Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:24 PM - Re: Engine failure in Yak-50 (Rico Jaeger)
2. 08:10 PM - CJ6 exhaust system for sale (Okanogan Lew)
3. 08:18 PM - Okanogan Lew e mail (Okanogan Lew)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Engine failure in Yak-50 |
Guys, I am only an acute Yak admirer (not an owner) w/ only a tiny
fraction of the flight experience most of you have and very little
intimate knowledge of the type. But if I may...this forum is an
amazingly useful tool - not only for communication, but also education.
When experiences such as the recent engine-out incident are posted,
shouldn't they be viewed with an eye to the unique 1st hand instruction
they provide - rather than debated viciously over? After all, even w/ a
resource as awesome as the video, it still cannot equal "being there."
In the end, the pilot walked away from an emergency landing he can be
proud of. He lived to fly another day - and I'm sure he will. Also, when
such incidents are so closely scrutinized, it may stand to reason that
pilots able to post similar information - or questions - may neglect to
do so for fear of similar unpleasantries. Share your knowledge w/ the
world - but the minute you are convinced you "know it all," you set
yourself up for disaster. Don't be afraid to learn...
"Pride comes before the fall."
I aspire to fly w/ a red star on my wings. But until then, I will
simply continue to read (all) the postings, save (many) and continue to
learn from the guys doing NOW what I may be so blessed to do one day.
Thanks for all you do, Red Star Pilots.
Rico
>>> "netmaster15@juno.com" <netmaster15@juno.com> 10/20/2010 10:22 PM
>>>
ERIC, You are carrying this matter on ad nauseum; you come across as
a low time, low experienced , verbose bore; the list finds you
overbearing and argumentative. If there were a way to end this with a
motion for a directed verdict this would be the proper time for such a
remedy. You apparently have not been around this forum long enough to
realize that Mark Bitterlich is a highly respected, educated and
experienced source of information . His contribution to this list stems
from both high pilot experience and long service as a tech
representative for a major aviation manufacturer. I doubt that you will
be able to B.S. your way into a position of comparative respect by
further posting . Now, in the interest of peace and harmony,give us a
break and shut the hell up.
Respectfully, Cliff Umscheid ,
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
Eric. Really. Give it a break.
Mark
________________________________
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Wed 10/20/2010 7:35 AM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
<eric@buffaloskyline.com>
OK, Mark...
Early on, I mentioned that this may not apply to a Yak-50, which
apparently you missed. No one has ever said that there is no way to
destroy the engine on a Yak-50 by landing it gear-up. That doesn't
invalidate what was written in the article, which discusses specific
circumstances and the examined aftermath. It somewhat anecdotal, but
it's about many, many airplanes and from people who do this all the
time. Since narrow parameters were applied in the article, including
mention of an aircraft other than a Yak-50, and since in my first
string entry I mentioned that I had paraphrased it and that the
article should be read, your reaction was inappropriate. I hope that
you are not gear-up landing Yak-50s on a regular basis (or witnessing
the same), so unless that's the case, I don't think your experience
"trumps" the career experience of people who tear down and fix these
things every day. You have not asked me anything multiple times. You
suggested things like trying it myself, and that if I hadn't been
through it, I shouldn't weigh in on this. Your unexplainable rage and
belligerence doesn't compel me to respond. The old saying about
assumptions applies well in this situation.
On Oct 20, 2010, at 1:12 AM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
MALS-14 64E wrote:
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> I was not looking to excuse my bad manners. I was just explaining
> why I had them.
>
> You pointed out an article written by an expert. And he is an
> expert. I do not refute that. But I said that I saw it happen.
> That trumps the ace.
>
> I did not misquote you or take you out of context. I said that a
> prop hitting the ground on a YAK-50 making a gear up landing does
> not get ground down 1/10th of an inch at a time, based on what I saw
> happen with my own eyes and the pieces of that prop that I then went
> out and picked up off the runway.
>
> I do not have superior wisdom. I do have good eyesight.
>
> Unless you have landed a YAK-50 with the gear up or have seen this
> type of prop hit the ground on a gear up landing, you have zero
> experience in the matter. I have asked you multiple times whether
> you have or have not. You have not responded. If you have, please
> say so, otherwise I think it is a perfectly 'good idea' to assume
> you have not.
>
> Sorry about that. And sorry to the YAK LIST. I try to help people
> when I can, but once in awhile I am a tad rude, or better said, a
> tad sarcastic.
