Do I have A 302 V8 Cleavland or Windsor in my Xy???
Knigh...@usa.net
I just got a 1970 Ford Fairmont 302 XY V8, in almost mint condition im
doing it up, how do u tell if it is a windsor engine or a cleavland
engine?
Knightman
Knightmans new homepage
comming soon...
Cornholio
news:38d85ba1...@news.shoal.net.au...
> Hi
>
> I just got a 1970 Ford Fairmont 302 XY V8, in almost mint condition im
> doing it up, how do u tell if it is a windsor engine or a cleavland
> engine?
>
302 = Windsor
351 = Cleveland
--
Regards
Dan
icq # well email me for it.
Remove the <Y2K> from the email address before replying
Cornholio
Cornholio <mack_...@telstra.com> wrote in message
news:W_YB4.38236$oD3....@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> <Knigh...@usa.net> wrote in message
> news:38d85ba1...@news.shoal.net.au...
> > Hi
> >
> > I just got a 1970 Ford Fairmont 302 XY V8, in almost mint condition im
> > doing it up, how do u tell if it is a windsor engine or a cleavland
> > engine?
> >
>
> 302 = Windsor
> 351 = Cleveland
>
Crap that's not right
its 302 Cleveland
and 351 Windsor
Cornholio
>
> Cornholio <mack_...@telstra.com> wrote in message
> news:W_YB4.38236$oD3....@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> > <Knigh...@usa.net> wrote in message
> > news:38d85ba1...@news.shoal.net.au...
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > I just got a 1970 Ford Fairmont 302 XY V8, in almost mint condition im
> > > doing it up, how do u tell if it is a windsor engine or a cleavland
> > > engine?
> > >
> >
> > 302 = Windsor
> > 351 = Cleveland
> >
>
> Crap that's not right
>
> its 302 Cleveland
> and 351 Windsor
>
Oh crap! again.
302,s and 351's are available in Cleveland and Windsor form.
I shouldn't really need to know coz I'm a Holden person.
Kieron Murphy
>Hi
>
>I just got a 1970 Ford Fairmont 302 XY V8, in almost mint condition im
>doing it up, how do u tell if it is a windsor engine or a cleavland
>engine?
Easy way to tell is the thermostat housing, in the Windsor it is
bolted vertically to the front of the inlet manifold, a Clevelands
housing is bolted to the block horizontally.
Kieron
Brad
clevelands r real big
--
BRAD
bma...@hotmail.com
http://members.xoom.com/bmak99
Kieron Murphy <kie...@reiwa.com.au> wrote in message
news:38d8887...@news.per.aone.net.au...
Marco Spaccavento
Knigh...@usa.net wrote in message <38d85ba1...@news.shoal.net.au>...
>Hi
>
>I just got a 1970 Ford Fairmont 302 XY V8, in almost mint condition im
>doing it up, how do u tell if it is a windsor engine or a cleavland
>engine?
While we're at it, can anyone enlighten me as to why Ford produced two
different V8s in identical capacities seemingly at the same time?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
M a r c o S p a c c a v e n t o
obe...@netspace.net.au - ICQ #20196867
"Water into wine? No problem. Just a vineyard and a hosepipe...and let a
few seasons pass.
You need to think in terms of months and years, not days and weeks. Is
that bad news?
Only if what you're after is not worth waiting for."
*** The RB Gemini Web Page:
http://www.netspace.net.au/~oberhst/RBGemini.html ***
Stephen Williams
> While we're at it, can anyone enlighten me as to why Ford produced two
> different V8s in identical capacities seemingly at the same time?
>
both motors were available. I think this means that XW falcons were
available with either motor. They stopped the Windsor somewhere around
1969-1970 and then stopped using the Cleveland around 1982. In 1991 they
started using the Windsor again.
Steve
Kieron Murphy
They infact started using the Windsor in 1974 again, the Cleveland
tooling came down here to Aus at this point although Ford USA still
had a Cleveland derivitive with the 351/400M.
Kieron
Kieron Murphy
>both windsor & cleveland came out with 302 & 351
>clevelands r real big
The Windsor came out in more sizes than this, the 351W had a taller
deck height, the 302C was only ever available in Australia.
