>The manufacturer of the body in this case is meaningless...as is the
>workmanship on the conversion. It looks like a typical hodge-podge try at a
>modification...in other words...a typical prototype. I crawled under it and
>over it...It did look a bit sloppy...but then it was not being made to
>sell... it was being made to see "if" it could be done...and it "was"...!
>It is what it is...a prototype....
I do not agree. I was formerly employed as an engineer for a defense
contractor that did both ground based systems (army) and airborne stuff.
When we did prototypes be it systems that we would add to existing vehicles
or vehicles that we would modify, such as putting a Diesels in FAV's, they
pulled out all the stops to do a top notch mil-spec job (the only exception
that I saw was the use of some conventional auto gages, but still 2-1/16"
Dia, on that Diesel FAV because there was no mil spec gage made for that
function, do not recall what it was but something like boost pressure or
exhaust temp maybe?). It did not seem to matter, from where I sat, if the
project was purely on spec or if there was an actual contract for it. But
then anything is possible, maybe it was a G job by some guys in the shop
after hours even. I'd like more details.
Does anyone recalll which Perkins it was? I know it's not the 108cuin,
could have been the 234 or the one in between???? If it was the 234, good
choice, if it was the in between one, bad choice, very obsolete. My Perkins
engine dealer bud actually had to make a head gasket for one as nothing was
available from Perkins or anyone else.
je
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 24 2000 - 20:55:35 PDT