Jump to content

beastpath

Members
  • Posts

    1,549
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Posts posted by beastpath

  1. I've always wanted to drive through the desert, it seems like it would be almost surreal, especially considering where I live is covered in thick forests and hundreds of monstrous mountains

     

     

    Yeah, except its hot, dusty, and sucks when you break down.

     

    No, the desert is fun. Ha, I keep dreaming of an adventure through the mountains! Maybe we should swap places for a couple of weeks, lol.

  2. It really depends what type of expeditioning you will be doing and how much you are packing up top. COG isn't that critical that a few inches is make it or break it, especially if it gives you need clearances or places to tuck things away. It does make it a lot easier to work on some items as well, which could make a big difference out in the middle on nowhere...

     

     

    Not trying to be arguementative, but I think the Pathfinder is a good size, at least for 2 people; I have done long treks in smaller vehicles. Its size gives it better mileage than some of the fill sized options and makes it more manuverable as well. About the only thing that it doesn't allow for is sleeping inside, but a roof tent takes care of that nicely and saves a lot of room inside.

     

    That is a great site, I brouse it often.

     

    Damn, that's why you think the Pathy is small, you have a friggin Mastiff! :rolleyes:

     

    B

     

    Its not argumentative at all, like you said, it depends on the kind of expedition.

     

    I personally think for the amount of "equipment" that most expedition vehicles carry, the Pathfinder is too small for long range. It doesn't mean it can't be done, but there will have to be trade offs. For example, many long range expedition vehicles (Defender 110 etc) stick a rooftop tent at the back of the roof rack, then have 4-6 jerry cans at the front. I just don't see that as possible on a Pathfinder, but think you could probably get away with having a few cans on the roof, OR a roof top tent. Having had heavy stuff on the roof with only a 3" suspension lift, I can tell you COG can be important. If you are smart about it you can get away with it though - but there are so many examples of people putting too much on the roof.

     

    You are right about the mileage, and maneuverability. And the tank is a little larger than other vehicles that I have driven too.

     

    One idea I have seen which I LOVE and want to implement is using a water cooler as a roof top washing machine. Stick all your dirty clothes in, some water and soap, then strap it on the roof rack while you drive. The movement cleans the clothes. Brilliant idea.

     

    Yeah, my dog just loves to take up the whole back - even when the seats are down - its like he inflates or something. lol

  3. Ah, yeah you have more space between gas stations for lots of your stuff.

     

    I would be careful of how much weight you put on the rear swing out though - another option is to get a steel bumper/swingout that has fuel can mounts - spendy though.

     

    Check these out for water options - I'd love to get the front runner one personally (keeps the center of grav low, and takes up less space)

     

    Frontrunner 40L Footwell Tank

     

    Flexitank

  4. This is my goal too, or rather, I am aiming to have a medium range expedition vehicle.

     

    To be honest we picked a bad vehicle for long range expeditions as the Pathfinder is so small.

     

    However, expedition pathfinders would be unique.

     

    I have picked up a lot of info from www.expeditionportal.com, and Overland Tech and Travel. I wish I had found that site long before I started modifying the truck, I could have saved money.

     

    Here are three good articles to get you started: Importance of Gross Vehicle Weight, Top 10 Overland Kit Items You Need, Designing an Overland Vehicle

     

    Now while I agree with a lot of the main points, and understand that its nice to have things that make a long vehicle based trip comfortable, I also realize that the pathfinder has limited space. Therefore, I think it is ridiculous to NEED a fridge, rooftop tent, full kitchen etc. Not only are these things expensive, but they are very heavy. I am more than happy to use basic cookware, and can manage with with dried foods, or use a small cooler for longer trips (if you freeze all the food before hand it removes the necessity of using ice), and I can sleep on the ground (i hardly ever use a tent anyway).

    Now maybe I would change my mind if I were going through Africa - but I somehow doubt that will ever happen in the Pathfinder.

     

    I am in the process of thinning out the gear I have in the truck to keep weight down, and make space for essentials (and my 120lb Mastiff who likes to get comfy).

