k9sar

there was a thread discussing the addition of acetone. search? (I would but I'm in class)

k. Easier to check the grounds than the starter itself

Just wanting to confirm my suspicions... This morning, I went to leave for work, got into the pathy, turned the key and 'click'. battery?... turned on lights... ok, radio on.. ok... headlights work... probably not the battery. Threw a volt meter on it... 12.5V. checked the fusable link... looks ok. Tried again... I can definately hear the starter relay clicking so it's not the ignition switch or relay. The only thing left, in my mind, is the starter. If the starter is bad, there should be no pull on the battery when I try to turn it over. If ther engine is preventing the starter from turning (like if it were seized), there would be a heavy pull on the battery. Threw the volt meter on it again and turned the key... this time it gave a tiny hesitation then started fine and the battery read 14V (under charge while running so I know my alternator is ok too. bonus) Anyway... turned it off and started it back up no problems. 3 or 4 times before I left the driveway. Off to work. Once here, turned it off, crossed my fingers and turned the key... started up fine. hmmmmm.... I'm thinking I might have a bad spot on my starter where the brushes just aren't making contact and I got lucky when it finally started. agree? disagree? suggestions? Anyone done their owwn rebuild or just throw a new/rebuilt one in?

I like the idea of business card size. If it were to be designed and posted, I'd certainly tap into my business card stock and print out a few sheets to distribute.

problems number 1 and 2.... It's a Haynes manual and it's at home.

if it's a slow leak, probably ok to keep driving as long as you don't run her out of coolant. Gushing leak should get fixes asap. Bottom line is that your engine needs to keep cool. If there is no coolant, you will probably toast the motor.

in PA you are required to spend a certain amount of $$ to try to get it to pass. If it still fails, you can provide proof that you tried and get a waiver. Haven't needed to but it's nice to know that it's out there

you called it... water pump. to fix it... go ahead and get a new timing belt, thermostat, wather pump, cam seals, and anything else on the front of the engine that you should replace while you are there and it's easy to get to with it disassembled.

need something that'll take to water as well as offroad. Here's an amphib vehicle built on a land rover chassis

sounds shady to me

speaking of the price of gas....

*ouch* (rubs back of hand after getting hit with the ruler)

he was busy hiding all that extra money from the stolen Iraqui oil

NO DAMNIT!!! I'LL BUY YOU A BEER!!!

Hey B... you do have to admit that the thread became interesting reading.

no problem chief. hey MZ.. next time I'm out in the Indy area, I'll buy you a beer.

true. A buddy of mine over there believes that, after insisting that they didn't have any, they couldn't then use them against the baghdad invasion forces or he' dhave to admit that he lied. He believes that the damage he could do with the weapons was far less effective than maintaining the stance that the US was there unjustly and that the people should support the resistance. Now there's a posture (if it was true)

I don't recall him ever saying that but I could certainly be wrong. I know that there were lots and lots of findings that could be attributed to their existance but, like the reports reported... there was no definitive evidence found during the commissions investigation into it. Personally... if there's a duck nest and duck feathers and duck poop and duck egg shells, there's more than likely a duck around, even if I don't see it. Missiles equiped to deliver Sarin, hidden bunkers, inspectors delayed at plants during surprise visits, prior history of having/using them, undisputed fact that they have the technology, missing items from the reports... looks like there's ducks to me on the other hand... it could certainly be an interesting set of coincidences. Oh well... we all have our beliefs and we don't live in New Orleans. Good enough for me.

believe what you want. but... consider this... Would it be smart to reveal that you had information if the fact that you were able to obtain it revealed your intelligence gathering capabilities? The greatest source of information for enemy is our own free press. We had a person locally who was leaving pipe bombs around and causing quite a problem in the area. The police were very close to catching him until the newspaper reported that police were focusing on a certain bus route that was common to all the attacks. Next day, the pattern changed and he was never caught. I laugh every time I hear about the Rhino Force and how pissed the news media was that they were also deceived and helped pull it off.

