small-list-digest Sunday, February 28 1999 Volume 03 : Number 054



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Ranger, Explorer, Bronco 2 and Aerostar
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
majordomo ford-trucks.com
with the words "unsubscribe small-list-digest" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

Re: FTE Small - Better bass suggestions?
FTE Small - Re: Truck mileage
FTE Small - Crome Bumpers
Re: FTE Small - Crome Bumpers
FTE Small - Sob..goodbyr
Re: FTE Small - Sob..goodbyr
FTE Small - Blowing Speakers
FTE Small - Blowing loudspeakers
FTE Small - Blowing Speakers
Re: FTE Small - Chrome Bumpers
Re: FTE Small - Hey Ken, stereo list maybe
Re: FTE Small - Blowing Speakers
Re: FTE Small - Re: Truck mileage
FTE Small - Speakers and other high power things...
Re: FTE Small - Sob..goodbyr
FTE Small - Another Audio Question
Re: FTE Small - Re: Truck mileage
Re: FTE Small - Hey Ken, stereo list maybe
Re: FTE Small - Ford Excursion to be officially revealed tomorrow
Re: FTE Small - Ford Excursion to be officially revealed tomorrow
Re: FTE Small - Blowing Speakers
FTE Small - explorer upgrades
FTE Small - '92 Ranger 4X4 for sale in Rolla/St.Louis Missouri area

=======================================================================

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 10:03:31 -0600
From: "Greg Hopper"
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Better bass suggestions?

i have a question/comment about this. when i bought my amp and subs for my
truck, i was plannin on gettin a Rockford Fosgate Punch 55.2, and bridging
it to run two Punch XLC 10s (4ohms). this, of course, would have created a
2ohm load. which the punch should have been more than happy to handle. but
the installer said that that would not work, that the punch would not handle
the MONO load the subs would create. point is, my installer was telling me
that a STEREO load is different from a MONO load. i accepted this as true,
but does anyone know why?? ive also noticed that in catalogs such as
crutchfield, many of the amps mention output with a 2ohm stereo load, but
only a very few (amps designated for subwoofers usually) mention a mono
load... what gives?? hell, what's determines the difference between a mono
and stereo load in the first place??
thanks
dave


>It would be a little more accurate to say bridge the amp into mono and then
>wire the speakers in parallel. This both takes advantage of the higher
>ratings in bridged mode of some amps and takes advantage of the higher
>power output to a low impedance load found with many amps.
>
>Two important considerations:
>
>1. Make sure the amp is designed for bridging (usually there is a switch.)
>Trying to bridge an amp not designed for it will blow the amp and possibly
>the speakers.
>
>2. Make sure that the amp is rated for a 1-2 ohm load. Wiring 2 speakers in
>parallel halves the impedance of the load seen by the amp. If the amp can't
>handle this things won't go well. Fortunately, many high-end car audio amps
>are designed with low impedance drive capability.

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 12:25:16 -0500
From: "Lou Guerriero"
Subject: FTE Small - Re: Truck mileage

Are you out of your mind?

There is no reason that these vehicles need to pollute as much as they do,
except the fact
that they fall under "trucks" and in order to keep economies competitive,
governments (US)
failed to enact the same rules/legislation as is on regular commuter cars.

I really resent being called a communist. Just cuz you prefer to watch the
planet die slowly
doesn't mean we all do. I love SUV's too, but if there were rules to make
them safer/cleaner
it would be a better world. There is nothing wrong with a free market. But
if you knew a
little more about US trade practices, you'd realize Adam Smith would be
rolling in his freakin
grave. Just look at US oil subsidies/price fixing compared to responsible
taxation in foreign countries
(IE for cleanup of spills, medical coverage etc).

Following your reasoning, we should still have slavery, cuz the "market
warranted it."

I'm sure you wouldn't agree with that statement.

I can agree that if it's bigger than a suburban and gets better mileage,
that's good.

But is there a reason that a 1988 ford ranger and a 1999 ford ranger get
similar mileage?

If a similar situation existed in other cars, there would be hell to pay.

_______________________________________________________

Take the TV stories with a grain of salt. The environmentalists
(socialists/communists) HATE the new Ford Excursion, as they do
anything that is an expression of the free market or freedom in
general. The news stories are all carrying a negative slant.
It looks like this vehicle will be bigger than a Chevy Suburban and
will probably get about the same mileage. It will be a much better
product just by definition (Ford).