     

    So far this is what I have decided to keep in the truck at all times:

     

    1. Comprehensive 1st Aid Kit

    2. Several Flashlights - preferably Surefire LEDs

    3. Comprehensive but minimal tool kit (no duplicates)

    4. On board air (I have the ARB high output which is not installed yet..)

    5. Tire repair kit - This is what I picked: Ultimate Puncture Repair Kit

    6. Fire Extinguisher

    7. Survival kit - emergency blanket, waterproof matches, compass, pocket knife etc. (I want to expand this to a small bug out bag)

    8. CB and Ham Radio (haven't picked up the Ham yet - Steevo from Rugged Rocks had one installed where the ash tray is - I want to copy that)

    9. At least 3 self recovery options - shovel/axe, recovery strap, highlift, sand tracks, winch and associated shackles etc.

    10. Camping gear - what do you REALLy need? 2 man tent, compact sleeping bags, toiletries, warm weather clothes, cold weather clothes, cooking gear, solar shower.

     

    I would say for most trips in the US you don't need extra fuel, but I would go for the rotopax or a Nato fuel can (Nato Cans are heavy when full - especially if they are on a roof rack - plus you can't distribute the weight like you can with a couple of rotopax).

    • Like 3
  5. No worries, when you can afford it go back and do it. Alki should be able to get you a good price.

    I think the next cams I am going to try are the JWT S1.

    I can afford it. I just don't know how much I want to take the engine apart again right now.

     

    I'll be interested to see a dyno with the JWT S1 cams.

  6.  

    Yes, there are so many versions, I don't claim to know of all of them. From what I understand, they were a short duration interceptor and evolved from there? I do know that the earlier variations, while being good planes, were so under-gunned it was silly. I honestly can't say where they went from there.

    Personally, the Mosquito impressed me more...

     

    The FW-190 was also contantly upgraded as well of course! From the A-1 to A-9, then the D-G varients to play all roles as well AFAIK. It is hard to pit one plane against another unless you have the serial number, and then you have the pilot factor. Why were so many manuevers named after Germans? Why did so many German 'Aces' have dozens, if not hundreds, of kills? The plane can only account for so much, and the pilot for the rest? I suspect the availability of missions played a part as well...

     

    B

     

    The Mosquito is one of my favorites also!

     

    Who needs defensive guns or armor when you can fly faster than anything else in the sky?!

  7. Just because your father and mother were not 100% behind the way Germany was going doesn't mean that the majority of the nation was. That is what I was trying to say. I was also referring to the beginning of the war, not when things started to go badly and people were realizing the gravity of what was happening. Also, I did not mention or imply complicity with any atrocities, just the war, being a Nazi and being a patriotic German were and still are two different things. There were very few Nazis, but many German's fed up with the way the rest of Europe was treating them.

     

    An academic degree is based on reading from various texts, including first hand accounts, all of them researched an peer reviewed.

    Just because you have chatted to one person first hand doesn't discount the facts.

     

    Man, I wasn't even trying to get into personal family BS. Just trying to correct the mistakes about the armament of the Spitfire!

  8. Awesome! I was clinging to every word of your post wondering if that was coming from you or if you were plagiarizing. I find it funny that if you copy from one person it is "plagiarism" but, if you copy from many it is "research". :lol:

     

    Yes, basically my whole degree is based on copying many other people in "my own words".

    • Like 1
  9. Exactly!

    Sorry, but no love here. Typical Brit "look how awesome we were' crap. The Spitfire was a great plane but it was a high performance/short distance interceptor which is an easy roll to fill (they aren't meant to last). The armament was weak! 4-8 machine guns and no cannons. Nice that you can dig it up and clean it up enough to fire, but why did it take 70 years to care?

     

    While the BF109 wasn't perfect, it had 20mm cannons and that makes a huge difference.

     

    This is what made people pee in their pants though..

     

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdPv0h5Kpm4

     

    B

     

    Hey all,

     

    My :my2cents::my2cents:

     

    Yesterday I watched a WWII movie...I know, Hollywood...no, but really it clearly displays the true nature of people during wars.

     

    It is about how we can all be brothers if/when not carrying out the work of evil-doers. Part of the story focuses on two soldiers, one german, one american, both wounded, yet somehow they find it in their hearts to help each other and treat each other with civility. I am sure the war was riddled with hundreds of untold instances like that one.

     

    It is not a good movie by any means but it does drive home the message that wars are not the solider's war, they are the botched-up dreams of mindless, butchering leaders sending normal folk, with families and dreams to their deaths.

