1972 Range Rover bolts

A

Austin Shackles

Guest

• Oct 31, 2006

• #21

On or around Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:43:40 GMT, "Rich"
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>Right now I know where I stand, I think, so the only other thing to do is to
>decide whether to fit Polybushes or original, the fact of pressing in and
>out the original spec bushes does not enter the equation but I have never
>used polybushes and might consider giving them a try to draw my own
>opinions, I have heard good and bad about the poly type bushes and have
>searched Google very confusing many swear by them and others hate them
>!!!!!! :-((((
>Don't know what to do !!!

the gist is that polybushes are generally harder, so give a harsher ride,
but more precise handling, I think.

they're also a damn sight more expensive than standard ones.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
Travel The Galaxy! Meet Fascinating Life Forms...
------------------------------------------------\
>> http://www.schlockmercenary.com/ << \ ...and Kill them.
a webcartoon by Howard Tayler; I like it, maybe you will too!

 

O

Oily

Guest

• Oct 31, 2006

• #22

"Dougal" <DougalAThiskennel.free-online.co.uk> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Oily wrote:
> > "Dougal" <DougalAThiskennel.free-online.co.uk> wrote
> > >
> >
> >>You actually loose so much torque in underhead and thread friction
> >>that it won't make much difference!
> >
> >
> > The frictional area is still the same but the fine thread pitch will
> > effectively gear it down so you will overtighten it if you're not
careful.
> >
> > "loose" I think you mean lose, it won't come loose either with a finer
> > thread.
> >
> > Martin
>
> I'll admit to a spelling mistake! Lose was intended. (Too close to
> bedtime.)
>
> The effect of the fine pitch is well understood. In reality bolts of
> that pitch are not going to be readily available and it is also too
> 'delicate' for this kind of environment.

That's what I meant, not very practical for this application, I wasn't the
one who suggested using the fine threads. Sorry for being a pedant but over
90% of recent posts on here have written 'loose' when they meant 'lose' and
it gets tedious, reading it twice to make sure. But it's not important. ;-)

Martin

 

A

Austin Shackles

Guest

• Nov 1, 2006

• #23

On or around Tue, 31 Oct 2006 23:43:22 -0000, "Oily"
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>That's what I meant, not very practical for this application, I wasn't the
>one who suggested using the fine threads. Sorry for being a pedant but over
>90% of recent posts on here have written 'loose' when they meant 'lose' and
>it gets tedious, reading it twice to make sure. But it's not important. ;-)

not to mention "break" when they mean "brake".
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"Any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in Mankind; and
therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee"
John Donne (1571? - 1631) Devotions, XVII

 

I

Ian Rawlings

Guest

• Nov 1, 2006

• #24

On 2006-11-01, Austin Shackles <[email protected]> wrote:

> not to mention "break" when they mean "brake".

I also see "mute point" more than I see "moot point" these days. I
think I've seen it a few times in here.

It's an American site but this is QI in a Stephen Fry sense;

http://wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html

--
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

 

A

Austin Shackles

Guest

• Nov 1, 2006

• #25

On or around Wed, 1 Nov 2006 07:41:41 +0000, Ian Rawlings
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>On 2006-11-01, Austin Shackles <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> not to mention "break" when they mean "brake".
>
>I also see "mute point" more than I see "moot point" these days. I
>think I've seen it a few times in here.
>
>It's an American site but this is QI in a Stephen Fry sense;
>
>http://wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html

nice. It's got one that annoys me that some pillock on the wireless used
yesterday: "second of all".
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"Any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in Mankind; and
therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee"
John Donne (1571? - 1631) Devotions, XVII

 

O

Oily

Guest

• Nov 1, 2006

• #26

"Ian Rawlings" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 2006-11-01, Austin Shackles <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > not to mention "break" when they mean "brake".
>
> I also see "mute point" more than I see "moot point" these days. I
> think I've seen it a few times in here.

Well then, keep quiet about it. ;-)

Martin

>
> It's an American site but this is QI in a Stephen Fry sense;
>
> http://wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html
>
> --
> Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

 

G

GbH

Guest

• Nov 1, 2006

• #27

Austin Shackles wrote:
> On or around Wed, 1 Nov 2006 07:41:41 +0000, Ian Rawlings
> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
>> On 2006-11-01, Austin Shackles <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> not to mention "break" when they mean "brake".
>>
>> I also see "mute point" more than I see "moot point" these days. I
>> think I've seen it a few times in here.
>>
>> It's an American site but this is QI in a Stephen Fry sense;
>>
>> http://wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html
>
> nice. It's got one that annoys me that some pillock on the wireless
> used yesterday: "second of all".

