Be Grateful for DCX. At Least They Aren't FORD!

Be glad, Jeep lovers, DCX and not Ford got Jeep , and FORD got some
others...too bad for them.


If Ford is so great, let them introduce their own Wrangler-like
product with horizontal and not vertical bars. Ford isn't so great. The
V8 flathead with its three exhaust ports was a piece of dog poop as was
Henry's suspension and transmission designs. Carroll Shelby wanted Chev
not Ford power, GM had head-up-ass and refused. Ford did make some good
engines and the excellent 9" rearend but Chevy ruled because everything
interchanged. Chrysler was even worse, ever tried to swap a 318 V8 for
a /6 or vice versa in a old work car, more parts than the junker was
worth. Every really good Ford idea like PROCO and the 707/710 truck
engine was never produced. Daimler Benz built the best recip fighter
engine of the war, only the fact their country lost and the failings of
the Me109 airframe make it rare today.
A Wrangler with VM power is going to be the vehicle to get.

If Ford had bought Jeep you would have seen a CJ body on an early-Bronco
frame, along with 9" axle. Not a bad combo. I think Jeep would have done
better under Ford than AMC or even DCX.

"Ted" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Be glad, Jeep lovers, DCX and not Ford got Jeep , and FORD got some
> others...too bad for them.
>
>
> If Ford is so great, let them introduce their own Wrangler-like
> product with horizontal and not vertical bars. Ford isn't so great. The
> V8 flathead with its three exhaust ports was a piece of dog poop as was
> Henry's suspension and transmission designs. Carroll Shelby wanted Chev
> not Ford power, GM had head-up-ass and refused. Ford did make some good
> engines and the excellent 9" rearend but Chevy ruled because everything
> interchanged. Chrysler was even worse, ever tried to swap a 318 V8 for
> a /6 or vice versa in a old work car, more parts than the junker was
> worth. Every really good Ford idea like PROCO and the 707/710 truck
> engine was never produced. Daimler Benz built the best recip fighter
> engine of the war, only the fact their country lost and the failings of
> the Me109 airframe make it rare today.
> A Wrangler with VM power is going to be the vehicle to get.
>

Remember troll, Ford put that one piece V8 in a '32 and sold it new for
five hundred bucks.
Of course Chrysler, made their parts to fit one application, to work
together, no need to carry the weight and rolling resistance of a heavy
duty transmission for a six.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
http://www.billhughes.com/

Ted wrote:
>
> Be glad, Jeep lovers, DCX and not Ford got Jeep , and FORD got some
> others...too bad for them.
>
> If Ford is so great, let them introduce their own Wrangler-like
> product with horizontal and not vertical bars. Ford isn't so great. The
> V8 flathead with its three exhaust ports was a piece of dog poop as was
> Henry's suspension and transmission designs. Carroll Shelby wanted Chev
> not Ford power, GM had head-up-ass and refused. Ford did make some good
> engines and the excellent 9" rearend but Chevy ruled because everything
> interchanged. Chrysler was even worse, ever tried to swap a 318 V8 for
> a /6 or vice versa in a old work car, more parts than the junker was
> worth. Every really good Ford idea like PROCO and the 707/710 truck
> engine was never produced. Daimler Benz built the best recip fighter
> engine of the war, only the fact their country lost and the failings of
> the Me109 airframe make it rare today.
> A Wrangler with VM power is going to be the vehicle to get.

L=2EW. Hughes III (=DFill) wrote:
> Remember troll, Ford put that one piece V8 in a '32 and sold it new
for
> five hundred bucks.
> Of course Chrysler, made their parts to fit one application, to
work
> together, no need to carry the weight and rolling resistance of a
heavy
> duty transmission for a six.

You are a bigger troll.

The trans in the 6 was the same weight as the V8, in fact the 6 was
heavier than the 318. No one gave a **** about weight then! They were
just making things tough. If they cared about Weight they would have
kept the aluminum block and made an aluminum head too. Actually they
would have made the 6 with a 4 speed and a three deuces carb setup as
the Aussies did. Chrysler made things awkward almost on purpose. When
DB made things awkward they had an excuse, engineering went off on a
tangent.

The Ford flathead V8 was a piece of horse poop with three main
bearings and it stunk on ice. The four was a better engine although it
didn't have full pressure lube until the end. The American engines that
were well built were mostly the Packards and such, it wasn't until the
mid to late fifties US tech caught up with Europe in the "popular
price" cars.

While I'm on the subject, who's the dumbass that came up with Three
Deuces....for V-8s? What a DUMB DUMB DUMB peckerwood-ass idea. Six
don't go into eight evenly. Not without a three or four foot plenum or
a turbocharger.

