Going back to my question about whether T/bars were designed to be
lubricated...
if the ends' of the bars were properly inserted into their ft/rr
receptacles, I can't see how
mere corrosion at those bar-insertions could cause a bar to break.
Making them a BITCH to remove: sure, but causing their failure (because
they're still
able to rotate freely)..I dunno.
I'm trying to contact a guy, back east, now (long-retired) who IIRC,
had had a T/bar
fail on his newly purchased 57 Plymouth.
I had 'heard' that the bars broke because of bad metalurgy, and that
they either broke quickly
or that they out-lasted the car's lifetime.
Neil Vedder
Joe Savard wrote:
The original reason that the bars broke was corrosion at the rear
socket due to salt build-up in the winter. Chrysler didn't catch that
it would be a problem during the first year of production. Time was a
factor. As soon as they realized what was happening, a rubber
bushing/seal was installed, and the problem went away, as far as I know.
Joe Savard, 19 degree snowy Lake Orion, Michigan
In a message dated 1/9/2011 9:31:51 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
jrawa@xxxxxxx writes:
i have a feeling the bars that break had a production flaw that
just needed enought stress to allow failure- at 50+ yrs old now-
if they didnt break yet- i'd say youre safe. the trick may be
constant use- spring steel has memory but dormancy may also raise
the risk factor- as other "springs" do sag without use or with
overloading.
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1
<http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1>
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1
|
|
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network