I just hate the idiots who keep insisting 'I know' Clearly they do not.

--
Don't say it cannot be done, rather what is needed to do it!

If the answer is offensive maybe the question was inappropriate

The fiend of my fiend is my enema!

 

I

Ian Rawlings

Guest

• Nov 1, 2006

• #28

On 2006-11-01, Oily <[email protected]> wrote:

>> I also see "mute point" more than I see "moot point" these days. I
>> think I've seen it a few times in here.
>
> Well then, keep quiet about it. ;-)

Well, if you're mute I suppose you have to point!

--
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

 

S

Simon Isaacs

Guest

• Nov 1, 2006

• #29

On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 11:01:42 GMT, "GbH" <[email protected]>
scribbled the following nonsense:

>Austin Shackles wrote:
>> On or around Wed, 1 Nov 2006 07:41:41 +0000, Ian Rawlings
>> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>>
>>> On 2006-11-01, Austin Shackles <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> not to mention "break" when they mean "brake".
>>>
>>> I also see "mute point" more than I see "moot point" these days. I
>>> think I've seen it a few times in here.
>>>
>>> It's an American site but this is QI in a Stephen Fry sense;
>>>
>>> http://wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html
>>
>> nice. It's got one that annoys me that some pillock on the wireless
>> used yesterday: "second of all".
>
>I just hate the idiots who keep insisting 'I know' Clearly they do not.

upset a kid today who said "I know", so told her to get on with it,
gave her the drywipe board pen (not allowed to call them white boards
anymore, upsets some folk....) and sat down at the back of the class.
Funnily enough she didn't know, and the class then told her she didn't
know, should shut up, sit down and let me get on.....
--

Simon Isaacs

"Bad officials are elected by good citizens who do not vote"
George Jean Nathan (1882-1955)

ROT13 me....

 

G

GbH

Guest

• Nov 1, 2006

• #30

Simon Isaacs wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 11:01:42 GMT, "GbH" <[email protected]>
> scribbled the following nonsense:
>
>> Austin Shackles wrote:
>>> On or around Wed, 1 Nov 2006 07:41:41 +0000, Ian Rawlings
>>> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>>>
>>>> On 2006-11-01, Austin Shackles <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> not to mention "break" when they mean "brake".
>>>>
>>>> I also see "mute point" more than I see "moot point" these days. I
>>>> think I've seen it a few times in here.
>>>>
>>>> It's an American site but this is QI in a Stephen Fry sense;
>>>>
>>>> http://wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html
>>>
>>> nice. It's got one that annoys me that some pillock on the wireless
>>> used yesterday: "second of all".
>>
>> I just hate the idiots who keep insisting 'I know' Clearly they do
>> not.
>
> upset a kid today who said "I know", so told her to get on with it,
> gave her the drywipe board pen (not allowed to call them white boards
> anymore, upsets some folk....) and sat down at the back of the class.
> Funnily enough she didn't know, and the class then told her she didn't
> know, should shut up, sit down and let me get on.....

Nice one,

It's those interviewees on the radio, almost every other phrase is 'you know',
actually more likely "y'no". I get fed up with shouting at the radio "No, I don't
know, that's why the interviewer asked you"


--
Don't say it cannot be done, rather what is needed to do it!

If the answer is offensive maybe the question was inappropriate

The fiend of my fiend is my enema!

 

D

Dougal

Guest

• Nov 1, 2006

• #31

Oily wrote:
> "Dougal" <DougalAThiskennel.free-online.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>Oily wrote:
>>
>>>"Dougal" <DougalAThiskennel.free-online.co.uk> wrote
>>> >
>>>
>>>>You actually loose so much torque in underhead and thread friction
>>>>that it won't make much difference!
>>>
>>>
>>>The frictional area is still the same but the fine thread pitch will
>>>effectively gear it down so you will overtighten it if you're not
>
> careful.
>
>>>"loose" I think you mean lose, it won't come loose either with a finer
>>>thread.
>>>
>>>Martin
>>
>>I'll admit to a spelling mistake! Lose was intended. (Too close to
>>bedtime.)
>>
>>The effect of the fine pitch is well understood. In reality bolts of
>>that pitch are not going to be readily available and it is also too
>>'delicate' for this kind of environment.
>
>
> That's what I meant, not very practical for this application, I wasn't the
> one who suggested using the fine threads. Sorry for being a pedant but over
> 90% of recent posts on here have written 'loose' when they meant 'lose' and
> it gets tedious, reading it twice to make sure. But it's not important. ;-)
>
> Martin

No offence etc. taken. I should have noticed but my fingers got
carried away.