilborn-style injector intake for the 351.  It's right at the outer
>limit of my present capabilities, but no pain, no gain, right?  <grin>

	Hey, Dave, how about an article, either for the list or for
PE, about casting aluminum?  I would love to know how to do this.  Please
include a decent bibliography so we can pick up the details from sources
where you may have learned the art.

Thanks,
-- 
Chris BeHanna	DoD# 114          1983 H-D FXWG Wide Glide - Jubilee's Red Lady
behanna@syl.nj.nec.com	          1975 CB360T - Baby Bike
Disclaimer:  Now why would NEC
agree with any of this anyway?    I was raised by a pack of wild corn dogs.

----------
Posted by: emory!syl.nj.nec.com!behanna
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Re: 429/460 Ford connecting rods
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 04:02:57 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Monday, Jan 11 23:02:51
X-Sequence: 3379
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu

> >  I would recommend trying to find a set of 429CJ (or equiv) rods too, since
> >  they are they same length, same diameter holes, and literally twice as
> >  beefy.
> >
> 
> I thought that all 429/460 rods were forged and the main difference
> between hi and lo perf was that the seat for the rod bolt head was
> broached on the lo perf version and spot faced for the "good" ones.    
> 
> Am I missing something? Is there something else that separates the good
> from the bad and the ugly?
> Posted by: emory!sierra.com!vcook (Victor Cook)

The CJ rods are quite noticeably thicker than the standard rods and have 
larger bolts too. If you ever see the ones with the D0OE prefix on the
part number (sorry, I can't remember the rest of the p.n.) you'll be able
to tell the difference at a glance.

----------
Posted by: Neal Howard <emory!gatech!cmptrc.lonestar.org!neal>
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Re: Gasoline and about last nig
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 01:19:46 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Monday, Jan 11 20:19:43
X-Sequence: 3361
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu

> [The competition is to see who can cut through a log the fastest.  
> Alcohol classes typically use 4 ft logs while unlimited nitro burners
> use 6 ft diameters.  Typical cut times are under 5 seconds.  My mentor
> used to run a nitro saw.  One of the old McCollough gear drives that
> had the same engine as their go-kart motors.  Operated it in a
> fire suit and mask just like the dragster fellows.  I understand this
> sport is still popular in the northwest, but I've not heard of it 
> around here in a long time.  JGD]

It's been about a year or so since I've looked for it, but I've seen
chainsaw races on ESPN several times...  along with ax throwing, etc.
I think the larger chainsawshad 250cc engines.


-- 
Jon Lusky
lusky@gnu.ai.mit.edu

 79 Rx-7 12A/Holley 4bbl
 67 Camaro/350/4spd (under construction)
 89 Jeep Wrangler/258 (currently self destructing)

----------
Posted by: emory!gnu.ai.mit.edu!lusky
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: fuel use
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 93 22:59:14 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Friday, Jan 08 17:59:09
X-Sequence: 3300
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu

Using an estimated molecular weight of 100 for gasoline (seems OK for
a benzene-like molecule), I get about 13.5 kg/min on a 500ci 8000rpm 11:1mix
1.0 VE engine. That's about 10 gallons a minute. I used a real calculator,
and only slightly bogus numbers (like that molar weight estimate above),
and it's not too far off from John's 6gal/min estimate.


-- 
---
John R. Lupien
lupienj@wal.hp.com

----------
Posted by: emory!wal.hp.com!lupienj (John Lupien)
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Re: Solid Lifters?
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 93 23:52:39 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Friday, Jan 08 18:52:36
X-Sequence: 3306
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu

Dave Williams on The Hotrod List (hotrod@dixie.com) wrote:
: 
:  "Worth looking at" if you like short duration, wide lobe center, low
: overlap cams for computer controlled cars.  These are basically yer
: generic RV or stump puller grinds with wider lobe centers.  For adding a
: little oomph to your four door Caprice they're OK, but they're severely
: limited because too much overlap will freak the oxygen sensor.