Kieron
>bma...@hotmail.com
>http://members.xoom.com/bmak99
>Kieron Murphy <kie...@reiwa.com.au> wrote in message
>news:38d8887...@news.per.aone.net.au...
>> On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 05:37:22 GMT, Knigh...@usa.net wrote:
>>
>> >Hi
>> >
>> >I just got a 1970 Ford Fairmont 302 XY V8, in almost mint condition im
>> >doing it up, how do u tell if it is a windsor engine or a cleavland
>> >engine?
>>
Adam
Kieron Murphy wrote in message <38d97d3f...@news.per.aone.net.au>...
>On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 22:17:18 +1100, "Brad" <bma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>both windsor & cleveland came out with 302 & 351
>>clevelands r real big
>
>The Windsor came out in more sizes than this
Thats right! How can we forget the original 260 and its 289 brother!
Cheers,
Adam
Richard Murray
>Hi
>
>I just got a 1970 Ford Fairmont 302 XY V8, in almost mint condition im
>doing it up, how do u tell if it is a windsor engine or a cleavland
>engine?
If it is the standard motor it will be a Windsor. Even most of the 351's in
XY's are Windsors.
The 302 Cleveland came out in the XA.
BTW, the 302 version of the Cleveland was only made in Oz, some people call
them the 302 "Geelong".
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
"Sorry for the Inconvenience."
Richard
Richard Murray
>>
>> While we're at it, can anyone enlighten me as to why Ford produced two
>> different V8s in identical capacities seemingly at the same time?
>>
>They moved from the Windsor to the Cleveland, during the transition period
>both motors were available. I think this means that XW falcons were
>available with either motor. They stopped the Windsor somewhere around
>1969-1970 and then stopped using the Cleveland around 1982. In 1991 they
>started using the Windsor again.
As I remember it, only the GTHO Phase II had a Cleveland 351 in the XW.
I have also seen a lot of (non-GT) 2V 351 Windsors in XY Falcons.
All the 302s were Windsors 'till the XA, when ALL sizes were Clevelands.
Kieron Murphy
wrote:
Or in fact the original original Windsor, the 221, and another obscure
size in 1980 was the 255 !!!
Kieron
Pete!
>both windsor & cleveland came out with 302 & 351
>clevelands r real big
>
To be totally correct, there is no such a thing as a "302 Cleveland". Only the
aussie built "Clevelands" where 302s, no such a thing in US. You get strange
looks from US guys when talking about 302 clevos.The aussie engine should
really be a "302 Geelong"
BTW to the original poster, the Clevo is bigger, the heads and rocker covers
look square when viewed from the ends and top and the Windsor heads look
likethey point in at the top and are parralellogram shaped from above.
Clevo from top
__________
|__________|
Windsor from top
__________
/__________\
P!
Brett Whisson
me a 351. So this begs the question, are there any other differences
between the 302C and 351C blocks? I figure there must be since Australia
went to the bother of making them.
Perhaps someone can open up the debate as to which motor (Windsor vs Clevo)
is better?
Brett
Richard Murray <r.mu...@xqut.edu.au> wrote in message
news:8bc2s2$ds7$1...@dove.qut.edu.au...
> In article <38d85ba1...@news.shoal.net.au>, ja...@shoal.net.au wrote:
> >Hi
> >
> >I just got a 1970 Ford Fairmont 302 XY V8, in almost mint condition im
> >doing it up, how do u tell if it is a windsor engine or a cleavland
> >engine?
>
> If it is the standard motor it will be a Windsor. Even most of the 351's
in
> XY's are Windsors.
>
> The 302 Cleveland came out in the XA.
> BTW, the 302 version of the Cleveland was only made in Oz, some people
call
> them the 302 "Geelong".
>
Adam
Kieron Murphy wrote in message <38d9aaa5...@news.per.aone.net.au>...
>On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 14:14:23 +1200, "Adam" <vp...@nospamautospeed.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>Kieron Murphy wrote in message <38d97d3f...@news.per.aone.net.au>...