Let me start off by saying that, while I work for a large corporation, I have access to many sources of classified information due to my security clearances. I am however, unable to post any of the specifics of the that information due to a non-disclosure agreement that I have with the government. The opinions I have are based on facts that may or may not be available to the general public. You may certainly choose to base your own opinions on whatever information you choose to consider to be factual. On October 29, 2004, the Arab television network Al Jazeera broadcast excerpts from a videotape of Osama bin Laden addressing the people of the United States, in which he took responsibility for the September 11, 2001 attacks, condemned the Bush government's response to those attacks, and presented those attacks as part of a campaign of revenge and deterrence begun after having personally seen destruction in the Lebanese Civil War in 1982. A copy of that videotape was given to U.S. diplomats in Qatar just prior to the broadcast. The transcript from that tape is readily available from Al Jazeera's website. The original reason for the war in Iraq was that "Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction (WMD)" and that "al Qaeda operatives were being backed and harbored by that country and its geographical neighbor, Iran." At a recent speech in Coronado, however, Bush addressed the reason for US troops to continue fighting in Iraq: protection of the country's vast oil fields, which he said would otherwise fall under the control of terrorist extremists. Al Qaeda is very active in Iraq under the leadership of Abu Musab alZarqawi and continues to wage war against the US forces there. They are using the war in Iraq as their own personal battleground and seizing the opportunity to combat America wherever possible. While the oil fields are now one of the main focuses, it is not because we are there to take them. America's mission in Iraq is to turn it into a democratic ally just as the United States did with Japan after its 1945 surrender. ''We will build a free Iraq that will fight terrorists instead of giving them aid and sanctuary." So, in response to your comment... yes, oil has it's part in the current focus of the war but not for the reasons that many implying. If Bush and his buddies are in the oil business, why would they push to fight to obtain a new source of oil? If anything, they should try hard to prevent it from getting to the US so that the domestic oil can be inflated in price but that ain't happening, is it? The US first hit Al Qaeda in Afghanistan but it has been a well known fact for years that Al Qaeda was regrouping in new bases and safe harbors granted by Iraq, Iran and Syria. This means that those countries stand in violation of U.S. wartime policy. Iraq was the first target under discussion rather than Iran or Syria because that its leader had developed weapons of mass destruction. Ansar al-Islam is a group of several hundred terrorists who were initially trained and organized by bin Laden troops and co-financed by al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's secret police. They have also tested chemical and biological weapons at a facility in northern Iraq and against the Kurdish people of northern Iraq when Kurdish leaders tried to drive the group out of their mountain stronghold. My apologies. It was not a treaty, it was UN Security Council resolution 1441. Eyewitnesses have said that Iraqi warplanes dropped three clusters each of four bombs on the village of Birjinni on August 25, 1988 after the ceasefire that ended the Iran-Iraq war. Observers recall seeing a plume of black, then yellowish smoke, followed by a not-unpleasant odor similar to fertilizer, and also a smell like rotten garlic. Shortly afterwards, villagers began to have trouble breathing, their eyes watered, their skin blistered, and many vomited--some of whom died. All of these symptoms are consistent with a poison gas attack. The Birjinni attack was one of dozens of chemical weapons attacks launched against the Kurds in 1988 that were part of a genocidal campaign carried out against Kurdish civilians. Scientists have been able to prove the use of chemical weapons through the analysis of environmental residues taken years after the attack occurred. Soil samples taken from bomb craters near the village in northern Iraq by a team of forensic scientists from the Chemical & Biological Defence Establishment (CBDE) of Great Britain's Ministry of Defence at Porton Down were found to contain evidence of nerve gas. Analysis by gas chromatography and mass spectrometry found that six soil samples taken from the first two craters contained mustard agent and/or thiodiglycol, a compound produced by the hydrolysis (breakdown by water) of mustard, 1,4- thioxane and 1,4-dithiane, were also detected in these samples. The chemists at Porton Down also found the presence of the compound tetryl, an explosive that, according to Dr. Hay, is widely used in chemical munitions. The second six samples, including pieces of metal, contained "unequivocal" residues of methylphosphonic acid (MPA) and isipropyl methylphosphonic acid (iPMPA), according to analytical chemists at Porton Down. MPA is a product of the hydrolysis of any of several chemical weapons nerve agents. iPMPA is a product of the hydrolysis of the nerve agent GB Other instances... March 17 and 18 1988 - Halabja was bombarded more than twenty times by Iraqi regime's warplanes with chemical and cluster bombs April 1987, twenty four villages of Iraq's Kurdistan were targeted by the chemical bombardment These villages were chemically bombarded twice in less than 48 hours. April 28 1987, Iraqi warplanes dropped 18 chemical bombs at Sheikh Dassan, Kani Bard, Pasian and Tuteman villages Just a few examples: In the early weeks of 2003, over a dozen 122 mm chemical munitions that had not been disclosed in the December 7 declaration were found by inspectors. In late February 2003, the Iraqi regime refused to destroy nearly 100 al-Samoud ballistic missiles. 1991 Inspections -vs- documentation uncovered the following discrepancies. The items are believed to have been buried in storage facilities or temporarily relocated into Syria: 150 R-400 aerial bombs, and 25 or more special chemical/biological Al-Hussein ballistic missile warheads biological weapon sprayers for Mirage F-1 aircraft 17 metric tonnes of iological weapon growth media 2,000 aerial bombs, 15,000-25,000 rockets, and 15,000 artillery shells capable of carrying chemical weapons several al-Hussein (modified Scud- missiles with 650km range and 500kg payload and it is believed that they retain samples of smallpox and camelpox which was tested prior to the Gulf war Additionally, several missiles were found and destroyed by troops outside of Nassiriya. These missiles were equipped to deliver a "non-explosive agent" Inspectors also found a clandestine "network of biological laboratories" and a deadly strain of botulinum in October '03 you can mail it to me