So for an application like mine - "329 the hard way" intended for street,
low RPM, emissions legal use - that I want to yield as much economy and
bottom end grunt as possible....   one of these cams would be a good
selection?  I was thinking about the Chevy ZZ3 roller cam as a model.  It
has some very impressive torque figures and is smog legal.  The '82 305
block that I will be starting with does not have hydraulic lifters, so
I would have to go the Crane (whoever) retrofit route.  I am trying to
get a warm and fuzzy feeling that the roller route would be worth the
money and effort to put together.  What do you guys think?

:  I waited a long time for someone to grind some real performance
: profiles for the factory hydraulic rollers.  After all, over half the
: cost of a roller cam is the lifters.  Alas, the factory hydraulics are
: low-RPM pieces that pump up quick, and they couldn't be any heavier if
: they were filled with lead shot.  They're not suitable for quick cam
: profiles.

I don't understand "quick cam profiles".  I thought the folks at Chevy
and the rest have gone to rollers because they *can* get a quick profile.
The short duration, highER lift cams can be ground for roller setups
where the same specs would be impossible on hydraulic or solid setups.
True??

What is the "real performance profile" that you have been waiting for?
Do you want a high RPM screamer?  What kind of application do these
cams fall short for?

:  To the best of my knowledge, all of the grinds intended for stock
: roller lifters are very mild.  You can't just pick out a hairy roller
: profile - roller cams are generated with a specific roller size.  If you
[...good example scenario omitted...]

I had not considered using anything but the roller set designed for the
cam - a matched set.  Now that I understand the profile of the cam as it
relates to the geometry of the roller better, thanks to your explanation,
I now know to *always* keep the set matched.

DER

-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 Don Robinson    (602) 752-6466     Internet:  vlsiphx!donr@asuvax.eas.asu.edu

   ** Any resemblance between the above views and those of my employer, **

----------
Posted by: emory!marble.UUCP!donr (Don Robinson)
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Re: Geof Evans
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 03:45:27 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Monday, Jan 11 22:45:04
X-Sequence: 3377
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu


In article <m0nAZkQ-0000pKC@dixie.com> somebody wrote:
>>> 
>>>-> BTW, Geof Evans, one of our Australian correspondents, is in the USA
>>>-> on vacation.  He is coming to Pennsylvania today and will stop by for
>>>-> dinner. His tour plan is to go south from here to Florida, then west
>>>-> across the southern tier states to California.  I'll give him your
>>>-> regards.
> . . . .
>> Geof and his wife Anita had dinner with us night before last.  Nice couple.
>>
>>>>> Now that bit is complete bullshit..Geof..
>> 

We had the pleasure of Geof and Anitas company last weekend, a very
nice couple indeed despite what Geof might say!

>>>>> Hey Dave... that van we purchased... we threw a tyre yesterday at what we
> thought was 55 mph...but today in Ohio Mr. Patrolman was pleased to imform
> [stuff deleted]

Geof and I cruised over to the local 'boneyard' and spent an hour going
through the lug nut containers looking for some custom chrome lug nuts
to restore the van to its "modified/customized" appearance.  He had trouble
changing out the bad tires when he found the old custom lug nuts had
aluminum caps covering them!  BTW, when you remove those caps, your lug
wrench may no longer get the proper 'bite' when you attempt to remove the
lug nuts..  ;^)  Failing to find a set of 19 matching, we settled for chrome
on one side, non-chrome on the other -- it doesn't look too bad as long
as you don't walk all the way around the van (that's right, 19 -- we were
able to salvage one of the old ones which didn't *appear* to be covered,
it was..  Back to the bins for one more lug nut!)  I won't go into the
fun we had at the Sears Hardware store and lug wrenches, I'm sure Geof
will want to share that when he gets back..

With the extra problems, an *awful* snow storm and already running
behind schedule, Geof and Anita headed out early Sunday morning through
a blinding, blowing blizzard they won't soon forget, I'm sure!  I know they
felt very bad about having to change some plans to try to make it through to
their next location :^(

>> Is Ron Rader still on line? Geof asked me to ask his whereabouts.
>> 
>> ----------
>> Posted by: Dave Tartaglia <emory!immacc.prepnet.com!indy>
>>  
>>>>> Subsequently hacked up and reposted by Geof Evans...so there !

