That's a good rant!!
Sully
77 royale
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Bounds
Sender: gmclist-bounces
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 20:46:50
To:
Reply-To: gmclist
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Autolevel/Level/Newbie question
What????!!!!
I was not there when the coach was designed, was probably out surfing, but in the 17 years I have been dealing with the aftermath that years have done to the
GMC. There is nothing that accurate between the body and
frame. I have seen crushed, falling out and missing body
pads. I have found fuel, brake, air and LP hoses and lines
crushed. I have seen body and frame condition from deterioration, damage and just falling apart. I want a good 1/2" for all that stuff to pass throught the body and frame, I don't want it to crush the body pad from front to back.
BTW, the 1973,4,5 & early 76 models do not use the "H" mold body streamer, there was a production change of the basic body structure, I know that.
I subscribe to the KISS system, making things complicated to the point every head is swimming does no good anf may damage the fun many are hoping to have with their
coach. The GMC was built to use not to stare at, we fix them up to hit the road. I align then to track well, to have a soft feel and have good steer ahead and it works. I don't theorize it or get my experiences from discussions, I have a computer 6 wheel alignment machine and I have aligned machine coaches. Toe it out at all and you will be all over the road, I know that too.
I know what works and I know what I like
visually. It'a all about that anyway-- what you want and what you
like. The coach had designed in technology, we all know that but it also had style. There would not be so many interested in the GMC and it would not still be around if it looked bad. You cannot block this out in favor of a technical purist view of this machine, it has much more than that. If the emperor was parading around with no cloths on I would tell him.
At this point in their lives, it's past time to re refurd the GMC for use from the next generation-- as well as our use. There's no need to leave an 8 track in the dash-- therer are no tapes! Actually, I use the cassette slot for the mount of my Tom Tom. Now that is gone in favor of my smart phone! The coach is useful now as much as in the past.
There are more than technical aspests of the coach and it looks better to many when the rocker panel is level to the ground. With the push of a button I can drop the rear and make the coach handle better, a push of the button again and I can make it turn tighter-- I think thats cool hey and when I'm driving I can't see what it looks like so let the butt hang!
Relax, the coach can do a great job for many people for many reasons and yea, that too was designed in.
Jim Bounds
--------------------
> From: James Hupy
> Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Autolevel/Level/Newbie question
> To: gmclist
> Date: Thursday, August 11, 2011, 2:28 PM
> Sully, I know that. I was just
> pointing out what I believe to be absurd, the
> lengths some will go to in affecting the visual image of
> what they feel is
> "right" or correct". One is visual without regards to
> function, and the
> other ignores visual to have the mechanical or technical
> aspects exactly
> correct. The age old friction between designer/dreamer and
> engineer/technician. They ain't never going to agree
> totally.
> Jim Hupy
> Salem, OR
> 78 GMC Royale 403
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 9:20 AM,
>
> > You cannot remove the belt mld aluminum strip as it is
> the structural joint
> > between the upper aluminum and lower composite
> bodyside panels. At least on
> > my 77 royale.
> >
> > Sully
> > 77 royale
> > Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: James Hupy
> > Sender: gmclist-bounces
> > Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 08:49:38
> > To:
> > Reply-To: gmclist
> > Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Autolevel/Level/Newbie
> question
> >
> > Rob, due to the cushioned pads between the frame and
> the body, some are
> > thick, some are thin, and the differences in shape and
> the way that the
> > plastic and metal parts are assembled on the GMC, the
> factory elected to
> > take all height measurements from the hypothetical
> level ground to the oval
> > slots in the frame. As far as I am familiar with and
> all the cars that I
> > have repaired and restored, ride height specs are
> always been described in
> > this manner. If the visual appearance is disconcerting
> to some, I suppose
> > the visual appearance could be altered by placing
> thicker body to frame
> > isolators in the rear of the coach, or by changing the
> position of the
> > beltline strip. It just is visual after all that is
> the objections most are
> > complaining about. We used to have a saying in racing,
> "If it won't go
> > quick
> > and fast, chrome and paint it and make a show car out
> of it. I subscribe to
> > the Function first, Form second school myself. The
> cosmetic things are on
> > the very bottom of my list when it comes to working on
> my coach. I have had
> > several extremely detailed and over restored show cars
> in my life, the last
> > one being a 1961 Cadillac Coupe DeVille small roof. I
> spent 2 months wet
> > sanding that car, and you could see yourself in any
> portion of the car that
> > you chose to look at. Metallic Pearl over Dupont Negro
> Base coat with 7
> > coats of Dupont Clearcoat on top. I was almost afraid
> to take that thing to
> > car shows because I was afraid that it would get
> scratched. I was at Hot
> > August Nights in Reno at a night time show and shine
> parked in front of the
> > downtown Hard Rock Cafe. I had stepped away from the
> car for a couple of
> > minutes to BS with another car guy and when I came
> back to the car, two
> > dancers from one of the casino revues were perched on
> the front fender of
> > the car while their escorts were shooting promotional
> photos of them. I
> > about had a stroke, and told them that the only way
> they could sit on my
> > car
> > was if they had no clothing on. They laughed at each
> other and for a minute
> > I thought they were going to comply with my request.