>
> This is apparently one of those times. Sigh.
>
> Once in awhile I just have a hard time backing down to someone that
> tries to tell me that I don't know what I saw with my own eyes.
>
>
> Mark
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric
Wobschall
> Sent: Wed 10/20/2010 12:32 AM
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>
>
<eric@buffaloskyline.com
> >
>
> Mark:
>
> I am not calling you a lair or disputing your experience. I pointed
> out an article written by someone who I know to be expert in this
> area. I also objected to being misquoted and taken out of context.
>
> Just because I didn't agree with everything you said doesn't mean I
> was saying that I was "absolutely right". I merely referred to the
> paper and then clarified certain things that were mischaracterized
and
> incorrectly repeated. We're not even talking about the exact same
> conditions, but you seem to need to force everyone to defer to your
> superior wisdom.
>
> Since you don't know me, I don't think it's a good idea for you to
say
> that I have "ZERO experience" about this.
>
> Lastly, siting your own history of bad manners hardly excuses them.
>
>
> On Oct 19, 2010, at 11:49 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
Point,
> MALS-14 64E wrote:
>
>> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>
>> You are absolutely correct. I was rude. And I am going to be rude
>> again. Sometimes I am human and this is one of those times. So
>> hold on, here it comes again!
>>
>> My responses come from talking to a person who keeps demanding he
is
>> absolutely right and has ZERO experience compared to something I
>> have seen with my own eyes, and have left over parts for sitting in
>> the hangar.
>>
>> What is up with that Eric? Are you calling me a liar? Am I blind?
>> Are your theories better than my photographs?
>>
>> I have not tried to make my points on an intellectual basis. I
>> have tried to make my points by telling you I have seen the
evidence
>> with my own eyes and what you are saying it just totally wrong.
>> Intellectually, I am sure you're right. Sadly though, a million
>> intellectual guesses get blown out of the water with a simple
>> proof. I've seen the simple proof... you keep referencing the
>> intellectual guesses. Ok then. I've got pictures, you've got
>> theories. Good luck with that.
>>
>> I consider the fact that you refuse to accept what I have said and
>> keep bantering on with what you propose to be JUST as rude as I
have
>> been, and while I did not start off rude,.... you're right, I am
now.
>>
>> But that's just me. I admit....once in a awhile I stoop to that
>> level, as many people here that have been around long enough will
>> attest to, I am sure. So, once again I am back in form! Ah
well,
>> sucks to be me.
>>
>> I could give a damn less about the 1/10'th of an inch nonsense. Go
>> land a YAK-50 with the gear up and come back and tell me how it
>> goes. ONE TENTH OF AN INCH AT A TIME. right. ... good luck with
>> that.
>>
>> Mark Bitterlich
>>
>> p.s. I'm done. How stupid is this discussion anyway?
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Eric
Wobschall
>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 10:24 PM
>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>
>>
>>
<eric@buffaloskyline.com
>>>
>>
>> Mark, I think you're being pretty rude. That's usually the refuse
of
>> someone who hasn't made their point on an intellectual basis.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Oct 19, 2010, at 10:06 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
>> Point,
>> MALS-14 64E wrote:
>>
>>> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>>>
>>> You're right. And who freaking cares? The prop hits the ground.
>>> It comes apart in pieces. Sometimes it shears clean enough to
>>> continue flying. Sometimes it does not. The load imposed on the
>>> engine demands an inspection. Others will try to find ways to
>>> justify not doing that. Some people will say that since the prop
>>> comes apart 1/10 of an inch at a time, the load imposed on the
>>> engine is so slight that we can easily just hang another prop on
it
>>> and continue flying without a care in the world. Most people that
>>> think that way are trying to save a buck at the possible expense
of
>>> someone's life. So no, there is no point in continuing this.
There
>>> will always be people that put the almighty dollar above someone
>>> else's life, or even their own for that matter. And you're right
>>> again. Having followed this list since 1999, there is really no
way
>>> to convince anyone not to do something stupid if they are
determined
>>> to do so.
>>>
>>> Whatever.
>>>
>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Paul Hamlin
>>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 9:32 PM
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>>
>>>
>>> The answer is yes to have watched it happen and examined the
>>> aftermath. Having followed this list there is one thing I know
for
>>> sure - no point in continuing this.
