mgs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Rear Tube Shock Conversion Plans

To: Andy Ramm <aramm@concentric.net>
Subject: Re: Rear Tube Shock Conversion Plans
From: "John J. Peloquin" <peloquin@mamba.bio.uci.edu>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 09:37:05 -0800 (PST)
Dear Andy

Thanks, I suspected that would be the case, as the idea of the higher
grade bolt is supposedly less chance of failure. I believe your resident
Mech E.

Thanks!
 On Thu, 8 Jan 1998, Andy Ramm wrote:

=%OGood question.  I just canvassed our resident mechanical engineer and
=%Onuts'n'bolts curmudgeon.  He said grade 8 is not necessarily more
=%Obrittle than grade 5 and would be appropriate for use in mounting shock
=%Oabsorbers.  He said that a grade 8 bold simply has a finer, more dense
=%Ocrystaline structure within the metal making it stronger.  I personally
=%Oplan to use grade 8 bolts in my application.
=%O
=%OAndy
=%O
=%OJohn J. Peloquin wrote:
=%O> 
=%O> Dear Dave,
=%O> 
=%O> Thanks a ton for your reposting of your conversion scheme. It sounds great
=%O> to me. At the risk of starting another thread, would there be any problem
=%O> with using grade 8 or aircraft grade bolts instead of grade 5? I've seen
=%O> posts that claim the higher grade bolts are stronger, but more brittle
=%O> which might cause problems in a suspension.
=%O> 
=%O> Please remember I'm not an engineer and I really don't know if that is
=%O> true or not. I'm sure the opinionated out there will let me know what they
=%O> think!
=%O> 
=%O> "Never ascribe to Malice that which can be explained by Ignorance"
=%O> 
=%O> John J. Peloquin
=%O> Molecular Biology &
=%O>   Biochemistry
=%O> 3205 BioSciences II
=%O> UC IRVINE
=%O> Irvine, CA 92697-3900
=%O> jpeloqui@uci.edu
=%O
=%O-- 
=%O
=%O
=%O
=%O
=%OAndy Ramm
=%OA silver face in a tweed world.
=%ORemove obvious spam filter from email address when replying.
=%O"What we play is the blues, straight from the delta, and I believe we'll
=%Omake it on that,"  B.B. King
=%O
=%O
=%OBy US Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), Sec.227(b)(1)(C) and
=%OSec.227(b)(3)(C), it is unlawful to send any unsolicited advertisement
=%Oto this equipment.  A violation of the aforementioned Section is
=%Opunishable by action to recover actual monetary loss, or $500, whichever
=%Ois greater, for each violation.
=%O

"Never ascribe to Malice that which can be explained by Ignorance"

John J. Peloquin
Molecular Biology &
  Biochemistry
3205 BioSciences II
UC IRVINE
Irvine, CA 92697-3900
jpeloqui@uci.edu


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>