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 12:57:19 -0500
From: "Eric Davis"
Subject: FTE Small - Crome Bumpers

Does anyone know if you can paint crome on. I would like to make my bumpers
crome but I don't want to pay $600 to get new ones. Thanks

Eric Davis
98 4x4 Ranger,
Edlebrock muffler, K&N.


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 12:05:46 -0600
From: "Greg Hopper"
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Crome Bumpers

you can buy chrome spray paint but i know the stuff i had at least looked
more like silver paint than chrome...
just a thought
dave


>Does anyone know if you can paint crome on. I would like to make my bumpers
>crome but I don't want to pay $600 to get new ones. Thanks
>
>Eric Davis
>98 4x4 Ranger,
>Edlebrock muffler, K&N.

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 18:25:36 -0000
From: "Neil Brownlee"
Subject: FTE Small - Sob..goodbyr

Hi guys,

It's goodbye from me I fear. I am having to get rid of the 98 Explorer due
to the inability of service departments in the UK to cope with it. I will
really miss her. Local Service departments have repeatedly told me that
grinding noises and inabilities to turn right without yet more grinding
noises are 'characteristics'.....I say F*ck Off! If that was the case,
no-one would drive them!!! It is a lemon, built on a Monday or Friday.....

The good news, and please...no flame wars...I am replacing her with a Range
Rover 4.6 HSE - it is gorgeous, the air suspension is something you just
HAVE to try!

Neil




== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 12:29:09 -0600
From: "John Becker"
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Sob..goodbyr

did you contact FORD about this?
Seems to me that they would do something about it.

John


- -----Original Message-----
From: Neil Brownlee
To: small-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Saturday, February 27, 1999 12:25 PM
Subject: FTE Small - Sob..goodbyr


>Hi guys,
>
>It's goodbye from me I fear. I am having to get rid of the 98
Explorer due
>to the inability of service departments in the UK to cope with it. I
will
>really miss her. Local Service departments have repeatedly told me
that
>grinding noises and inabilities to turn right without yet more
grinding
>noises are 'characteristics'.....I say F*ck Off! If that was the
case,
>no-one would drive them!!! It is a lemon, built on a Monday or
Friday.....
>
>The good news, and please...no flame wars...I am replacing her with a
Range
>Rover 4.6 HSE - it is gorgeous, the air suspension is something you
just
>HAVE to try!
>
>Neil
>
>
>
>
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info
http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 10:37:02 -0800
From: rgstein pacbell.net
Subject: FTE Small - Blowing Speakers

Burnett wrote --------------------------------------------------------
However, I have heard of (but never actually seen) speakers that were
destroyed when so much power was applied that the woofer cone literally
was
blown out of the enclosure. This isn't something that I would want to be
listening to at the time it happened!!

Me -------------------------------------------------------------------

My favorite speakers that I sold carried a lifetime warranty on the
woofer. These were _real_ studio monitors. A recording engineer
brought the mfr a blown woofer. He replied: "My woofers are designed to
withstand 300 watts RMS. I'll replace the driver for you, but may I ask
you a question: what are you doing to your ears?"

You'll note that I hammer away at this point. _We_ have not been
engineered to withstand 300 watts. In fact, we may be damaging our ears
at sustained levels above about 5-10 watts in the car.

Richard


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 10:27:33 -0800
From: rgstein pacbell.net
Subject: FTE Small - Blowing loudspeakers

J Cope wrote:

Y'know, as harsh and grating as your reply was, I appreciate you setting
me straight. I stand
corrected.

JC

I'd written ----------------------------------------------------------
In all my years in audio, I sure picked up a lot of half-baked theories,
but this one takes the prize.

I apologize to you. Got carried away there. The theory was kinda
juicy. (One day I'll hear the description of "Hungry Water Theory" on
Car Talk).

Richard


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 10:57:37 -0800
From: rgstein pacbell.net
Subject: FTE Small - Blowing Speakers

>From Burnett -------------------------------------------------------
> rgstein pacbell.net wrote:
> >
> > Despite my being an audio expert, as you may guess, I think that
putting
> > an audiophile system into a vehicle is lunacy; road noise defeats the
> > whole concept (I won't explain why now).

For many years I was concerned about this. Then I actually installed an
audiophile system in my truck, and I haven't looked back since. Road is
generally easy to overcome and even the wind noise generated when
driving
70-75 mph can be all but obliterated with enough power matched to the
right speakers.