One more thing, maybe someone in our group could answer definitively --
when the wandering couple get to California, will they be able to sell
their 1978 Chevy van (licensed in Pennsylvania) if it is not smog-able??
If not, are there any suggestions you could pass on to them, such as, sell
it in New Mexico?  If anyone else sees them along their path, please pass
on any answer..

Phil Gunsul

----------
Posted by: emory!mgweed.ATT.Com!prg (Phil Gunsul - WB9AAX)
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Re: humvee
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 00:45:19 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Monday, Jan 11 19:45:08
X-Sequence: 3357
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu

> 
> I would think that the Cummins Turbo Diesel would work
> very nicely in a HumVee.
> -Merv
> 
> ----------
> Posted by: emory!MAINE.maine.edu!IO10702

Or a big block <insert major US auto manufacturer here).
Maybe a blown big block chevy...


-- 
Jon Lusky
lusky@gnu.ai.mit.edu

 79 Rx-7 12A/Holley 4bbl
 67 Camaro/350/4spd (under construction)
 89 Jeep Wrangler/258 (currently self destructing)

----------
Posted by: emory!gnu.ai.mit.edu!lusky
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: RE: Autonotes #7
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 00:28:15 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Monday, Jan 11 19:28:09
X-Sequence: 3355
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu


          Fun stuff!  I see the 93 LT1s come with some kind of composite 
          material rocker covers.  GM claimes that it quiets valvetrain 
          noise. (I think composite means a mixture of plastic and moose 
          dung)  But how noisy can a hydraulic roller system be?  Could the 
          GM factories in Canada be dumping moose dung on Bowling Green?
          
          You have to wonder about the Allante.  GM has lost money on the 
          suckers from day one.  Now, just as it finally has some Northstar 
          power, and some suspension enhancements, they're going to can it?
          Yeah, it is probably overpriced, but at least it is a real car 
          now.  Reminds me of when the Buick folks put an anemic version of 
          the best V6 ever made - the 3.8 liter - in the Reatta.  When they 
          finally started talking about putting in a permutation of the 
          Grand National's vaunted turbo version, the bean counters canned 
          it.  Go figure.
          
          Regards,
          Eric

----------
Posted by: ERIC WEBB 919-541-7896 <emory!epamail.epa.gov!WEBB.ERIC>
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: 351C trivia...
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 93 17:20:09 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Monday, Jan 04 12:19:59
X-Sequence: 3165
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu

>-> First, anyone who can't get a 351C to rev to more than 6,000 rpm has
>-> either:
>-> 1) weak valve springs - causing valve float.
>-> 2) A very mild cam.
>-> 3) Any of a host of ignition/timing problems.
>
> So I figured, only I have no idea what the CR, ignition, and cam timing
>specs are for Australian 351Cs, which is what we were talking about.
 
Hope this will help:
 
   Standard Australian 351C - 300 duration and .500 lift, other variations
   were available when purchasing the GT and the HO options.
 
   Compression Ratios:
     72-73 (2V) 9.5:1     Australian
     72-73 (4V) 11.0:1    Imported (USA)  - Fitted to last of the GTs only.
     74-75 (2V) 9.1:1     Australian
     74-75 (4V) 11.0:1    Imported (USA)  - Only fitted to HO.
     74-75 (4V) 9.1:1     Australian      - Fitted to GT only.
 
     302's:  72-73 9.8:1 & 74-75 9.4:1
 
   Valve head diamter:
     Inlet:
      302 & 351 (2V, 4V Australian) 51.61 - 52.07 mm (2.032-2.050 in)
      351 (4V Imported) 55.50 - 55.83 mm (2.183-2.198 in)
     Outlet:
      302 & 351 (2V, 4V Australian) 41.91 - 42.16 mm (1.650-1.660 in)
      351 (4V Imported) 43.30 - 43.56 mm (1.705-1.715 in)
 
   All ran ignition timing of 6 deg btdc
   Contact point gap:
 
      1972-1973 302 & 351 2V (auto) 0.33-0.45 mm (0.013-0.018 in)
                351 2V/4V (manual)  0.53 mm (0.021 in)
      1974-1975 302,351 2V & 4V 0.33-0.45 mm (0.013-0.018 in)
                351 4V (imported) 0.53 mm (0.021 in)
 
   Dwell Angle:
 
      1972-1973 302 & 351 2V (Auto)  26-30 deg
                351 2V/4V (Manual)   24-29 deg
      1974-1975 302, 351 2V/4V       26-30 deg
                351 4V (Imported)    24-29 deg
 
 
I hope the conversion to inches is correct. All the above is from my
many notes/scribblings so some may not be exactly accurate. If you want
some more information then give me a yell.
 