>>>
>>>
>>> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
>>> MALS-14 64E <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>>>
>>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 9:40 PM
>>>
>>>
>>> The point is that it does not come off 1/10 inch at a time
>>> folks.
>>> I was there, I watched it, I have the fragments, and they are not
>>> tiny little 1/10" pieces of dust. The prop is made out of WOOD
>>> folks. WOOD. When you whack it into a concrete runway it
splinters
>>> just like you hit it with a hatchet. The reason there is not
enough
>>> force to shear steel is because last time I checked, steel is a
>>> whole lot harder than compressed wood with a fiberglass sheath.
>>>
>>> Sorry for blowing a little steam here but how many of you
>>> commenting on this subject matter have actually seen a YAK-50 prop
>>> hit the ground with the gear up?
>>>
>>> How many of you have what is left of that prop in your hangar?
>>>
>>> How many of you went out on the runway and actually picked up
>>> the
>>> pieces?
>>>
>>> So, if you want to continue to tell me that I simply don't
know
>>> what I am talking about since you read a good article someplace
else
>>> on the Internet, you just go right ahead on with your bad self!
>>>
>>> Lastly, even though the prop is made out of wood, and even
>>> though
>>> it comes apart like an attack with a chainsaw, the force DOES have
>>> the ability to cause damage to the M-14 engine, to areas that you
>>> can go back on this list and read about from people like Richard
>>> Goode if you would like.
>>>
>>> In the case of THIS engine failure, when the engine seized
>>> (and it
>>> DID seize), the spinning mass of the prop assembly was enough to
>>> cause failure in the gearbox allowing the prop to continue to
spin.
>>> That comes from the gent who took it apart.
>>>
>>> Have a nice day.
>>>
>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>> From: Paul Hamlin
>>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 3:54 PM
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>>
>>>
>>> the point was about shearing shafts, if only a little at a time
>>> comes off at a time, not enough force to shear
>>>
>>> ab
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
>>> MALS-14 64E <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
<mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>>>
>>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 8:17 PM
>>>
>>>
>>> Cherry
>>> Point, MALS-14 64E"
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>>>
>>>
>>> Really? And exactly how was that determined? A 1000 frame
per
>>> second camera focused on a YAK-50 performing a gear up landing?
>>>
>>> Excuse me... ?
>>>
>>> This is silly. You make an approach with the gear up in a 50,
>>> there is a loud buzz and before you can say WHAT THE F__K WAS
THAT?
>>> You have 10 inches or more gone off each end of your prop.
>>>
>>> Who cares if it came off 1/10th of an inch at a time? And I
>>> find
>>> that number to be variable on sink rate and engine RPM at the
time,
>>> don't you think?
>>>
>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>> From:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>> on behalf of Paul Hamlin
>>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 2:28 PM
>>> To:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>>
>>>
>>> He said, per strike
>>>
>>> --- On Tue, 10/19/10, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
>>> MALS-14 64E
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
>>>
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>>>
>>> Subject: RE: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>> To:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>>> Date: Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 5:12 PM
>>>
>>>
Det
>>> Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E"
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>>
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=mark.bitterlich@navy.mil
>>>>>
>>>
>>> Excuse me, but that is not accurate information when it
>>> comes
>>> to a YAK-50
>>>
>>> Much more than a 1/10 of an inch gets shaved off on a
YAK-50
>>> that lands gear up. I think you might have misread the article (I
>>> did not read it myself), or he might have been talking about some
>>> other type of aircraft than a YAK-50.
>>>
>>> A YAK-50 making a gear up landing will take about 10 or 12
>>> INCHES off the prop (or more). I own one of these aircraft and
>>> there is no question about that.
>>>
>>>
>>> Mark Bitterlich
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>> From:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>>
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>>> on behalf of Eric Wobschall
>>> Sent: Tue 10/19/2010 8:23 AM
>>> To:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-
>>> list@matronics.com>
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>>
>>>
>>> There's a Carl Hayes article (on the M-14P.com website)
that
>>> explains that for any damage at all to occur, a (torsional
>>> resistance) of 400 lb-ft (I think) must be encountered to cause
>>> damage. During a regular (gear-up) landing on pavement with the
wood
>>> prop, only one-tenth of an inch of blade is shaved off per
rotation,
>>> which gets nowhere near that force. On the other hand, if you hit
>>> something else more abruptly, the inertia of things on the
accessory
>>> shafts will shear those shafts off or twist them out of sync. This
>>> is all paraphrased, so if you haven't read it, you should read
>>> Carl's article, which addresses all kinds of prop strikes.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 10:20 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Not sure but I think I heard that there is a design
>>> shear
>>> point in shaft. But, if that were so why would a prop strike not
do
>>> the same.
