Freebird
-
Posts
18,080 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
227
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Store
Everything posted by Freebird
-
and...I don't see where the post is out of line at all. We DO support our troops here whether they be active or retired.
-
Please tell him that we are thinking of him. Sounds like he was very lucky but I do know how hard it is in these economic times to have to replace something out of pocket. Still...it could have been so much worse.
-
Same here...it was only a few years ago after moving to Ohio that I even tried it. Tried it for about 5 minutes and felt that was plenty.
-
Are you kidding...I've only tried ice skating one time. We didn't have a lot of ice where I grew up in Texas.
-
No WAY. I will NOT knight you until I have sampled the product.
-
There are a lot of good guitars on the market and you don't have to spend thousands of dollars to get one. I love my Seagull. I think they are about as good as you can buy for the money spent. Mine does have the cedar top, wild cherry back and sides and the maple neck. It is a solid top but I think the back and sides are laminated. Great low action for an acoustic.
-
LOL...feisty? ME? I'm just trying to keep this thing in the No Spin Zone. For the record, I don't even LIKE hockey. I've been to ONE game and I figured it very quickly. If you swat that puck enough times, it's eventually gonna go into the net. Total chaos.
-
And that is exactly what I said. Hockey was NOT invented by Canadians. It was invented by British soldiers who just happened to be in Canada at the time or possibly by the Scots CENTURIES before some of them immigrated to Canada. Thank you for proving my point.
-
It looks like Al edited his post for some reason. Not sure if he intended to delete the link to the video or not.
-
The funniest part of that entire list of falsehoods is that even HOCKEY wasn't invented by a Canadian.
-
Removing rear wheel with bike on CarbonOne lift adapter
Freebird replied to SilvrT's topic in Watering Hole
It's not hard to do and I'm sure you will do just fine. One thing you may want to consider in the future is the Carbon One lift adapter. It is well worth the money. -
Send me your address by email or private message. There is no hurry for you to get it back, I certainly have no plans to use it OR to sell my bike anytime soon...if ever. There was no shim on mine.
-
I actually have a stock final drive sitting on my shelf. I'm keeping it just in case I ever sell the bike and the new owner prefers the stock rear. I don't want to get rid of it but would be glad to ship it to you if you want to use it for measurements and etc. You would just have to ship it back when you are done with it. Of course if somebody wants a VMAX rear, this would be the perfect time of the year for them to just send you their stock unit and take advantage of your great offer.
-
I'm not convinced that Geo Thermal is always the best option. Last year, I got a quote to have it installed. It came to about $13,000.00. I have to think that the dealer was pretty honest because he basically talked me out of doing it. I already have a high efficiency furnace. It's a heat pump system with propane backup and in the high 90s for efficiency. He told me that based upon the efficiency of my existing furnace, the payback for the Geo Thermal system would be about 13 years. He said that the true life expectancy of the Geo Thermal system is about 15 years. So...it would be 13 years before I reached the break even point and then possibly only 2 years of the continued small savings before I had to spend big bucks again.
-
I think the "Imagehacks" is part of the modification that resizes the linked images that some folks add to their posts. It prevents them from making the width so wide that you have to scroll across to read messages. I've removed it for now to see if that is indeed it. If so, I think it is OK and not causing any harm. I may put it back if I don't find anything negative about it.
-
No, I do not have that modification installed here. I'll try to figure it out though.
-
LOL....I doubt THAT.
-
I can't argue with your logic there and will not deny that there have been times when it would have been nice. I wouldn't fault anybody if they chose to own one if it works as advertised but it's just not for me. Too large and etc.
-
LOL...there are so many inaccuracies in that stupid list that I won't even take the time to list them all...... Just do a "who invented baseball"... or "who invented velcro".... etc.....with an advanced Google search if you want actual facts and not urban legend emails. You troublemakers....
-
I agree that you have to do your own homework. I'm amazed that you go to a hospital and see a specialist and they often give you only ONE option. The one that they have the equipment to perform. I ran into this with my cancer..Ocular Melanoma. The director of the Cole Eye Institute of the Cleveland Clinic wanted to remove my eye the day following my appointment with him. He told me that was the only real option. I chose to go home and do some research and found the doctor in Boston who pioneered the proton beam radiation for Ocular Melanoma. I chose to go that route instead of having my eye removed. Not only do I still have my eye but his success rate is higher than the procedure of having the eye removed. In addition to that, there was a good chance that I would retain all or some of my vision in that eye...though in my particular case...the odds were not good due to the location of the tumor. At this point, I have indeed gone almost blind in my right eye but at least it is still MY eye, I can at this point at least see a little out of it...and it looks, turns, etc. the same as my good eye. I'll take this any day over a glass eye if given the same choices. The fact is, the doctor in Cleveland did not even HINT that there were alternative treatments for me to consider. In my opinion, the only reason for him not to have told me was that it would cost him many thousands of dollars due to the fact that he was not equipped or trained to do it. ALWAYS do your research and find out what your options are. NEVER count on them telling you all there is to know.
-
Interesting but I think I'll pass. Too big...no outlet for passenger...no PRICE? Just doesn't seem like a good way to launch a new product...not even an ESTIMATED price. I'm guessing that they are running the 20% discount offer to determine if there is a real demand. Then they can find out what it will cost to have them manufactured in those quantities and until then, they don't know what to charge for it. It's easy to offer a 20% discount when you have not announced a price. All they have to do is make the initial price 20% higher.
-
I agree with you. That is why I stated in my post that it really depends upon how you use the truck. Same thing goes for motorcycles. That's why I'm running the lower ration VMAX rear in my RSV. Much better performance overall and better gas mileage under certain conditions such as pulling the trailer.
-
I can't help much on the reliability question. I sold Chevrolets for a few years and sold a lot of 3/4 ton trucks with the 6.0. We had very few problems with that engine. That was about 7 years ago and before the 6.2. I don't know how much it differs from the 6.0 but if it's pretty much the same engine, it should be OK. The main problem with any of the GM motors was the intake gaskets. It wasn't a matter of IF they were going to leak but WHEN. I never understood why they didn't do something to correct that problem.
-
OK...I just took another look at the Chevy site and selected the 2009 model year. The only rear end available with the 6.2 engine is the 3.42. That would typically mean that the gas mileage will not be as good. That is not always the case though. Sometimes the lower rear will get as good or better mileage if you do a lot of towing or drive where there are a lot of hills/mountains. At any rate, I wouldn't expect very good gas mileage. I will still stick with my estimate of 12-14 MPG.
-
It may depend a lot on which rear end it has. I don't remember now but at one time, I think you could get a 4:10 rear with the 6.2 and that was a gas mileage killer. I know that most of the 3/4 ton trucks with the 6.0 were lucky to get 12-14 MPG. When I look at the chevy site now, I don't even see an option for a 6.2 in 2010 but they show the rear end options to be 3.08 standard or 3.42 if you order the trailering package.