my local dealership has non adjustable OEM shocks for 52.22 (69.63 MSRP) and adjustable ones for 78.34 (104.45 MSRP). I think the Rancho 5000 series runs about 50. 90 for the 9000 series.

The "no AC" thing applys well to local driving (low speed) but if you are on highway, it is believed that having your windows open puts significantly more drag on your already non-aerodynamic vehicle and will actually burn more fuel than if you had them closed with the AC on. My money-saving tip... buy a siphon hose and a gun. It may get to that point.

factory setup has the front sitting a little lower than the back to start off. I can tell a difference between 'sport' and 'comfort' when I'm driving but can easily get used to either way. The sport setting is to stiffen your ride for better handling offroad but I did not have any difficulty staying with the 'comfort' setting while running offroad in New Mexico. When mine fail to adjust, I'll probably just throw on some Ranchos and leave it at that. As for the T-bars, yea... you can crank them up a bit. Use your search feature here. there are lots of posts on doing this. good luck

OMFG! What a bunch of uneducated crap. Do your f-ing homework before spewing garbage like that. You probably forward chain emails too so you don't break out in hives or so little timmy can have that operation he so desperately needs. Take you liberal heads out of your asses and go look at who really sets the price of oil. It's a big f-ing auction on wall street. Companies who are in the business of making money selling gasoline are bidding on the barrels of oil that are being projected to be extracted and shipped. If there are fears of a shortage, they bid higher since they fear that they may run out of their own supply and not be able to keep the refineries open. Bush actually made an important step in trying to keep the price of gas down. By releasing federal oil reserves to the refinery companies, they should no longer fear that they will run out of crude oil and the price should not be inflated by fear. The problem is that the gasoline companies see an opportunity to have a price increase and will all follow suit. Companies like Exxon could very easily govern the prices that are set at your local station but they do not. It is up to the station owner to make the determination of how much money he can make and what the local competition is. Independant companies that sell gas, like Wawa, Sheetz, 7-11, etc, buy gasoline from suppliers (like Gulf) and must set their prices based on what they buy it for (plus profit of course). As soon as someone yelled 'shortage', these companies all jacked up their prices to make enough profit to cover themselves in the event that they are unable to get gas from the third-party suppliers in the future. They must meet their profit margin for the fiscal year with or without selling gas. My local station went from 2.64 to 3.15 in a few hours and I guarantee that it was the same gas in the underground tanks all day. The profit margin jumped way high for gasoline that was purchased at a much lower price. Just because Bush has friends in the oil industry does not give him any more control of gas prices than you I. And as for your dumbass comments V, what f-ing cave have you been living in. Bin Laden openly admitted to the attacks. The war in Iraq had very little to do with the Sept 11 attacks. The trouncing of Afganistan did. The Iraq situation was because Hussein was harboring known terrorists, was producing chemical weapons (and using them on his own people too), and was not following the terms of the UN treaty and preventing UN inspection teams from enforcing the treaty. That had been going on since 1991. I don't necessarily agree with Bush's decisions but I don't go around whining about conspiracy theories with no basis. I suppose Bush has a secret weather generator too and caused the tsunami in Indonesia and hurricane Katrina too. NExt he'll cause earthquakes and plagues of locusts in New Zealand. If you're not going to say anything intelligent, just shut the F up.