Nitro
-
Content Count
1,971 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by Nitro
-
-
Ummm... call the tag office or go up there, would be my first thought.
As far as how much you'll need, look at last years registration receipt.
It should give you a close idea of what this years will be.
This year will probably be a little lower due to depreciation, but it will be fairly close to last years.
-
Well, first off, let's tell the whole story.
The bill is not just about ATV's for the youth.
It's ALL children's items (clothing, toys, etc...).
And just an FYI, lead is cumulative and it doesn't have to be ingested to get lead poisoning.
The bill states that ATV's for children 12 and under may not be sold *IF* they do not meet the lead content requirements.
If they exceed, they cannot be sold.
They are making the manufacturers do testing on their products to ensure they don't contain harmful (specified) amounts of lead.
Once the testing is done, if they don't meet the requirements, they cannot be sold.
If the do meet the requirements, they will be allowed to be sold.
It's not an outright and total ban. It's more of a short term moratorium until they can be tested.
-
Subby,
The problem is there and it's very common, like you've found.
Just because there are a few people on here that have "that" engine, doesn't mean they will have the problem.
What they fail to know and understand, is just because they have a 4.6l
engine doesn't mean that it's the same 4.6l engine that you had problems with.
The "I've had my 4.6l Mustang for 400,000 miles" analogy doesn't apply.
Ford has many configurations of the 4.6l engine and not all of them exhibited the problem.
The truck 4.6l is not the same as the car 4.6l and even the truck 4.6l is not the exact same engine across the years.
Truck engines, as you probably know, are taller stroke engines, while car engines a bigger bore.
Just because it's a 4.6l doesn't mean the one in your car is the same engine. Will it bolt right in, with the exception of
electronics differences throttle body configuration? Sure it will. That still doesn't mean they are the same engine.
Just like the 302's and 351's were not all the same, nor where all the 350 Chevy motors all the same.
Another thing that contributes to the equation is Ford's cylinder heads don't all come from the same place.
It's as simple as poor quality and manufacturing on the heads issue at one facility and not the others.
As far as torquing a spark plug... Give me a break. A good mechanic doesn't need to torque a spark plug.
I've been wreching for well over 20 years and not once have I ever stripped a spark plug in an aluminum head (or cast for that matter),
while installing it.
The problem with pulling the spark plugs and stripping them is most always a "removal" problem, not an install problem.
People pull plugs while the engine is hot and they wait well over their recommended mileage before changing them,
which again, as guard dad pointed out, gives dissimilar metals time to get galvanic corrosion and seize the threads.
This can simply be cured by a little dab of anti-seize.
Should a novice or someone who doesn't work on vehicles everyday use a torque wrench on plugs? Absolutely.
A torque wrench for spark plugs for an experienced mechanic... silly.
And on the "STEP" torquing. You step torque to prevent warpage, not to keep from pulling out threads.
The problem is there, it's well known, and you are correct, Ford hasn't done a thing about it other than they've
corrected the issue in the later engines.
But just because someone else hasn't had the problem doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It means they got an engine that didn't have the problem.
-
Much to my horror, she had a word wrong!
I don't remember now what word she had wrong, but I told her under no circumstances could she mess up ANY WORD in the National Anthem! 
It's a lot of pressure to sing with all those eyes on you... and it's not easy to sing.
I have heard many people sing wrong words, such as:
"Hosea can you see..."
Oh, say can you sing..."
"...what so proudly we held, by the twight-lights glass gleaming..."
"...and the rockets red glare... bowel bombs bursting in air..." <--- just nasty!
"...gave proof to the night...
and of course... "...the home of the braves."
I know it's a hard song to sing, but if I had to choose between signing the wrong words
or having a cheat sheet to read while singing, I think I'd use the cheat sheet.
-
Subby,
This has been an issue with Ford for several years...
I've seen this happen on trucks as old as '97.
Don't fool with a helicoil.
There's a product on the market that has the same function as a helicoil,
but it's MUCH stronger and won't ever back out.
A helicoil can back out when you remove the plugs...
The product is called a TimeSert.
-
I have heard very few people actually sing the National Anthem well.
It's not an easy song to get right... it's musically primitive, but it's a very difficult song to sing.