>>>
>>>>both windsor & cleveland came out with 302 & 351
>>>>clevelands r real big
>>>
>>
>>Thats right! How can we forget the original 260 and its 289 brother!
>
>Or in fact the original original Windsor, the 221,
Dang! I forgot the original 221! Yep, I do recall!
and another obscure
>size in 1980 was the 255 !!!
Thats one i have never heard of!
Cheers
Adam
Kieron Murphy
wrote:
> and another obscure
>>size in 1980 was the 255 !!!
>
>Thats one i have never heard of!
I don't know what Ford was thinking at the time, it was used in the
Fox platform Mustang, it had an odd bore of 3.68", the 260 was 3.8",
289/302/351W's where all 4".
Kieron
Richard Murray
>I always understood that a change of crank and rods in my 302 Clevo can give
>me a 351. So this begs the question, are there any other differences
>between the 302C and 351C blocks? I figure there must be since Australia
>went to the bother of making them.
AFAIK the Cleveland 351 crank and rods fit straight in to the 302.
>Perhaps someone can open up the debate as to which motor (Windsor vs Clevo)
>is better?
My (limited) understanding is:
The Windsor has a better bottom end and the Cleveland has the better heads.
Hence the "Boss" motors, Windsor block, crank, etc with Cleveland heads.
Kieron Murphy
<whi...@norcom.net.au> wrote:
>I always understood that a change of crank and rods in my 302 Clevo can give
>me a 351. So this begs the question, are there any other differences
>between the 302C and 351C blocks? I figure there must be since Australia
>went to the bother of making them.
>
>Perhaps someone can open up the debate as to which motor (Windsor vs Clevo)
>is better?
The 351/302C blocks are exactly the same, the only difference is the
stroke. The only other main diference is the 302 has a unique head
with a smaller combustion chamber to bump compression back up, simply
adding 351 crank/rods will boost the compression close to 10.7:1 ish
iirc, you would need to used dished pistons to bring it back to a max
of around 10:1.
As for which is better. The C is a later design with huge canted
valves and bangs for buck wise is probably still the better option if
your modifying them. However, the 302W has reached small block Chev
status in the US and has a huge aftermarket performance catalogue, to
the point of it being pretty much cheaper to modify bangs for buck
wise, the W's other advantage's is it has factory EFI and is smaller
and lighter than a C.
Out of interest, the V8 Supercars use Windsor style heads (Ford
Motorsport), the block is a modified Windsor to with the water
entering the block directly - easier for custom built injection.
Kieron
Noddy
> The Windsor has a better bottom end and the Cleveland has the better
heads.
That's pretty much it in a nutshell. The Cleveland was a strange engine. The
4V's were one of the best pair of heads ever to come out of detroit, but
they also came bolted to one of the poorest designed, weakest short motors
ever known.
Funny logic really: Heads that flow fantastic at 8000 rpm on a short motor
that is in the lap of the gods at 6000 rpm :)
Regards,
Noddy.
John H
>
>My (limited) understanding is:
>The Windsor has a better bottom end and the Cleveland has the better heads.
>
In fact there were no Cleveland heads when the Boss 302 was introduced
in 1969 (nor were there ever any 302 Clevelands outside of Oz). The
first 351-C appeared (US) during 1970 and in 1971 the Boss package was
only available on the Cleveland (bottom end included).
Neither was there anything called a Windsor prior to 1969, when the
351-W was introduced. AFAIK the 90° small blocks, ie 221 & 260 ('62),
289 ('63) and 302 ('68) weren't ever known as Windsors at their time
of manufacture.
Perhaps someone might tell us when the 302 small block became the
302-W, or whether they've ever been called Windsors outside of Oz,
since - unlike the 351 - no-one else ever needed to distinguish
between them.
--
John H
Neil Fisher
with a thumbnail dipped in tar, wrote:
>On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 14:14:23 +1200, "Adam" <vp...@nospamautospeed.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>Kieron Murphy wrote in message <38d97d3f...@news.per.aone.net.au>...
>>>On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 22:17:18 +1100, "Brad" <bma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>both windsor & cleveland came out with 302 & 351
>>>>clevelands r real big
>>>
>>>The Windsor came out in more sizes than this
>>
>>Thats right! How can we forget the original 260 and its 289 brother!
