From: Neil Harrington on

"(PeteCresswell)" <x(a)y.Invalid> wrote in message
news:q8rjf51hosqqt7ukn3gt713u971c30v299(a)4ax.com...
> Per Neil Harrington:
>>However, despite all the bad publicity given the Pinto, apart from those
>>two
>>final-assembly problems mine was a good car and never gave me any further
>>trouble. I owned it about five years, took it on trips to Canada and to
>>Florida, never had another complaint with it.
>
> Was Pinto the one where the occupants were incinerated if
> somebody hit it from behind?

That's the one. Probably something of an exaggerated problem, but never
having been hit in it from behind I can't speak from experience. Of course
those who *were* incinerated in Pintos wouldn't have considered it an
exaggeration.

>
>
>
>> When you say "suburban" you mean the Chevy Suburban,
>>right? (I don't know whether the term is used for any other vehicle.) How
>>old is yours now?
>>
>>I didn't even know Chevy was assembling cars in Mexico.
>
> Yes, Chevrolet Suburban. Suburbans are also marketed by GMC, but
> I think it's the same vehicle except for the badge.
>
> I didn't know they were assembling them in Mexico either until I
> drove this one home and saw something somewhere in the
> documentation or something that said where it was assembled.
> --
> PeteCresswell

That's interesting. I knew some American electronic stuff has been assembled
in Mexico for many years, but I guess they never advertised the fact about
cars. I've read about quality differences between specific GM plants, but
never saw a Mexican plant mentioned.


From: (PeteCresswell) on
Per Bill Graham:
>
>My daughter used to use a Suburban with 4 wheel drive to carry oxygen
>bottles and wheelchairs to her patients in the winter snow, but she stopped
>buying them a few years ago because of poor reliability.

This one, the first new car I've ever owned, has stranded me a
total of six times so far. That's more times than I've been
stranded (once) by 30+ years of driving beaters.

But go in the snow, it does. In a nice heavy snowfall, I make a
game out of seeing how long I can go with using 4wd. Usually
it's until I do something stupid like stopping at the bottom of a
hill or going into a rutted area without enough momentum.
--
PeteCresswell
From: Neil Harrington on

"R. Mark Clayton" <nospamclayton(a)btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:OLmdnQWi2eLSIGTXnZ2dnUVZ7rudnZ2d(a)bt.com...
>
> "Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote in message
> news:qOKdnbg9Q7TZDmTXnZ2dnUVZ_vCdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>
>> "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:5qCdnZYI57wUg2TXnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>>
>>> "Neil Harrington" <not(a)home.today> wrote in message
>>> news:FJKdnbcsb5IrbWXXnZ2dnUVZ_o2dnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>>>
>>>> "R. Mark Clayton" <nospamclayton(a)btinternet.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:w5GdnQbD2PUH_mXXnZ2dnUVZ8m2dnZ2d(a)bt.com...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Larry Thong" <larry_thong(a)shitstring.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:yPSdndov5ssc12rXnZ2dnUVZ_rZi4p2d(a)supernews.com...
>
>
>
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course the tripod mount thread is 1/4" Whitworth.
>>>>
>>>> Really?! I always just assumed that was SAE too.
>>>>
>>> I think he's kidding.....Mine's 1/4-20 SAE.
>>
>> That's what I thought. But I don't think he's kidding.
>>
>> As far as I know, Whitworth sizes were only used on British products.
>>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitworth_thread
>
> "Within the United States, the Whitworth thread that most people encounter
> is the quarter-inch thread on the bottom of most cameras for mounting on a
> tripod."

That's interesting. But the chart on that page shows 1/4-20 to be a standard
Whitworth size, so a 1/4-20 SAE bolt still fits, even if not perfectly. I
believe the shape of the threads is slightly different between the two.

For American mechanics working with Whitworth bolts, nuts and wrenches, the
main problem is the difference in wrench sizes -- which is only because SAE
measures size across the flats while Whitworth measures point to opposite
point.

>
> Touch�!
>
> Even though the Yanks left the Empire they still won't join the rest of
> the world.

And go metric, you mean? There'd be no point to it. Metric is silly for most
ordinary purposes, and it would cost billions to change everything.
Hexadecimal really makes far more sense than metric, and that is closer to
the old familiar English systems of measure. You blokes should have stayed
with what you had. (Well, except for currency I suppose. But even that had
the advantage of being charmingly quaint.)


From: Allen on
(PeteCresswell) wrote:
> Per Neil Harrington:
>> However, despite all the bad publicity given the Pinto, apart from those two
>> final-assembly problems mine was a good car and never gave me any further
>> trouble. I owned it about five years, took it on trips to Canada and to
>> Florida, never had another complaint with it.
>
> Was Pinto the one where the occupants were incinerated if
> somebody hit it from behind?
A neighbor, a retired engineeyu ring prof, served as an expert witness
in auto liability cases back in the Pinto days. One day one of his
daughters came home driving a Pinto. His comment: "If you're in a bad
wreck, I hope you're killed in the impact". Answer your question?
Allen
From: J�rgen Exner on
"Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote:
>And go metric, you mean? There'd be no point to it. Metric is silly for most
>ordinary purposes,

Yeah, right. That's probably the reason why 200+ countries are using it
where there are only 3 that don't.

>and it would cost billions to change everything.

"Those who are late will be punished by life itself."

>Hexadecimal really makes far more sense than metric,

You got 16 fingers? Amazing!
And you are fluent in adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing
them, too? Like 3A4F + BE3 * 2D5? Even more amazing!

Besides, what does the radix of a numeral system have to do with metric
or not?

>and that is closer to
>the old familiar English systems of measure.

???
What? Where except for small liquid quantities?

>You blokes should have stayed
>with what you had. (Well, except for currency I suppose. But even that had
>the advantage of being charmingly quaint.)

How many cubic inches are in a gallon, again? How many tea spoon are in
one cubic foot of water? And how many inches are there to a mile? And
how high can I lift 1 pound with the energy provided by 1 BTU in 1 hour?
And do you even know how a furlong by a chain is commonly called today?
Now tell me again, that that nonsense makes any logical sense.

jue