But don't think I'm anti Mopar completely. The Chrysler electronic
ignition was the best and the 727 TorqueFlite the best auto trans there
was in its day. Rolls Royce wanted to use them but Mopar was
uncooperative. RR used THM's-but with THEIR electric shift controller
and their superb brake servo arrangement that worked, still does, very
well. On the whole, though, there's no question Chrysler engineering
was a dim shadow of its once proud past whereas DB has always been
absolutely first rate as an engineering firm.

Troll,
How many V8s did Chrysler and Chevy have during Ford's flathead
era?
You really are stupid when it comes to engines and transmissions!
Both Ford and Chevy factory experimentals, during the early sixties used
three 550 CFM Holleys like my friend's stock 406" pictured at:
http://members.aol.com/franangrenteria/frank_32.jpg
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
http://www.billhughes.com/

Ted wrote:
>
> You are a bigger troll.
>
> The trans in the 6 was the same weight as the V8, in fact the 6 was
> heavier than the 318. No one gave a **** about weight then! They were
> just making things tough. If they cared about Weight they would have
> kept the aluminum block and made an aluminum head too. Actually they
> would have made the 6 with a 4 speed and a three deuces carb setup as
> the Aussies did. Chrysler made things awkward almost on purpose. When
> DB made things awkward they had an excuse, engineering went off on a
> tangent.
>
> The Ford flathead V8 was a piece of horse poop with three main
> bearings and it stunk on ice. The four was a better engine although it
> didn't have full pressure lube until the end. The American engines that
> were well built were mostly the Packards and such, it wasn't until the
> mid to late fifties US tech caught up with Europe in the "popular
> price" cars.
>
> While I'm on the subject, who's the dumbass that came up with Three
> Deuces....for V-8s? What a DUMB DUMB DUMB peckerwood-ass idea. Six
> don't go into eight evenly. Not without a three or four foot plenum or
> a turbocharger.
>
> But don't think I'm anti Mopar completely. The Chrysler electronic
> ignition was the best and the 727 TorqueFlite the best auto trans there
> was in its day. Rolls Royce wanted to use them but Mopar was
> uncooperative. RR used THM's-but with THEIR electric shift controller
> and their superb brake servo arrangement that worked, still does, very
> well. On the whole, though, there's no question Chrysler engineering
> was a dim shadow of its once proud past whereas DB has always been
> absolutely first rate as an engineering firm.

From: L.W >>
<< Troll,
How many V8s did Chrysler and Chevy have during Ford's flathead
era?
You really are stupid when it comes to engines and transmissions! <<
Subject: Be Grateful for DCX. At Least They Aren't FORD!

Doesn't sound stupid to me. He said they were stupid, not that they weren't
used. Three Deuces was available both in production and aftermarket setups and
it never gave very uniform fuel/air mixtures.

Chrysler built straight eights, not V8s, in the thirties. Chevys were sixes,
but Pontiac, Buick, Olds, the "better" GM marques had straight eights and
Cadillac had V-8, V-12 and V-16 engines. Chevrolet had splash oiling until
1953. Only pressure from independents and imports made Detroit get rid of
sidevalve and splash oiled engines. Your antagonist is apparently more
knowledgeable than you are, perhaps you should be quiet and learn something, Mr
Hughes.

Maybe if you had a little experience in the progressive linkage of a
tri-power, and had read the post I was replying to, you wouldn't sounds
so..... STUPID! I'll quote it again just for you:

"You are a bigger troll.

The trans in the 6 was the same weight as the V8, in fact the 6 was
heavier than the 318. No one gave a **** about weight then! They were
just making things tough. If they cared about Weight they would have
kept the aluminum block and made an aluminum head too. Actually they
would have made the 6 with a 4 speed and a three deuces carb setup as
the Aussies did. Chrysler made things awkward almost on purpose. When
DB made things awkward they had an excuse, engineering went off on a
tangent.

The Ford flathead V8 was a piece of horse poop with three main
bearings and it stunk on ice. The four was a better engine although it
didn't have full pressure lube until the end. The American engines that
were well built were mostly the Packards and such, it wasn't until the
mid to late fifties US tech caught up with Europe in the "popular
price" cars.

While I'm on the subject, who's the dumbass that came up with Three
Deuces....for V-8s? What a DUMB DUMB DUMB peckerwood-ass idea. Six
don't go into eight evenly. Not without a three or four foot plenum or
a turbocharger.

But don't think I'm anti Mopar completely. The Chrysler electronic
ignition was the best and the 727 TorqueFlite the best auto trans there
was in its day. Rolls Royce wanted to use them but Mopar was
uncooperative. RR used THM's-but with THEIR electric shift controller
and their superb brake servo arrangement that worked, still does, very
well. On the whole, though, there's no question Chrysler engineering
was a dim shadow of its once proud past whereas DB has always been
absolutely first rate as an engineering firm."