My problem is that most people who sing it want to put their spin on it.
They drag it out or they sign it too fast... or they want to do that vibrato and pitch slurring.
The National Anthem is meant to be a majestic and precise, boasting anthem of patriotism and devotion (which is why it's an anthem).
I hate it when people massacre it by trying to add their own touch and garbage pitch slurring to it. It just ruins the song and all that it stands for...
You want to hear what our National Anthem is supposed to sound like,
go somewhere and listen to the United States Marine Band play it.
If you want to hear it sung correctly, then, list to the US Army's A Capella team.
-
What price range are the NAS?
The Linksys NAS is about $130 on average.
Then, you just get two of whatever size drives you wish to use and pop them in.
I've got two of them... I use one for documents, pictures, and such and the other I use for Ipod music.
I've got two 1 terabyte drives in the one for documents and pictures and I've got two 500GB drives in the one for iPod music.
...and another good thing about them is that you can setup security for them.
If you put it on your network, you can create user accounts and share it across multiple users.
You can grant access to who you want and to what you want.
-
An external hard drive is just as capable of going bad as the one in your computer.
The ones in the externals are the same that is on the inside of your computer.
If you really want to have the slightest bit of security and protection from loosing files due to crash,
you need to get a NAS (Network Attached Storage).
You'll need a switch and a NAS connected up to make a small network.
Then, you can set the NAS up with 2 or more drives and you can have them at various fault tolerances.
Linksys makes a nice little personal NAS box that you can put two hard drives in and it will either
set them to work as one big drive or you can set them to "mirror" (RAID 1) each other.
When you write to one, it makes an identical copy on the other one.
If one drive craps out, you can still get the data off the other one and still use it.
When you replace the defective drive, the NAS will automatically start to rebuild the new drive by creating a mirror
to the drive that didn't crash.
-
He works at the recycling center----for the county
No, he doesn't, he works in the Utilities division, for the county.
-
I actually think the legislature went to far and made probably half or more of the cars on the road illegal.
Why?
Well the dash lights on many cars cast a blue light and the interior 'dash light' on my 2007 HHR is blue. While those lights might not be as intense as the reflective lights on HOG's cycle, they are blue and stationary and on a motor vehicle. This is not to mention the radios.
I doubt if the law has been properly tested in court and it may be that the court may rule that the state making the provision of blue stationary lights might not be depriving people of property without due process of law because of the enormous cost of retrofitting the entire automotive fleet. The way the law is written, any blue light is illegal.
It may be that Hog, you should test the law as it seems overly broad.
pubby
Any officer that would write for stock interior lights, would just be silly.
While the wording does not specifically exclude stock interior lights, they would definitely be excluded as long as they are
manufacturer installed/stock and meet the US federal motor vehicle code regulations.
As long as the stock interior lights aren't modified in a way where they would be subject to misinterpretation by another motorist,
a distraction to another motorist, or a distraction to the driver of that vehicle, that law simply could not be applied.
The law is designed to deal with aftermarket / user added lights, not stock factory lights.
-
...So, you ride a motorcycle?
Yep, sure do. Been riding since I was 5 and been riding street since I was 17.
Also green,Except as provided in this subsection, it shall be unlawful for any person, firm, or corporation to operate any motor vehicle or to park any motor vehicle on public property with flashing or revolving green lights. This subsection shall not apply to any motor vehicle being used by any law enforcement agency, fire department, emergency management agency, or other governmental entity to designate the location of the command post for such agency, department, or entity at the site of an emergency.
I think green is often (in some states) used to show reserved for "volunteer" or "reserve" fire fighters and law enforcement.
-
§ 40-8-90. Restrictions on use of blue lights on vehicles
( a )( 1 ) Except as provided in this paragraph and subsection ( b ) of this Code section, it shall be unlawful for any person, firm, or corporation to operate any motor vehicle equipped with or containing a device capable of producing any blue lights, whether flashing, blinking, revolving, or stationary, except:
This wording prohipits the posession of any device that can produce a blue light in or on the vehicle.
Ah... good to know! Thanks for the correction. I don't really worry about it because it just seems like common sense to not have
emergency colors on my vehicles....
Am I right though, that this is not a new law? It's been this way for a while, right?