Me -------------------------------------------------------------------

A key here may involve the kind of music we are listening to. With rock
music, we're almost always listening to music that encompasses a fairly
limited dynamic range, intended to be enjoyed at a fairly high level.

With classical material, and much "classic" modern jazz, the dynamic
range within a work can be huge: a symphony can thin out from the entire
ensemble playing full-bore to a single unaccomianied flute. Even a
string quartet's range can greatly surpass that of a typical rock group.
In this case, it becomes a pain to constantly turn the stereo up and
down as the music goes quiet and loud, all vs. the road noise. Indeed,
I wish that my car stereo came with a compressor circuit built-in.

About blowing drivers, I agree of course that any amplifier can probably
fry an appropriate driver. It's just that tweeters are what usually get
toasted. The reason is pretty simple when you go to a large OEM raw
driver catalog (such as Philips) and check out the power specs.

Relative to the musical energy going into the woofer (in order to make
sound audible to the human organism), it takes a pittance to drive the
tweeters. Therefore, in a multi-speaker integrated speaker system, the
power handling ability of the tweeter will be miniscule compared to the
woofer. If I remember correctly, it is common for a 75 watt woofer to
be mated with an 8 watt tweeter. And people live with these boxes for
decades without blowing anything. Car audio would be similar, I'd
think.

In home systems, it is typical for the manufacturer to have their woofer
custom made, but to buy the tweeters and midranges stock, right out of
someone else's book. There's a nice variety of good tweeters out there
right off the shelf. Two european companies seem to supply almost
everyone. Tweeters are easy to mass-produce, and are quite
inexpensive. I suspect that car systems are handled the same way.

Richard

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 11:15:01 -0800 (PST)
From: Bill Ciocco
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Chrome Bumpers

Chrome is an electroplating process. I have enver seen a successful
attempt at paiting something with silver or aluminum paint to
duplicate the look of chrome.

You might try the salvage yards for a good chrome bumper. Not cheap,
but it should be less than $600.





_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 13:38:13 -0600
From: Mike Fisher
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Hey Ken, stereo list maybe

RMS is the average amount of voltage that a sine wave produces. RMS is
.707 x the peak voltage. That means that if you have an amp that is
rated at 100 watts per channel, it produces 70 watts RMS. That is a 30%
difference. Also, manufacturers used to have ratings that they called
peak music power, that was the total peak power of both channels
combined. That means that 200 watts peak music power would be only 70
watts RMS per channel. Watch the numbers, because units can make a BIG
difference.

Mike Fisher
'97 AWD Mountaineer/K&N/Borla/31x10.5-15s BFGs

Matthew Banevich wrote:
>
> To be honest to you, peak power and RMS are pretty much the same thing,
> it's just that RMS has an electrical name to it ( Root Mean Square )
> when you work the electrical numbers out, the crap comes out pretty much
> the same.
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 19:20:41 -0500
From: "Jim Chapman"
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Blowing Speakers

Sir: What do you mean by the phrase " 300 Watts RMS"? I have never seen that
term when referring to power.
r/s jimc Semper Fi
- -----Original Message-----
From: rgstein pacbell.net
To: small-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Saturday, February 27, 1999 2:05 PM
Subject: FTE Small - Blowing Speakers


>Burnett wrote --------------------------------------------------------
>However, I have heard of (but never actually seen) speakers that were
>destroyed when so much power was applied that the woofer cone literally
>was
>blown out of the enclosure. This isn't something that I would want to be
>listening to at the time it happened!!
>
>Me -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>My favorite speakers that I sold carried a lifetime warranty on the
>woofer. These were _real_ studio monitors. A recording engineer
>brought the mfr a blown woofer. He replied: "My woofers are designed to
>withstand 300 watts RMS. I'll replace the driver for you, but may I ask
>you a question: what are you doing to your ears?"
>
>You'll note that I hammer away at this point. _We_ have not been
>engineered to withstand 300 watts. In fact, we may be damaging our ears
>at sustained levels above about 5-10 watts in the car.
>
>Richard
>
>
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 19:24:30 -0500
From: "Jim Chapman"
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Re: Truck mileage

If you like the taxes in overseas places go live there.
v/r jimc Semper Fi
- -----Original Message-----
From: Lou Guerriero
To: small-list ford-trucks.com
Date: Saturday, February 27, 1999 12:29 PM
Subject: FTE Small - Re: Truck mileage