God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
http://www.billhughes.com/


GaryMason9385 wrote:
>
> Doesn't sound stupid to me. He said they were stupid, not that they weren't
> used. Three Deuces was available both in production and aftermarket setups and
> it never gave very uniform fuel/air mixtures.
>
> Chrysler built straight eights, not V8s, in the thirties. Chevys were sixes,
> but Pontiac, Buick, Olds, the "better" GM marques had straight eights and
> Cadillac had V-8, V-12 and V-16 engines. Chevrolet had splash oiling until
> 1953. Only pressure from independents and imports made Detroit get rid of
> sidevalve and splash oiled engines. Your antagonist is apparently more
> knowledgeable than you are, perhaps you should be quiet and learn something, Mr
> Hughes.

Ever notice trolls keep changing their names, therefo don't have
much of a track record?
http://groups-beta.google.com/groups...=2004&safe=off
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
http://www.billhughes.com/


GaryMason9385 wrote:
>
> Doesn't sound stupid to me. He said they were stupid, not that they weren't
> used. Three Deuces was available both in production and aftermarket setups and
> it never gave very uniform fuel/air mixtures.
>
> Chrysler built straight eights, not V8s, in the thirties. Chevys were sixes,
> but Pontiac, Buick, Olds, the "better" GM marques had straight eights and
> Cadillac had V-8, V-12 and V-16 engines. Chevrolet had splash oiling until
> 1953. Only pressure from independents and imports made Detroit get rid of
> sidevalve and splash oiled engines. Your antagonist is apparently more
> knowledgeable than you are, perhaps you should be quiet and learn something, Mr
> Hughes.

Bill,

The troll for got one thing, if Ford had purchased the Jeep company they all
would require the optional heated tail gate. The heated tail gate would be
required to keep your hands warm as you are pushing them off the road in the
winter.

The new Fords are not off road capable to the extent the Jeeps are hell none
of the SUVs are. Sure you can drive the so called off road SUVs through a
field or a dirt road but they can't take the heat so to speak.

We were out on the trails several weeks ago when an Explorer broke one of
its lower rear supports on the rear axle. If you look at not just Ford but
all the major SUVs which tout off road capability the rear and front ends
have much stuff hanging down below the axles which are just asking to be
broke. It is just fact, can't help if Jeep has their stuff together for
being at the top of the food chain for it's off road capability it always
has.


HarryS


"L.W. ("ßill") Hughes III" > wrote in message
...
> Ever notice trolls keep changing their names, therefo don't have
> much of a track record?
> http://groups-beta.google.com/groups...=2004&safe=off
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> http://www.billhughes.com/
>
>
> GaryMason9385 wrote:
>>
>> Doesn't sound stupid to me. He said they were stupid, not that they
>> weren't
>> used. Three Deuces was available both in production and aftermarket
>> setups and
>> it never gave very uniform fuel/air mixtures.
>>
>> Chrysler built straight eights, not V8s, in the thirties. Chevys were
>> sixes,
>> but Pontiac, Buick, Olds, the "better" GM marques had straight eights and
>> Cadillac had V-8, V-12 and V-16 engines. Chevrolet had splash oiling
>> until
>> 1953. Only pressure from independents and imports made Detroit get rid of
>> sidevalve and splash oiled engines. Your antagonist is apparently more
>> knowledgeable than you are, perhaps you should be quiet and learn
>> something, Mr
>> Hughes.

Point is...to judge an automaker based on what was developed 60+ years ago
is rather asinine. He was bitching about Henry Ford's Model T drivetrains,
for pete's sake.

"GaryMason9385" > wrote in message
...
>
> From: L.W >>
> << Troll,
> How many V8s did Chrysler and Chevy have during Ford's flathead
> era?
> You really are stupid when it comes to engines and transmissions! <<
> Subject: Be Grateful for DCX. At Least They Aren't FORD!
>
> Doesn't sound stupid to me. He said they were stupid, not that they
weren't
> used. Three Deuces was available both in production and aftermarket setups
and
> it never gave very uniform fuel/air mixtures.
>
> Chrysler built straight eights, not V8s, in the thirties. Chevys were
sixes,
> but Pontiac, Buick, Olds, the "better" GM marques had straight eights and
> Cadillac had V-8, V-12 and V-16 engines. Chevrolet had splash oiling until
> 1953. Only pressure from independents and imports made Detroit get rid of
> sidevalve and splash oiled engines. Your antagonist is apparently more
> knowledgeable than you are, perhaps you should be quiet and learn
something, Mr
> Hughes.
>
>