>
>Or in fact the original original Windsor, the 221, and another obscure
>size in 1980 was the 255 !!!
Also... (I don't know if these are C or W but...)
239,256,312,332,352,359,360,361, and definately others as well.
Neil
---
Neil Fisher
Thundercords
personal opinion unless otherwise noted.
Looking for spark plug leads?
Check out http://www.magnecor.com.au
Spooned
Cornholio wrote in message ...
><Knigh...@usa.net> wrote in message
>news:38d85ba1...@news.shoal.net.au...
>> Hi
>>
>> I just got a 1970 Ford Fairmont 302 XY V8, in almost mint condition im
>> doing it up, how do u tell if it is a windsor engine or a cleavland
>> engine?
>>
>
>302 = Windsor
>351 = Cleveland
>
>
>
Spooned
some would have made it to the states.
Kieron Murphy wrote in message <38d97d3f...@news.per.aone.net.au>...
>On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 22:17:18 +1100, "Brad" <bma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>both windsor & cleveland came out with 302 & 351
>>clevelands r real big
>
>The Windsor came out in more sizes than this, the 351W had a taller
>deck height, the 302C was only ever available in Australia.
>
>Kieron
>
>
>>bma...@hotmail.com
>>http://members.xoom.com/bmak99
>>Kieron Murphy <kie...@reiwa.com.au> wrote in message
>>news:38d8887...@news.per.aone.net.au...
>>> On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 05:37:22 GMT, Knigh...@usa.net wrote:
>>>
>>> >Hi
>>> >
>>> >I just got a 1970 Ford Fairmont 302 XY V8, in almost mint condition im
>>> >doing it up, how do u tell if it is a windsor engine or a cleavland
>>> >engine?
>>>
Kieron Murphy
(Neil Fisher) wrote:
>On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 05:32:40 GMT, kie...@reiwa.com.au (Kieron Murphy),
>with a thumbnail dipped in tar, wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 14:14:23 +1200, "Adam" <vp...@nospamautospeed.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Kieron Murphy wrote in message <38d97d3f...@news.per.aone.net.au>...
>>>>On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 22:17:18 +1100, "Brad" <bma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>both windsor & cleveland came out with 302 & 351
>>>>>clevelands r real big
>>>>
>>>>The Windsor came out in more sizes than this
>>>
>>>Thats right! How can we forget the original 260 and its 289 brother!
>>
>>Or in fact the original original Windsor, the 221, and another obscure
>>size in 1980 was the 255 !!!
>
>Also... (I don't know if these are C or W but...)
>239,256,312,332,352,359,360,361, and definately others as well.
These are old Y block Ford V8 sizes, pre FE and Windsor.
Kieron
Kieron Murphy
<spo...@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>302 c also avail in Mexico and Canada in F series trucks. More then likely
>some would have made it to the states.
I havn't heard of these, I certainly know that the Windsor 302 was
made in Mexico for a while, also the Windsor plant is actually in
Canada ;-)
Another small block Ford that floated around was the 351/400M which
effectively took the place of the 351C's in large cars and trucks.
Kieron
Kieron Murphy
>Richard Murray wrote:
>>
>>My (limited) understanding is:
>>The Windsor has a better bottom end and the Cleveland has the better heads.
>>
>>Hence the "Boss" motors, Windsor block, crank, etc with Cleveland heads.
>
>In fact there were no Cleveland heads when the Boss 302 was introduced
>in 1969 (nor were there ever any 302 Clevelands outside of Oz). The
>first 351-C appeared (US) during 1970 and in 1971 the Boss package was
>only available on the Cleveland (bottom end included).
There was 3 Boss Mustangs available, the Boss 302 that used a 302W
block with 4 bolt mains and Cleveland heads in 69/70, the Boss 429
which used a 429 bottom end with Hemi type aluminium heads, also in
69/70 and the Boss 351 in 71 which was all Cleveland.
Out of interest, Ford had a 302 in 68 with Tunnel Port heads which
where designed for Trans Am racing.