-
...and make no mistake you could not miss that bike, after dark.
You'd be surprised at little people see you, on a motorcycle, after dark or in broad daylight.
I have lights all over my bike. I've been told I look like a freight train rolling down the road with all my lights,
including LED accents (amber colored ones).
People don't pay attention and don't care... and are just generally stupid when they get behind the wheel.
....as far as the law, I might be mistaken, but blue lights have always been illegal on a non-emergency, non-pemitted vehicle,
flashing or otherwise. This is not anything new for '09.
Blue and Red are reserved for emergency vehicles and always have been.
It's not illegal to have them on the bike. It's just illegal to have the ON while driving on a public road.
-
are you serious!!! I am so going to get them from a discount place cause they are so expensive at the dealership!!
No, running different tires will not void your warranty.
I would suggest that, if your tires are the same size all around, that you put the two alike tires on either the front or the rear
and put the old tires on the other end.
If you have a front wheel drive car, put the new ones on the front.
If you have rear wheel drive, put them on the rear.
Having them on the same "side" and not the same "front" or "back" configuration **could** make it handle a little bit goofy in
corners or in wet conditions. You probably would not notice a difference, but if your tire compounds are different, you could notice the effect.
No matter what, running "not alike" tires on your car will not void the warranty.
There's a little thing called the Magnasson-Moss Act that prevents your warranty being voided for something like this, unless
a dealer or manufacturer can prove, without a doubt, that the tires caused a malfunction in something on the car.
Running mis-matched tires will not cause mechanical issues. Like I said, it could handle funny if they are on opposite sides, but
it won't physically harm the vehicle.
-
It's a very "interesting" event for Paulding, definitely.
Slight discrepancy in the story though.
Atlanta Hartsfield didn't exist in 1977. Construction on Hartsfield started in Jan of '77 and didn't open until 1980.
The plane was en route to the old Atlanta airport, aka Candler field.
-
My questions where not meant to be considered as jumping to conculsions..
I was asking to make sure I understood correctly..
Understood, my apologies.
Yes, they are allowed to do this.
Like I said before, if you are rolling up on a police officer who is speeding, you don't know why he is speeding.
He may be going to a non-emergency call that doesn't require lights and sirens, but still requires him to get their quicker than
just a causal drive would allow. Just because he is rolling faster than the speed limit doesn't give you the right to do so or "pace" him.
-
it seems a little crazy that the police officer would break the law to try and cathc someone else breaking the law but.......what does that matter if the ticket was for not using a directional?
The police officer was not breaking the law. They are allowed to exceed the speed limit if they are performing their job.
He was performing his job if he was pacing the vehicle in question.
-
so let me get this straight
an officer can speed up to see if the person will speed up behind him, and stay with his speed?
that is considered doing his duty? and then he can pull the car over for speeding becasue the person driving the car behind him was keeping up with the officers speed ?
The officer can purposely speed to see if the driver behind him will keep up with him?
Yes, he can... They can also sit outside a bar and wait to see if people drive intoxicated too.
Just because he speeds up and exceeds the speed limit, does not give you the right to speed up above the limit.
But before you go jumping to conclusions, re-read the OP's post.
The officer saw the car speed up behind him and caught up to the officer who was running 50 (and we'll assume the speed limit was 50).
So, if the person rolled up on the officer while he was doing the speed limit, the officer already witnessed the infraction, he just had no means to measure the speed
of the vehicle that was approaching. So, he speeds up to "pace" the car that is approaching him. If he keeps going faster and the car approaching him keeps
going faster, then he has every right to speed up and then pull the car over once he determines the speed of the car as it's breaking the law.
And the officer pulled them over because they failed to use that nifty little turn signal that all cars come equipped with and so many people are too stupid to use,
not the speed infraction.
-
That is what I was thinking. If so, the officer should ticket himself as well. 2 wrongs do not make it right. Obviously the car was following the leader.
Why would the officer ticket himself?
Judging solely on what was stated, he was perfectly legal.
He is allowed to speed up beyond the speed limit and is not required to have lights and siren on, as long as he
is performing his duty, which he was.
By speeding up and the other person keeping up, they were in the wrong.