>Are you out of your mind?
>
>There is no reason that these vehicles need to pollute as much as they do,
>except the fact
>that they fall under "trucks" and in order to keep economies competitive,
>governments (US)
>failed to enact the same rules/legislation as is on regular commuter cars.
>
>I really resent being called a communist. Just cuz you prefer to watch
the
>planet die slowly
>doesn't mean we all do. I love SUV's too, but if there were rules to make
>them safer/cleaner
>it would be a better world. There is nothing wrong with a free market.
But
>if you knew a
>little more about US trade practices, you'd realize Adam Smith would be
>rolling in his freakin
>grave. Just look at US oil subsidies/price fixing compared to responsible
>taxation in foreign countries
>(IE for cleanup of spills, medical coverage etc).
>
>Following your reasoning, we should still have slavery, cuz the "market
>warranted it."
>
>I'm sure you wouldn't agree with that statement.
>
>I can agree that if it's bigger than a suburban and gets better mileage,
>that's good.
>
>But is there a reason that a 1988 ford ranger and a 1999 ford ranger get
>similar mileage?
>
>If a similar situation existed in other cars, there would be hell to pay.
>
>_______________________________________________________
>
>Take the TV stories with a grain of salt. The environmentalists
>(socialists/communists) HATE the new Ford Excursion, as they do
>anything that is an expression of the free market or freedom in
>general. The news stories are all carrying a negative slant.
>It looks like this vehicle will be bigger than a Chevy Suburban and
>will probably get about the same mileage. It will be a much better
>product just by definition (Ford).
>
>
>== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 15:56:31 -0800
From: "Tom Watson"
Subject: FTE Small - Speakers and other high power things...

On Sat, 27 Feb 1999 05:31:13 -0500 (EST), "Bunrett" wrote:
>
> However, I have heard of (but never actually seen) speakers that were
> destroyed when so much power was applied that the woofer cone literally was
> blown out of the enclosure. This isn't something that I would want to be
> listening to at the time it happened!!
>

For such "blowing of speakers" one needs to review the opening scene of
_Bact to the Future_ (part 1). The operative quote goes something like
"Marty, watch the amplifier...."

ObFTE Small: The discussion about Ford Excursions Vs. Environmentalists is
similar to wanting all the audio power. At some time it becomes a waste, but
in some instances it IS needed. Besides, who knows, the US Secret Service
might switch to Ford Excursions if deverence to the C***y S********ns that
they now use. Market forces at work....


p.s. Them things are big!!
- --
Tom Watson Generic short signature
tsw johana.com (I'm at home now)
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 20:17:36 -0500
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Sob..goodbyr

Neil Brownlee wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
>
> It's goodbye from me I fear. I am having to get rid of the 98 Explorer due
> to the inability of service departments in the UK to cope with it. I will
> really miss her. Local Service departments have repeatedly told me that
> grinding noises and inabilities to turn right without yet more grinding
> noises are 'characteristics'.....

Have you tried some 'not so local' places? I'd also suggest going to
the next step above the dealerships and bending some ears.

> I say F*ck Off! If that was the case, no-one would drive them!!!

Good point.. raise some Hell to the right people and it'll be
fixed/replaced.

> It is a lemon, built on a Monday or Friday.....

Hey.. I do good work on Monday (once I finally get there...)
and I even wait until after closing on Friday to buy beer and
Jagermeister. Wed. is the day to look out for me.. No computer on Sun.
& Mon. so I'm always up late catching the mail up on Tuesday night!

>
> The good news, and please...no flame wars...I am replacing her with a Range
> Rover 4.6 HSE - it is gorgeous, the air suspension is something you just
> HAVE to try!

*NO* flames from me.. the Rovers are the only thing I'd
trade my B-II for!

TT

PS: I dont think you HAVE to actually own a Ford to stay on the list..
stick around! :-)
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 20:50:42 EST
From: NT650 AOL.COM
Subject: FTE Small - Another Audio Question

Fellow Listers,
Is there something about the Ranger's speaker placement which makes it
difficult to get decent sound?
I spec'd the 80 watt multi media sound system when I ordered my '99 2dr.
Supercab, fully expecting the factory speakers to be poor. I wasn't
disappointed. But I was surprised at just how much worse they performed than
say, my Taurus' basic factory system. Mid - base, especially male announcers'
voices were extremely heavy and exaggerated, and some jazz passages with
upright bass fiddle, for example, were so boomy the bass control had to be
backed way down to be even tolerable.
Okay, I liked the sound of Pioneer 6815's (6x8" 3-way) on the display
board, so in they went, all four. Mids and highs are vastly improved over the
whizzer-coned originals, but much of that boominess in the mid and upper bass
regions remains.
Has anyone else experienced this? Any solutions? I wonder if packing
insulation into the the cavities behind the speakers would eliminate some sort
of resonance, since these speakers didn't display these characteristics in the
showroom.