Note that generally all 302s would run cams designed for the 351C which
resulted in the 302 being slightly "lumpier" at idle.
 
>-> Even the 2V heads have intake/exhaust ports that should let the
>-> engine rev to 7,000 (it'll probably peak at 5,000 - 5,500, though, in
>-> terms of max. H.P.)
>
> They're good to 7000, leveling off at 7500.  Caveat:  you *must* have
>an appropriate intake manifold to actually wind the engine that high.
 
I can at least assure you that Australian 351Cs could not maintain 7000
RPM because of the dodgy valve springs that were standard. Besides, once
the engine passes 6000 RPM it becomes breathless and drops right off the
power band. Of course the whole idea of these cars was to put them
straight on the race track so needless to say the valve springs were
always "pitched" in favour of better and 7000+ was achieved.
 

----------
Posted by: Mark Jose <emory!werple.apana.org.au!speednut>
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Re: No Subject Line
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 02:02:15 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Monday, Jan 11 21:02:12
X-Sequence: 3366
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu

Stuff deleted 
> 
> I have settled on GM, pre 1966.  I'd like to be in the small block
> era, so the initial range is 1955-1966.  It seems all 55-58 cars cost
>
> expensive.  So, I a looking mainly at 60-63 mid sized 4 door GM.
> I'd like no power doors, windows, mirrors, brakes, steering.
> No expensive radios.  I am not impressed by paint.
>
> In sum, nothing radical, just decent power and drivabilty that has 
> been modernized.
> 
Well if you like 60-63 GM, how about a 4 door hardtop? Impala, Catalina,
Olds 98, Caddy Sedan deVille? Cheap and plentiful.

As for the fifties stuff, look beyond the Tri-Chevies for the best buys.
And as John mentioned, they cost less than they used to, as well.

I just spotted an interesting hybrid for sale: '49 Olds Rocket 88  
Torpedo (fastback) on a '73 Grand Prix chassis. Asking $3500.

Just check your local Auto Locator.  Stuff's going begging these days.
In all the time I've been fooling around with cars, I can't remember a
better time to buy in.

----------
Posted by: Dave Tartaglia <emory!immacc.prepnet.com!indy>
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Watts Link
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 93 05:33:55 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Saturday, Jan 09 00:33:34
X-Sequence: 3321
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu

Well, so far, by the ongoing discussions, I've decided to go ahead
with the Watts Link.

Conclusions:

1) The bell will be mounted to the frame, the tie rods to the ends
   of the axle.

2) The center of the pivot will be centered on the differential,
   and the tie rods will be parallel to the ground and to the
   axle as viewed from behind the car with the car static.


Further questions:

1) It seems that placing the pivot _exactly_ at the diff center
   point will be easy left-to-right but difficult top-to-bottom,
   due to weight.  It needs to be centered with the driver in,
   fuel in, etc.  Is building it to be adjustable top-to-bottom
   worthwhile?  Where are the significant loads on the bell's
   pivot bearing?  Top-to-bottom or side-to-side?  Intuition says
   that the major loads are side-to-side, so not much strength
   will be sacrificed by a top-to-bottom adjustability.

2) Anyone have any rules of thumb for computing the diameter of
   the bell based on expected axle travel?  What is the acceptable
   amount of rotational travel for the bell?  45 degrees?  I assume
   that 90 degrees is too much.  Is it?


Thanks for the great discussions.

-Bob Wise


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Bob Wise          | INET:622-1322 | MCIMail:rmwise | Pager:719-577-1928 |
| Unix Consultant   |-----------------------------------------------------|
| Consultant to MCI | Phone:719-592-1322 | Internet:rmwise@apdev.mci.com  |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------
Posted by: emory!mcigate.apdev.mci.com!rmwise (Bob_Wise)
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod