Fordnatics List Archive
How to eliminate gumballs in stock
Posted by mailbot
|
mailbot
Mail List Archive Bot
., Online, USA
|
Jul 19, 1994 03:10 PM
Joined 15 years ago
59,279 Posts
|
This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Dave Williams)
-> Makes you wonder how flimsy a tire would have to be to NOT be
-> approved by the US Department of Transportation, doesn't it?
It's not a matter of flimsiness - the DOT tire specs in CFR 49 are
pretty strict. More likely it's a matter of product liability.
Manufacturers generally buy insurance to protect themselves from
frivolous lawsuits, etc. If Hoosier markets the tire as "not for street
use" they probably get a substantial price break.
It's kind of like why you don't see Snell certification on all crash
helmets. Snell wants *money* for every single helmet that carries the
sticker, and it ain't cheap. A few years ago the Snell fees exceeded
the actual manufacturing cost.
------------------------------
n the best parts you can get.
If anyone here starts talking about a cost-no-object bad-ass motor,
you're the guy to talk to. I'm just the guy who digs through the junk
pile with a caliper and goes, "Now, wouldn't isn't that
*interesting...*" <grin>
-> As Skod pointed out, we are _very_ sensitive to engine weight in the
-> car, and although the rules would let us run a 358 (bored 351), we
-> don't want that weight up there. If we could run the V6 in the ACT
You mentioned the new minimum displacement limit pretty well shot your
331s out of the water. Have you experimented with a 4.125 bore in the
SVO block, with a 3.25 or 3.3 inch crank? That'd put you out at 350-ish
displacement. Probably screw your breathing all up until you got it
sorted out again, though.
Mail From: (email redacted) (Dave Williams)
-> Makes you wonder how flimsy a tire would have to be to NOT be
-> approved by the US Department of Transportation, doesn't it?
It's not a matter of flimsiness - the DOT tire specs in CFR 49 are
pretty strict. More likely it's a matter of product liability.
Manufacturers generally buy insurance to protect themselves from
frivolous lawsuits, etc. If Hoosier markets the tire as "not for street
use" they probably get a substantial price break.
It's kind of like why you don't see Snell certification on all crash
helmets. Snell wants *money* for every single helmet that carries the
sticker, and it ain't cheap. A few years ago the Snell fees exceeded
the actual manufacturing cost.
------------------------------
n the best parts you can get.
If anyone here starts talking about a cost-no-object bad-ass motor,
you're the guy to talk to. I'm just the guy who digs through the junk
pile with a caliper and goes, "Now, wouldn't isn't that
*interesting...*" <grin>
-> As Skod pointed out, we are _very_ sensitive to engine weight in the
-> car, and although the rules would let us run a 358 (bored 351), we
-> don't want that weight up there. If we could run the V6 in the ACT
You mentioned the new minimum displacement limit pretty well shot your
331s out of the water. Have you experimented with a 4.125 bore in the
SVO block, with a 3.25 or 3.3 inch crank? That'd put you out at 350-ish
displacement. Probably screw your breathing all up until you got it
sorted out again, though.
Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed.
Having trouble posting or changing forum settings?
Read the Forum Help (FAQ) or click Contact Support at the bottom of the page.



