I bought another Formal...

[commando1]

Never assume.

Posted via Topify on Android

 

[polara71]

I never assume, I presume and it IS implied

 

[commando1]

Assume and presume are synonyms.

Posted via Topify on Android

 

[polara71]

Yes, but I can never be caught on the stupid odd couple joke........oh its tiring yet timeless


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfvTwv5o1Qs

 

[1978 NYB]

The point that I ponder the most about these 1978 wiper cams (to the point I may have appeared to be obsessed) is why did Chrysler change the damn design for 1978 knowing 1978 was the last year they were going to build C-Bodies and then never used that wiper cam again. The previous design (small cam) worked well and didn't and still doesn't present any problems.To save arguments....Chrysler used a similar design on Cordoba's and other related cars but not the exact design or part number for 1978 C's.

 

[commando1]

I still am shocked they went to thinner glass. The tooling for that must have been outrageous.

 

[polara71]

Theres a reason they went bankrupt.

 

[Mr C]

I still am shocked they went to thinner glass. The tooling for that must have been outrageous.

We all know Chrysler Corp did incomprehensible things over the years (the one of none cars etc)...it's part of the Mopar charm I guess.

 

[Big_John]

I still am shocked they went to thinner glass. The tooling for that must have been outrageous.

Not really... The tooling for a windshield is pretty simple. It's just a form that the flat sheet is placed on and then sent through a large oven on a conveyor belt. It's trimmed to size and shape before it goes in the furnace.

 

[Bryan]

Thinner glass was used for the same reason thinner body panels & plastic dashes, bumper ends and panel fillers were. To save ounces and try to bring the overall EPA mileage ratings up. The thinner glass was easily compensated for by making seals and trim slightly larger.

 

[1978 NYB]

All that to save 7 lbs.

 

[Bryan]

yea, but the bean counters say it will make a difference when you add the seven pounds, plus the .77 cents saved per car, then multiply it by 100,000 cars.........

 

[Big_John]

Thinner glass was used for the same reason thinner body panels & plastic dashes, bumper ends and panel fillers were. To save ounces and try to bring the overall EPA mileage ratings up. The thinner glass was easily compensated for by making seals and trim slightly larger.

Yes, that's part of it... A larger reason is it's cheaper to use thinner glass.

I was in a Ford plant once where they were changing the configuration of the filters on the paint booths. The reason was they would eliminate some over spray... about a teaspoon's worth on a full size truck. They were spending a lot of time and money on this. That teaspoon of paint added up to real money over the number of trucks made.

Anytime they can save a penny, they will.

 

[Mr C]

Here's a cool project for the Newport:

http://www.imperialclub.com/Repair/Year/1969/Seq/conversion.htm

If I had those wide tail lights I'd do this...

 

[Big_John]

I've been thinking about doing that conversion with my 70 300.

I found the kit a while ago, but I had not seen the Imperial page on it.

 

[Stormer]

Mustangs ruined sequential taillights for me...

 

[1978 NYB]

Here's a cool project for the Newport:

http://www.imperialclub.com/Repair/Year/1969/Seq/conversion.htm

If I had those wide tail lights I'd do this...

That looks easy enough.

 

[commando1]

Here's a cool project for the Newport:

http://www.imperialclub.com/Repair/Year/1969/Seq/conversion.htm

If I had those wide tail lights I'd do this...

That looks easy enough.

Sure, Raspberry Pi and an Arduino controller, some Radio Shack stuff, and you're all set.
GOOGLE anything you guys didn't understand

Posted via Topify on Android