He could have been speeding up to get to a call that he needed to get to quick, but wasn't an enough emergency to run code (lights and siren).
People think that police aren't allowed to speed without their lights and sirens going,
which is not true, as long as they are performing their duty.
-
I know pacing is legal but can you be paced when the officer is in front of the vechile he is pacing?
Yes, pacing is legal and it doesn't matter if the officer is in front or behind, pacing is pacing.
-
These guidelines governing the use of radar are in place to prevent municipal and county agencies from operating in an “ambush” mode. This limits the ability of those at the helm of governing bodies of these county and municipalities to instruct, force or coerce these agencies to increase citation volume in order to increase revenue. GSP is not subservient to any municipal or county government and cannot be forced, intimidated or threatened with budget cuts or other sanctions by these government entities if citation volume does not increase. So the logic is, if you are not subservient to these governing entities you are not operating in a revenue generation capacity for said entity, and the measures to keep things like that in check need not apply.
Ahh... ok.. Thanks for the explanation. It makes sense.
-
Here's a interesting concept... Why not leave the seat up? If we men have to take the time to lift it up, then it should be the same for women to lower the seat. Fair? Yes it is and there is no argument against it either.
Why do you even lift the seat?
I don't know about you, but I'm not THAT bad of a shot.
I don't lift the seat.... and if by any odd ball chance that you do happen to get some on the seat,
get a piece of toilet paper and wipe it off....
I never understood the whole man vs. woman and the seat up vs. seat down ordeal...
If you are that bad of a shot, you can buy these little things that look like ships to put in the toilet.
They even make a "sight" with cross hairs on it.... then you can do target practice to improve your air.
I think they sell them at Spencers.
:lol: -
I got a S & W Airweight 38 for Christmas and I don't love it. Hubby wants me to have a revolver because they normally never misfire as semi-autos sometimes do. However, this one eats my hand all up and in the end I prefer his CZ P01 9mm. I can shoot way better with it too. It wouldn't be a good carry gun fo me thought because it's too big and heavy. I know that one reason the kick is so bad on mine is because the Airweight is so light and the ammo is not so light. I'm keeping it though.
Don't know if this is the case or not, but it sounds like you are using the incorrect ammo.
While the air/feather/light weight pistols are more than capable of using regular and even +P ammo,
their whole intent was to be light weight and easy to shoot.
They make special "light weight" ammo for the air/feather/light weight firearms.
They have aluminum or light weight special alloy bullets, light weight cases, and reduced powder loads to minimize kick back.
These rounds are a little more expensive than the regular stuff, but they are made specifically for the light weight pistols.
Might want to check around and get a box and try them... are a MUCH lighter than regular cartridges and also help reduce
the over all weight of the gun, when loaded.
-
Idk it must be like the ten over rule. It is against the law to exceed the posted speed but you can not be charged by municipal/county unless you are ten over posted. So that is saying “they are allowed break the law <this much> before you can take action.
It is a good thing that doesn’t apply to other laws.
I can sort of understand the 10 over rule a little bit.
You have to account for speedometer inaccuracies across a wide spectrum of automobiles.
10 mph? I don't know about that, but I could live with 5 mph.
...and why don't GSP Troopers have to follow that 10mph rule?
They have the same "certified" speedometers in their vehicles that every other police agency has.
They have to have their radar re-certed every year, just like local agencies.
So, why are they allow to write 1mph over and locals are not?
I can see a 5mph rule for speedometer discrepancy, downhill speed increase, etc..
But if you are moving 10 over, there's no getting around you knowing that you over that much.
your congress at work
in Internet Cafe
Posted · Edited by Nitro
Yep, that is correct. Every nut, bolt, spring, washer, engine case.... everything.
It was indeed poorly written.
I do know the CPSC has been absolutely flooded with emails and phone calls from citizens and
motorcycle organizations about this... The MIC (Motorcycle Industry Counsel) and SVIA (Specialty Vehicle Industry Association)
are all over this trying to get exemptions for these vehicles.
They been so inundated with calls and emails that they had to put out a "calm down" notice
to everyone... saying they know about the concerns and just want to make the "right" decision for everyone.
Hopefully, people will continue to bombard these people and get the bill a little more revised and specific instead of
just flat out banning everything.