     

    Personally, I love all types of WWII Aircraft, Ships and Weaponry. In most instances, there is no one clearly better than the other. Each had their faults and benefits. My dad had a huge collection of books and videos on WWII which he unfortunately sold but those books were hours of enjoyment for me. Spitfires, ME109's, Zeros and Mustangs are mongst my favourites. My absolute favourite (thanks to Pappy Boyington and The Black Sheep Squadron :lol: ) is the F4U Corsair. I finally got to see one live last year at the Boeing Aircraft museum in Seattle. What a beauty!!!! :wub::lol:

     

    Personally, I didn't lose anyone in any of the wars and empathyse with anyone who did. I think that aside from a few knuckleheads who went to war with the intent to harm and kill, no one went willingly or happily. Most were brainwashed or ofrced into service and into thinking this was a necessity and their duty. (Duty to protect their rights and freedoms yes, totally) Their duty to kill others whose "duty" was to kill them...well...Wars are a terrible thing made up by those who never fully grow and wisen up.

     

    Oh yeah , and what is that monstrosity? Russian-ized unimog? :laugh: It looks absolutely brutal! Except I don't see why one would put fogs so low to the ground...just beggin' for them to be ripped off. :/

     

    NE way, nice to see everyone getting along... :handlebars: That is why I come here... :lol:

     

    If you read about pre-war Nazi Germany you will realize there was no brainwashing or forced service. Perhaps a sense of shared desperation, and a yearning to recapture their national pride. The German people still went to war willingly.

     

     

    Exactly!

    Sorry, but no love here. Typical Brit "look how awesome we were' crap. The Spitfire was a great plane but it was a high performance/short distance interceptor which is an easy roll to fill (they aren't meant to last). The armament was weak! 4-8 machine guns and no cannons. Nice that you can dig it up and clean it up enough to fire, but why did it take 70 years to care?

     

    While the BF109 wasn't perfect, it had 20mm cannons and that makes a huge difference.

     

    This is what made people pee in their pants though..

     

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdPv0h5Kpm4

     

    B

     

     

     

    There were many versions of the Spitfire, in fact, they continued to be upgraded throughout the war. Versions were built with many wing varieties, power plants, and armaments - including the 20mm cannon. Other versions were used for ground attack and for observation (in fact the Spitfire was a pioneer aircraft within this role). The Spitfire has an excellent kill ratio, and was one of the most venerable, feared, and successful aircraft of WWII.

     

    Of course, the Focke Wulf 190 was a shock to the RAF when it showed up and outclassed them, but later in the war the Spitfire ended up outclassing the 190 due to constant upgrades.

     

    Remember, this technology was still very new, and air power had not been used in major warfare by most countries since the first war. The German's on the other hand had vastly more experience with what would, and what wouldn't work because of their involvement in the Spanish Civil War.

     

    The Russians would not nearly have done so well in the war if they had not been helped economically and materially by the Americans and British. Also, if the UK had agreed to a ceasefire (as Hitler wanted), there would have been no European Front and Germany could have pushed a lot more troops and resources into the Russian Front. The point is that the ALLIES won the war by cooperating together, not an individual country striking out on its own. Incidentally over 1,000 Spitfires were used by the Russians.

     

    Furthermore, the word Panzer just means "tank". There were many Panzer's that the Sherman was superior to, in fact for most of the war the Sherman's long 75mm barrel outgunned the short 75mm barrel on German tanks. When the Germans upgraded to longer barrels, the Shermans upgraded to 76mm. Unlike most European countries however, the Sherman was not optimized for one role (tank killing, infantry support etc.), but was intended to fulfill all roles decently well. Of course this left it vulnerable to stronger tanks, such as the Tiger and the Panther - which only appeared at the end of the war. Ordinance tests had initially shown the 76mm gun could destroy either of these tanks, but this was proved to be incorrect. Tests did show that the Sherman was equally able to destroy Russian tanks, as demonstrated in the Korean war.

     

    Source: Bachelors Degree in History

  10. 4x4parts has split poly bushings for the rear control arms. The uppers and lowers are different sized I believe.

     

    They can be called link arms or control arms, depending on who you talk to. Apparently it is best to get rubber ones as the poly ones are really stiff and need to be replaced after 3-4 years, whereas the rubber ones last 15-20 years.

     

    Cost is about the same, although the rubber ones do need to be pressed in.

×
×
  • Create New...