> They gave me some comp
> > tickets to the revue and left. Took me a few minutes
> to calm down.
> > Fortunately the rivets in their jeans did not contact
> the paint. Any future
> > hot rods I build will not be with a paint finish that
> makes me so nervous.
> > Same with GMCs.
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Rob Mueller > >wrote:
> >
> > > Jim,
> > >
> > > The factory specs say to set the front ride
> height at 13 1/8 inches, the
> > > rear 11 11/16 inches. That's 1 7/16 inches lower
> in the back. As a
> > > guesstimate the front slot is about 4 feet
> rearward from the very front
> > of
> > > the GMC and the rear slot about the same distance
> forward from the very
> > > back. That would make the height difference at
> the belt line would be a
> > bit
> > > higher at the front and a bit lower at the rear
> assuming the belt line
> > trim
> > > is parallel to the frame. I wonder what the
> measurements would be at the
> > > beltline trim if you measured just behind the
> front side clearance
> > (marker)
> > > light and just in front of the rear side
> clearance (marker) light.
> > >
> > > This discussion has me intrigued and next time I
> get back to the USA I
> > will
> > > set Double Trouble's ride height dead level front
> to rear as measured at
> > > the
> > > belt line and then have it aligned to 0° Camber,
> 5° Caster, and 0 toe
> > > in/out. Hopefully Dave Lenzi's offset control
> arms will let me get that
> > > much
> > > caster. If Double Trouble drives as well as it
> does now I'll leave it, if
> > > not I'll drop the ride height to the manual specs
> and have it re-aligned.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Rob M.
> > > Sydney, Australia
> > > AUS '75 Avion-The Blue Streak TZE365V100428
> > > USA '75 Avion-Double Trouble TZE365V100426
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: gmclist-bounces
> > > [mailto:gmclist-bounces]
> On Behalf Of James Hupy
> > > Sent: Thursday, 11 August 2011 2:18 PM
> > > To: gmclist
> > > Subject: Re: [GMCnet] Autolevel/Level/Newbie
> question
> > >
> > > Dolph, the rear of the coach, by factory specs,
> is supposed to be lower
> > > than
> > > the front. Some GMC owners dislike the appearance
> enough that they invent
> > > all manner of reasons why the coach should be
> level. The front ride
> > height
> > > is critical. It should be as close to the specs
> in the MM as possible.
> > The
> > > rear is subject to discussion. I believe that if
> the factory wanted the
> > > coach to be level, they would have specified that
> in their dimensions. If
> > > the rear is too high, the coach is affected more
> by cornering issues and
> > > wind steer, as well as push from 18 wheelers. You
> may well get all manner
> > > of
> > > conflicting opinions on this subject. I repair
> these coaches for others,
> > > and
> > > I always set them as close to factory specs as I
> can. Then, the factory
> > can
> > > take the blame for handling issues, not me. Same
> on brakes.
> > > Jim Hupy
> > > Salem, OR
> > > 78 GMC Royale 403
> > >
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > > GMCnet mailing list
> > > Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> > >
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
> > >
> >_______________________________________________
> > GMCnet mailing list
> > Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> >
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
> >_______________________________________________
> > GMCnet mailing list
> > Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> >
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
> >
>_______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
