FYI
B377...@webtv.net
wanting me to stay with aadt :)
Anyway, I'm not much for having a good short term memory, so bear
with me.
In a previous posting written by ???? (don't remember), they were
complaining about a shimmy in their Ram 4x4 after striking bumps in the
road.
I suggested that the front end alignment has either too little or
too much caster, thus causing a caster shimmy. He did not like my
response and changed his concern from a "shimmy" to a "bounce" (big
difference), and insisted it was the shocks. Maybe it is, I haven't
driven it. He also said the alignment "checked out". Here's the
problem:
Alignment programs (and service manuals I believe), give a wide
acceptable range for front caster on the 4x4 Rams. I believe the range
is 2 degrees to 5 degrees (if that's not correct, it's pretty close).
The problem occurs when the alignment tech (independent or dealer)
tells you that the measurements "checked out fine", just because they
were in this broad range of acceptance.
Caster readings that fall on either end of the scale are subject to
caster shimmy, even though they are "acceptable". I had to align some
30 trucks and attend a 9 hour "Dodge Ram Chassis Dynamics Diagnostics"
training session (fancy name, ehh?), before finding out that 3 degrees
to 4 degrees is the optimal caster setting for 4x4 Rams that eliminates
caster shimmy.
Below I will post what specifications I set Ram trucks to. First
I want to give a little more info on correct Ram alignments so you can
see if you had a job well done,
The eccentrics on the lower control arms ARE NOT for individual
wheel caster adjustments (even though our alignment machine says they
are). The eccentric sleeves in the upper ball joints are for adjusting
individual camber and total cross caster (difference in caster between
two front wheels). This is why replacement eccentrics are positionable
in eight different ways.
Once camber and cross caster are attained with the eccentrics, the
lower control arm eccentrics are then used to swing the caster readings
into specifications. The two eccentrics must be swung in the SAME
direction in EQUAL amounts. If they are not, it will create a setback
condition (one front wheel further forward than the other).
FYI - Comparing between the two front wheels, caster will cause a
pull to the smaller value and camber will cause a pull to the larger
value. A truck set up with caster pulling in one direction and camber
pulling in the other direction, can lead to a wandering truck; even
though it is "in specifications"!!!!!!
If the eccentrics on the lower control arms of your truck are not
pointing the same direction, the alignment was done incorrectly and the
axle was "twisted" or "forced" into position to attain the acceptable
values (seen them from the factory this way, go figure).
A correct alignment will set the truck up with a slight negative
cross caster (truck has slight pull to left) to compensate for right
hand road crown. Camber will be equal side to side slightly on the
negative side. This will help maintain acceptable camber when hauling
heavy loads, as the truck tends to lift in the front when towing.
Camber will then fall slightly positive when towing.
Just because the alignment shop says "it's in specifications", that
does not mean it is set up for proper performance and handling!!!!!!!!!
Specifications (my personal settings for every Ram I align): all specs
below are in degrees.
Left Wheel Right Wheel
-------------- ----------------
Caster 3.2 3.5
Cross Caster -.3
Camber -.10 -.10
Cross Camber 0.0
Toe - standard specs, (maybe a little out if you tow a lot, they will
pull in as the front end lifts up).
Brent
ASE Certified
Gold Certified Chrysler tech
wddodge
Denny
<B377...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:21931-38...@storefull-137.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
uuc
Lee
Dave Johnson
have my 2000 QC 4x4 checked ... don't suppose your anywhere near Iowa?
--
David K. Johnson
EMail: cgwr...@netins.net
<B377...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:21931-38...@storefull-137.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
uuc
Where are you at in Iowa???
Phrede
For the real info. Glad to here you are staying.
Can you add anything as it regards to a 4X2?
My '99 has had the problem from the showroom.
Thanks
Phrede
<B377...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:21931-38...@storefull-137.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
Mopar Man
Brent, glad your back. It's nice to have someone that actually knows.
AW
uuc wrote in message <38A355F5...@rconnect.com>...
>Dave
>
>Where are you at in Iowa???
>
>Dave Johnson wrote:
>
>> Sounds like you know what your doing. I'm thinking with 2700 miles I
should
>> have my 2000 QC 4x4 checked ... don't suppose your anywhere near Iowa?
>>
>> --
>> David K. Johnson
>> EMail: cgwr...@netins.net
>>
uuc
Lee
RedNeck from Hell
An Iowegien???
Is that sort of like a Norwegien???
Old age and treachery will overcome youth and enthusiasm
Happiness is driving an ass kicking big block Mopar
Mopar Man
AW
RedNeck from Hell wrote in message
<20000211213233...@ng-fs1.aol.com>...
uuc
RedNeck from Hell
Those Southern Iowegians always told me is was Misery down there???
DodgeEwe
went to the U of I for 3 years 88-91...