>>> So the answer is I do not know.
>>> Doc
>>>
>>> From:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>>
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>>>
[mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>>
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>>> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
>>> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:27 PM
>>> To:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-
>>> list@matronics.com>
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>>
>>> No problem, Doc.
>>>
>>> So what is it that caused it to shear? Is that a
>>> deliberate
>>> design to prevent the engine from twisting off it's mounts from
prop
>>> momentum? Otherwise, you'd think there wouldn't be enough inertia
to
>>> just break free like that.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry Eric, I wrote my response before seeing that you
>>> had
>>> already seen Robs post.
>>> Doc
>>>
>>> From:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>>
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>>>
[mailto:http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>>
<http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
>>>> ] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
>>> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 1:47 PM
>>> To:
http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-list@matronics.com
>>> <http://us.mc511.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=yak-
>>> list@matronics.com>
>>> Subject: Re: Yak-List: Engine failure in Yak-50
>>>
>>> Engine seized with broken gearbox, too. Well, OK... so
>>> that's how, which surprises me. Having access to the failed engine
>>> certainly trumps speculation.
>>>
>>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Richard Goode wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> For those interested in more details:
>>>
>>> As had been suggested, I am sure the oil
>>> pressure
>>> would have fallen as the pressure release valve became unscrewed.
>>> Andy says that he noticed the zero oil
>>> pressure
>>> pretty much at the same time as the prop (as one would expect)
went
>>> into coarse pitch.
>>> The engine then actually kept going for 9/10
>>> minutes without oil, which is quite impressive.
>>> Oil temperatures didn't go up simply because
>>> there was no oil and so nothing to measure! This of course was
the
>>> reason for the engine failure - because the pressure release valve
>>> had not been wire-locked, it unscrewed and fell out.
>>> However it then totally seized and this is
>>> what
>>> broke the gearbox - hence the propeller continuing to windmill
with
>>> a seized engine.
>>> The extent of the seizure was such that it
is
>>> impossible to remove most of the cylinders!
>>> I would expect the CHT to have risen a bit,
>>> but
>>> only because a small part of it is oil-cooled, but the vast
majority
>>> of cooling is through air, and of course he was at very low power
>>> settings in order to preserve the engine.
>>> In terms of gear-up of gear-down, I am sure
>>> gear-
>>> up is the safest way, but also, will cause far less damage to the
>>> aircraft.
>>>
>>>
>>> Richard Goode Aerobatics
>>> Rhodds Farm
>>> Lyonshall
>>> Herefordshire
>>> HR5 3LW
>>> United Kingdom
>>>
>>> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
>>> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
>>> www.russianaeros.com <http://www.russianaeros.com/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>> blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://forums.matronics.com/
>>> <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/
<http://forums.matronics.com/
>>>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>> blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://forums.matronics.com/
>>> <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/
<http://forums.matronics.com/
>>>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>> blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://forums.matronics.com/
>>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>>> style="color: blue; text-decoration: underline;
">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http:p://forums.matronics.com/"
target=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com/
>>> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List> <
>>> &nbstp://www.matronics.com/contribution" ======
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> p;--> http://forums.matronbsp; <http://forums.matronbsp;/>
<http://forums.matronbsp;/> <http://forums.matronbsp
>>> ;/
>>>> - List Contribution Web
>>> Site -
>>>
>>>
>>> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> et=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>> p://forums.matronics.com/
>>> blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> et=_blank
rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>> =nofollow>http://forums.matronics.com
<http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.com/
>>> > <http://forums.matronics.com/
>>>>
>>> blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
<BR========================;&NBSP;&NBSP;&NBSP;&NBSP;&NBSP;&NBSP;&NBSP;&NBSP;-
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | CJ6 exhaust system for sale |
Hey Guys, I installed a custom side exhaust on my CJ & now have a standard system
for sale. It does have a stainless heater muff with a cabin control, a stainless
lower left piece that goes thru the cowl & chrome 4" extension pieces.
If interested, e mail me off list. I am asking $750 for it.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=316634#316634
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Okanogan Lew e mail |
vplewis@communitynet.org
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=316635#316635
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|