Todd B.
NT650 aol.com
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 21:33:57 -0500
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Re: Truck mileage

What was the original thread?? I assume this is about the Excursion and
I'll respond as such


Lou Guerriero wrote:
>
> Are you out of your mind?
>
> There is no reason that these vehicles need to pollute as much as they do,

I believe the Excursion is supposed to qualify as a LEV (low emission
vehicle). I guess being as clean as a Honda Civic makes it a gross
polluter just because it's so big. Having done tail pipe checks since
1980 I can tell you that anything made after 1984 or so *in good working
order* is not making much in the way of pollutants. You want my opinion
of why cars pollute? Owners that dont give a rat's butt that the 'check
engine' light is on or that the vehicle runs like crap. THAT is what
needs to be targeted rather than lowering the emissions of *new*
vehicles that are already clean.

> except the fact
> that they fall under "trucks" and in order to keep economies competitive,
> governments (US)
> failed to enact the same rules/legislation as is on regular commuter cars.

I believe at the time the rules were put in place trucks were a much
smaller segment of the market; remember it's only been the last 5-10
years that the 'SUV' was born. (Always been there, just the sudden
popularity demanded a new acronymn.) Mini-vans have also followed this
trend by being classified trucks. Probably we should blame the earlier
boom in mini-vans for all the 'safety' crap we now have to endure in our
trucks.

>
> I really resent being called a communist.

I didnt; but I'll say an idealist.

> Just cuz you prefer to watch the planet die slowly doesn't mean we all do.

Just because you think that's the cause of our planet's ills doesnt mean
we all do. Try the emissions of large businesses, semis, jet aircraft,
etc. etc.

>
> I love SUV's too, but if there were rules to make them safer/cleaner it would be a better world.

You want to make 'em safer? Make it impossible to use a cell phone
inside one! (I'm reminded of a cartoon I saw the other day saying "I'd
rather see a guy coming at me with a beer in his hand than a phone; at
least HE might be paying attention." Airbags are standard now and
that's unsafe IMHO, crash worthy bumpers are in place raising the
purchase price for defensive drivers.. Good grief.. If people would USE
the belts in vehicles we wouldnt need an explosive device in the dash
and be spared the needless expense. Most motor vehicle incidents are
NOT 'accidents' they're driver error.. an accident is when a tie rod
fails! Teach people to use belts and *really* drive and you'll save a
lot more lives than any 'safety improvement' on a vehicle ever will.

By your tone I suspect you are in favor of catalytic convertors on lawn
mowers and out-riggers on motorcycles. (Both of which *have* been
proposed at one time or another.)


>
> There is nothing wrong with a free market.

But when the cost of regulated add-ons reaches a certain point the
public will not buy the new product and instead repairs the old 'dirty &
unsafe' one. I think we've already reached the point of diminishing
returns on light motor vehicles. I could also argue how 'free' it is
when I cant buy a new vehicle without an airbag as would be my
preference.

> if you knew a
> little more about US trade practices, you'd realize Adam Smith would be
> rolling in his freakin grave.

Might want to look at other commodities as well; grain, corn, milk,
soybean.. you get the idea.

> Following your reasoning, we should still have slavery, cuz the "market
> warranted it."
>
> I'm sure you wouldn't agree with that statement.

Dont bring out the debater in me.. with good evidence and preparation I
might make a dang good case for it. (NOT my view, but a good debate
person must be prepared to argue/refute either side.)

>
> I can agree that if it's bigger than a suburban and gets better mileage,
> that's good.

Plus being a LEV.. that's real good.

>
> But is there a reason that a 1988 ford ranger and a 1999 ford ranger get
> similar mileage?

Well the 88 was a 2.9 and the mid 90 and up is a 4.0 plus the boom in
trucks/SUVs means a higher percentage have the ineffecient automatic
transmission rather than the 'purist' manual. Seems like apples and
oranges to me.

>
> If a similar situation existed in other cars, there would be hell to pay.
>

I dont think so.. lets double the engine sizes and use a Mustang
platform; would there be an outrage if a 8 liter 99 Mustang (Whoo! I
want one) had the same mileage as a 5.8 88 did?

