1971 Plymouth GTX Hemi . last year for the real 426 hemi .
Car pics too cool not to share
- Thread starter Squatch
- Start date
@Squatch
I know this is kinda late but while googling just to see what the spool valve is is see that there are two Spool Valve Gasket Filters. Now I'm curious, how does the other filter look?
I know this is kinda late but while googling just to see what the spool valve is is see that there are two Spool Valve Gasket Filters. Now I'm curious, how does the other filter look?
I used to have a 66 falcon ranchero, and then a 67 fairlane ranchero right after it!
Sure wish I had those babies back!
For yours and @Squatch 's viewing pleasure
Does this help? Doesn't quite fit the VW body style IMO...
Hell, it's so far away and fuzzy that it could be an Opel Kadett wagon, for all we know.
Thanks ! , I don't see the taillights extending above the body line crease . Who knows though .
I can remove the entire spool valve assembly and reinstall it in about 30 minutes. The other filter requires supporting the engine, removing the passenger side motor mount, removing a belt tensioner and a pulley (I've forgotten what it goes to), as well as removing the power steering pump, all just to get to the second filter (screen). I did that the first time, and while it was fairly contaminated, it was nowhere near what the first filter was, which was absolutely plugged solid. Therefore, I decided that I will use the "easy access" filter as a gauge to determine what the engine's doing, removing it as many times as necessary over time. The second filter will likely only get pulled one more time, once I'm satisfied with the results of the first filter's condition. Does that make sense?
Thanks for looking into it, though, and sharing it with me. Nice to know some folks have my back on here!
Last edited:
And I'm not entirely sure, but this just might be...maybe...a Ford pickup...I think...perhaps...
And I'm not entirely sure, but this just might be...maybe...a Ford pickup...I think...perhaps...
View attachment 666067
What ! you must be one of those clairvoyant folks !
What ! you must be one of those clairvoyant folks !
I could physically feel its need for repair. You just can't make that stuff up.
What ! you must be one of those clairvoyant folks !
I once dated a girl name Claire Voyant.
*Just kidding.
I could physically feel its need for repair. You just can't make that stuff up.
Lifter tick and the power steering pump sounded like an air raid siren ? Standard Ford stuff.
Okay, so I have a mini rant.
When I bought my '06 Mazda5 minivan, I quickly learned that they were absolutely infamous for destroying rear tires. The amount of negative camber at the rear is excessive, and there is no camber adjustment unless you install adjustable upper control arms, which I did. Problem solved. Yay for me. Now I'm dealing with my wife's 2015 Honda CR-V (which I rather unflatteringly refer to as a Honda Cervix). It has the worst amount of road noise that I have ever experienced in a (stock-tired) vehicle, and it excessively wears the inside of the rear tires (cupping). I've since discovered that this is an extremely common problem with these cars, even with the newer ones. And guess what? Excessive negative camber at the rear, and no camber adjustment unless you install aftermarket adjustable upper control arms. Really? So, guess what I ordered last night...
Why the hell can't auto manufacturers just build a damn car with IRS that you can actually make the necessary adjustments to without having to modify the suspension? Grrrr...
Rant over.
When I bought my '06 Mazda5 minivan, I quickly learned that they were absolutely infamous for destroying rear tires. The amount of negative camber at the rear is excessive, and there is no camber adjustment unless you install adjustable upper control arms, which I did. Problem solved. Yay for me. Now I'm dealing with my wife's 2015 Honda CR-V (which I rather unflatteringly refer to as a Honda Cervix). It has the worst amount of road noise that I have ever experienced in a (stock-tired) vehicle, and it excessively wears the inside of the rear tires (cupping). I've since discovered that this is an extremely common problem with these cars, even with the newer ones. And guess what? Excessive negative camber at the rear, and no camber adjustment unless you install aftermarket adjustable upper control arms. Really? So, guess what I ordered last night...
Why the hell can't auto manufacturers just build a damn car with IRS that you can actually make the necessary adjustments to without having to modify the suspension? Grrrr...
Rant over.
Okay, so I have a mini rant.
When I bought my '06 Mazda5 minivan, I quickly learned that they were absolutely infamous for destroying rear tires. The amount of negative camber at the rear is excessive, and there is no camber adjustment unless you install adjustable upper control arms, which I did. Problem solved. Yay for me. Now I'm dealing with my wife's 2015 Honda CR-V (which I rather unflatteringly refer to as a Honda Cervix). It has the worst amount of road noise that I have ever experienced in a (stock-tired) vehicle, and it excessively wears the inside of the rear tires (cupping). I've since discovered that this is an extremely common problem with these cars, even with the newer ones. And guess what? Excessive negative camber at the rear, and no camber adjustment unless you install aftermarket adjustable upper control arms. Really? So, guess what I ordered last night...
Why the hell can't auto manufacturers just build a damn car with IRS that you can actually make the necessary adjustments to without having to modify the suspension? Grrrr...
Rant over.
They also design quite a bit of positive toe on the rear too. Which is why in states that use sand (aka gravel) in the wintertime they are among the absolute worst vehicles to encounter going the opposite direction on a 2 lane highway. They actively throw rocks out to the sides off the rear tires.
I did not know that. Thanks for the education, buddy!
Between the negative camber and positive toe it's supposed to help keep the rear of front wheel drive vehicles tracking "straighter".
Reality... it wears the CRAP out of a set of tires.
I read where the Mazda5 was known to wear out rear tires within 10,000 miles, and that was when they were brand new cars. The hell with that noise! After I installed the adjustable upper control arms, I set the angle myself, as I couldn't find an alignment shop that would touch it because it wasn't stock. Car handles just fine, and there's no discernable tire wear. Therefore, I feel confident enough to do the Honda.
I read where the Mazda5 was known to wear out rear tires within 10,000 miles, and that was when they were brand new cars. The hell with that noise! After I installed the adjustable upper control arms, I set the angle myself, as I couldn't find an alignment shop that would touch it because it wasn't stock. Car handles just fine, and there's no discernable tire wear. Therefore, I feel confident enough to do the Honda.
I ran into that a lot when I was doing alignments. I did my best to push the camber and toe out to the edges of "spec" if it was a 4 wheel align-able car, because going beyond spec could create liability issues. You know that whole Vehicle designed parameters thing... It can effect handling if you go too far.
Yup. I did alignments at a shop in Mt. Vernon back in the early '80s, and I know exactly what you mean (though IRS cars were nowhere near as plentiful back then). As for my Mazda5, I put half a tank of gas in it, and set angle for each rear wheel at about half a degree under the maximum positive camber. Worked out just peachy!
Similar threads