>Neither was there anything called a Windsor prior to 1969, when the
>351-W was introduced. AFAIK the 90° small blocks, ie 221 & 260 ('62),
>289 ('63) and 302 ('68) weren't ever known as Windsors at their time
>of manufacture.
Thats probably correct, the Windsor was actually called the Challenger
V8 by Ford.
>Perhaps someone might tell us when the 302 small block became the
>302-W, or whether they've ever been called Windsors outside of Oz,
>since - unlike the 351 - no-one else ever needed to distinguish
>between them.
It seems to be generally referred to as the W in USA in the old cars
and the 5.0 in fox bodied Mustangs, Crown Viccies etc.
Kieron
John H
>
>There was 3 Boss Mustangs available, the Boss 302 that used a 302W
>block with 4 bolt mains and Cleveland heads in 69/70, the Boss 429
>which used a 429 bottom end with Hemi type aluminium heads, also in
>69/70 and the Boss 351 in 71 which was all Cleveland.
But there weren't any Cleveland heads in '69! Clevelands weren't
available until well into 1970, so where would the Cleveland heads
have come from in '69?
>
>Out of interest, Ford had a 302 in 68 with Tunnel Port heads which
>where designed for Trans Am racing.
In fact the Boss 302 heads were an extension of the '68 tunnel port
design (which never reached production) - the Boss heads had canted
valves and larger ports. It was the Boss port design that was
subsequently adopted for the 4V Clevelands. All Clevelands (2V & 4V)
used the same canted valve layout as the Boss 302. There are also
significant differences between the two.
That is to say the (later) Cleveland heads were influenced by the 302
Boss design. The only Boss engine to have Cleveland heads was the '71
which, as you say, was all Cleveland.
Pedants-R-Us. ;-)
--
John H
Forg
...
> It seems to be generally referred to as the W in USA in the old cars
> and the 5.0 in fox bodied Mustangs, Crown Viccies etc.
A question; the term "fox body". I assume that's the generation that
Johnson drove after the XE went all 6cyl; what's the "fox" in reference
too?
--
Forg! -DUH#6=- (Y1)
"Flamin' heck; another Volvo Driver!"
"...
Another Turnip Boy;
A Forg stuck in the road
..."
[Greenday]
Kieron Murphy
>Kieron Murphy wrote:
>...
>> It seems to be generally referred to as the W in USA in the old cars
>> and the 5.0 in fox bodied Mustangs, Crown Viccies etc.
>...
>
>A question; the term "fox body". I assume that's the generation that
>Johnson drove after the XE went all 6cyl; what's the "fox" in reference
>too?
The Fox bodied Mustang came out in 1979, at the time it shared the
platform with the US Fairmont (Falcon size car), the fox platfrom was
used up to around 1993 when the new shape 'Stang came out on the Fox 4
platform which is a heavily modified fox platform!!
Kieron
Kieron Murphy
>Kieron Murphy wrote:
>>
>>There was 3 Boss Mustangs available, the Boss 302 that used a 302W
>>block with 4 bolt mains and Cleveland heads in 69/70, the Boss 429
>>which used a 429 bottom end with Hemi type aluminium heads, also in
>>69/70 and the Boss 351 in 71 which was all Cleveland.
>
>But there weren't any Cleveland heads in '69! Clevelands weren't
>available until well into 1970, so where would the Cleveland heads
>have come from in '69?
John, i'm afraid the 69 Boss 302 used C heads, there is no question
about it, they may not necessarily have been called Cleveland heads at
the time though.
>>
>>Out of interest, Ford had a 302 in 68 with Tunnel Port heads which
>>where designed for Trans Am racing.
>
>In fact the Boss 302 heads were an extension of the '68 tunnel port
>design (which never reached production) - the Boss heads had canted
>valves and larger ports. It was the Boss port design that was
>subsequently adopted for the 4V Clevelands. All Clevelands (2V & 4V)
>used the same canted valve layout as the Boss 302. There are also
>significant differences between the two.