> _______________________________________________________
>
> The news stories are all carrying a negative slant.

Because of all the hue & cry about it being so large.. at least the
semi-reliable ones do note that it's supposed to be LEV which shoots the
whole arguement in the butt. If fuel mileage is really such an issue
then why are large engines allowed in other trucks? I know plenty of
people that would smile at 12 MPG. (Heck.. needing a carb and an engine
on my BRONCO-II weighing less than half the Excursion my mileage is
10-11!)

Bah Humbug!

TT
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 21:50:26 -0500
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Hey Ken, stereo list maybe

Burnett wrote:
>
>
> Also, it's not entirely fair to compare radio transmission power to an
> audio amp's power output. Your transmission power has no effect on the
> volume that the receiver of your signal hears (technically this isn't
> entirely true.) The audio power output of the recipient's radio, be it 4
> watts or 400 watts, coupled with the volume control setting is much more
> relevant.

Quite so; my received signal is totally based on the user. If he has a
poor set-up then he wont hear me, but I guess my point was along the
lines of 'what is the minimum'?

>
> I guess my point is - let's stop bashing people for having "too much" power
> and start focusing on the real issue of being disrespectful of others by
> playing your system too loudly in an improper environment.

AMEN BROTHER! I dont care how many mega-Watts anyone has; just dont
force *your* music choice on me if I'm near you. If I'm driving Kim's
convertible top down with a purely stock Ford radio (for now), I'll
reduce the volume at a light even though it's probably less than
annoying to anyone else.


TT
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 21:58:43 -0500
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Ford Excursion to be officially revealed tomorrow

Thom Cheney wrote:
>

> Nope, and glad I don't have to plunk down the $40K to figure out how.

With the $12-15K profit on each..

> Let the greenies whine... gas is cheap & emissions are so low these days
> it is laughable to see them complain.

I just laugh.. it's as asinine as thinking gun laws on the legal
owners/buyers reduce the illegal gun sales. Feel good do nothing stuff.

>
> Meanwhile, since it's just me, wife, small kid & the wonder beagle...
> I'll stick to my easily parked and fueled Ranger Supercab and it's
> accompanying $214 per month payment.

Or my paid off 85 B-II for me and Kim and possibly her pomeranian! We
have no need for the behemoth but I am not going to berate anyone
wanting one.

>

TT
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 22:10:16 -0500
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Ford Excursion to be officially revealed tomorrow

Diana Slyter wrote:
>
> I'm an environmentalist. As long as Ford offers a diesel engine in it I
> love the Excursion.

So you prefer more particulate matter per mile than almost zero CO, NOx
and HC? Seems odd to me. If the Excursion truly *does* get LEV
certified it should be a darn sight cleaner than any oil-burner. A
diesel is a nasty little bugger when it comes to emissions; just more
fuel effecient.


> Can you imagine a more efficent way to haul a crew of
> 9 workers and a trailer full of gear?

A Ranger with 6 workers in the rear and a hitch. ;-)


TT
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 22:18:27 -0500
From: Tim Turner
Subject: Re: FTE Small - Blowing Speakers

rgstein pacbell.net wrote:

> You'll note that I hammer away at this point. _We_ have not been
> engineered to withstand 300 watts. In fact, we may be damaging our ears
> at sustained levels above about 5-10 watts in the car.
>
> Richard

Once again *THANK YOU*! After years of exposure to air tools and
firearms my hearing is very poor but I dont have tinnititus (ringing)
yet and hope I never do. Judging by the idiots I hear at lights hearing
loss will be the #1 health problem in another 10-15 years.

Tim
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 22:56:11 EST
From: Ding060297 AOL.COM
Subject: FTE Small - explorer upgrades

Does anyone know of a company that makes good headers for my 96 explorer with
the 5.0 v8 its the same as the mustang but the area might be different in the
chassis...any info is appreciated..or even just cat back systems.....ding
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 23:52:12 -0600
From: Scott Ford
Subject: FTE Small - '92 Ranger 4X4 for sale in Rolla/St.Louis Missouri area....


To access the rest of this feature you must be a logged in Registered User Of Ford Truck Enthusiasts

Registration is free, easy and gives you access to more features.
If you are not registered, click here to register.
If you are already registered, you can login here.

If you are already logged in and are seeing this message, your web browser is blocking session cookies. Change your browser cookie settings to allow session cookies.




Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - Jobs

This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.