The Tunnel Ports where modified 1968 Windsor 4V heads, no canted
valves, just massive ports, the pushrods where in the middle of the
ports running inside a tube, hence there name. Here's a pic I have of
the inlet ports of this head -
http://www.wa.realnet.com.au/ford/tport.jpg
The specs and a pic of this motor are at -
http://www.fomoco.com/index.asp?Dept=Resources&Tool=Textbook&Eng=11
The Boss 302 specs are -
http://www.fomoco.com/index.asp?Dept=Resources&Tool=Textbook&Eng=12
Note, it mentions the introduction of the Boss 302 motor as 3/69
>That is to say the (later) Cleveland heads were influenced by the 302
>Boss design. The only Boss engine to have Cleveland heads was the '71
>which, as you say, was all Cleveland.
Don't forget that the C would have been at the end of its design phase
in 68/69ish.
>Pedants-R-Us. ;-)
LOL !!!, but we must get it right ;-)
Kieron
John H
>
>John, i'm afraid the 69 Boss 302 used C heads, there is no question
>about it, they may not necessarily have been called Cleveland heads at
>the time though.
Sure they're Cleveland lookalikes (4V Clevelands even share the same
design) but they're peculiar to the 302 Boss, no Cleveland ever used
identical heads - or even identical castings. Nor were the Boss heads
the same casting for '69 and '70, the '69 even has different waterways
(at least according to pictures I have).
Have a look at the specs you've referred to...
No Cleveland ever had the same combustion chambers as the '70 Boss
(57.2-60.0ml). No Cleveland ever had the same size valves as the '69
Boss (2.23" inlet). There are also differences the specs don't cover,
eg rocker pedestals.
The clincher might be whether or not a 302 Boss head will run on a
Cleveland engine without modification, and I still think not. I'll
retract on the tunnel port influence on the Boss heads though, quite
clearly (from your reference picture) they bear no relationship to the
Boss heads whereas Cleveland's certainly are related.
--
John H
Kieron Murphy
The Boss 302 heads would have had different waterways (probably during
casting) due to the Windsor using a wet inlet vs the Cleveland's dry,
its easy enough to covert standard C heads to bolt onto a W block by
modifying the waterways, and I would be surprised if you couldn't make
simple waterway mods to Boss heads and bolt them to a C block.
As for conbustion chamber volumes/valve sizes and rocker mountings,
don't forget the Windsor had many different combinations, from memory
for instance, there where 3 different rocker mountings for the W but
they are all still called Windsor heads, same even goes for the C as
we know it, many different chamber/valve sizes ;-)
Kieron
Kieron
John H
>On Sat, 01 Apr 2000 07:37:48 +1000, John H <no_...@home.au> wrote:
>
>>Kieron Murphy wrote:
>>>
>>>John, i'm afraid the 69 Boss 302 used C heads, there is no question
>>>about it, they may not necessarily have been called Cleveland heads at
>>>the time though.
...
>>
>>The clincher might be whether or not a 302 Boss head will run on a
>>Cleveland engine without modification, and I still think not.
...
>
>The Boss 302 heads would have had different waterways (probably during
>casting) due to the Windsor using a wet inlet vs the Cleveland's dry,
>its easy enough to covert standard C heads to bolt onto a W block by
>modifying the waterways, and I would be surprised if you couldn't make
>simple waterway mods to Boss heads and bolt them to a C block.
Installing any Windsor type head (which would include the Boss 302) on
a Cleveland is actually easier than vice versa. It's a simple matter
of drilling an 11/16" hole in the head face using a Cleveland gasket
as a template.
However the Boss intake face is also unique to the Boss heads so a
Cleveland manifold won't fit - at least that is my understanding.
Therefore by my logic... if Boss 302 heads won't run on a Cleveland
engine without *extensive* modification then they can hardly be called
Cleveland heads.
On rummaging through my junk I did find some SVO engine building
literature (circa 1985) along with Catalogue No. M-18833-A1 (which
also has a comprehensive list of what fits what). SVO describe the
Boss heads as "similar in design" to the 351C 4V heads but they are
*never* referred to as Cleveland heads.
And here's what they (SVO) say about the 90-degree V family, ie
221/260/289/302/351W... "This engine family can be correctly referred
to as the Windsor family, although most Ford people reserve that
distinction only for the 351. The remainder are called by their
displacement. "
...
--
John H