--
-Michele
dodgeew...@nllfan.com
(remove -NOSPAM to e-mail)
"Mopar Man" <mis...@netins.net> wrote in message
news:880sh9$nus$1...@ins22.netins.net...
Charles Cochran
I got a letter from my ex while I was in Basic there back in 1970 and
that's how she addressed it.
Ft. Leonard Wood, Misery.
RedNeck from Hell <mopa...@aol.comxxx> wrote in message
news:20000212114533...@ng-cp1.aol.com...
RedNeck from Hell
>
>I got a letter from my ex while I was in Basic there back in 1970 and
>that's how she addressed it.
>
>Ft. Leonard Wood, Misery.
>
I went Navy so missed out on all that.
I believe Fort Leonard Wood is now closed?
Fitch R. Williams
>I got a letter from my ex while I was in Basic there back in 1970 and
>that's how she addressed it.
I was in basic training there in fall of 1961. What an awful bivouac area
it was - major mud in the rain! Only place I've ever been where you could
walk to a firing range, and then walk back, and have it be up hill in both
directions!
Fitch
In So. Cal. High Desert
1995 Reg. Cab 2WD 2500SLT/12V/5spd/4.10/Turnover Ball gooseneck hitch/Tekonsha Sentinel
1999 QC 2 WD 3500SLT/24V/5spd/3.55/customized mirrors/Turnover Ball gooseneck hitch/Tekonsha Sentinel/Class IV DrawTite rear hitch.
Budd Cochran
RedNeck from Hell wrote:
>
> >ell, I know that Ft. Leonard Wood is in Misery.
> >
> >I got a letter from my ex while I was in Basic there back in 1970 and
> >that's how she addressed it.
> >
> >Ft. Leonard Wood, Misery.
> >
> From pictures I have seen, I would have to agree!!!
> I went Navy so missed out on all that.
> I believe Fort Leonard Wood is now closed?
>
> Old age and treachery will overcome youth and enthusiasm
> Happiness is driving an ass kicking big block Mopar
If it is, then the Army has taken a "kinder / gentler" attitude, for
sure. While I was there Satan came around looking for ideas to make Hell
more hellish.
Hmmm. Maybe I ought to check it out. . . .of course, if they did close
it, then the prostitution business in Waynesville closed over night.
Budd Cochran
"Fitch R. Williams" wrote:
>
> "Charles Cochran" <ctre...@ris.net> wrote:
>
> >I got a letter from my ex while I was in Basic there back in 1970 and
> >that's how she addressed it.
>
> I was in basic training there in fall of 1961. What an awful bivouac area
> it was - major mud in the rain! Only place I've ever been where you could
> walk to a firing range, and then walk back, and have it be up hill in both
> directions!
>
By Jan 1970 ( when I entered basic) they had improved it by making all
trips by foot uphill, even to the mess hall.
It was really weird to see a basketball rolling down hill and find
yourself running uphill to chase it. . . . . and _that_ was on the
courts!!!
Parthe N. Ogenesis
Mike, the chem training and MP training Fort in Al was McClellan.
Not sure of the spelling though.
Fitch R. Williams <frwi...@ptw.com> wrote in message
news:2oghascunlfm2hna8...@4ax.com...
> "Mike Simmons" <mik...@fidnet.com> wrote:
>
> >For the group's info, Fort Leonard Wood is VERY much open and growing by
> >leaps and bounds!
> >
> >Yup, the doggies still do basic training there but the Army has moved the
> >engineering training command from Ft. Belvior, NJ to Ft. Wood and now
they
> >are in the process of moving all chem/bio training from Ft. Rucker (I
> >believe), AL. Also, they are the primary military police training
command
> >for the Army.
>
> I hope they buried the infiltration course!
>
> As I recall - one of its major missions when I was there (egad - was it
> really 39 years ago? Don't answer that!) was training of the Army
> Engineering corp. They were doing bridges and other things. There were
> also a few tanks and tank retrievers there (talk about your two vehicle,
> those tank retrievers were something else). It also had a huge parade
> field.
>
> One of my big lessons, which I retell to this day is related to that
parade
> field. Before our last trip to the practice range with was to be followed
> in two days by a trip to the record range, the Drill Sargent told us he
> would put the whole company (C-2-2) on detail the whole day Sunday if we
> didn't have more folks shoot expert than "D" company.
>
> Well, we sat in the barracks that night (WW-II "temporary" wooden barracks
> thankyouverymuch) and allowed that there were not that many "Bloody
Mary's"
> and trashcans in the place to keep the whole company busy on detail for a
> whole day. The whole area was clean enough to eat off. After some
> discussion we said "they can't do that. They can't put us all on detail
> for the whole day". We should have known better .... really, we should
> have ...
>
> Well, the days went by, we went to the record range, and while I shot
> expert with the M-1 with some margin, we didn't have enough folks shoot
> expert - "D" company beat us by 3.
>
> They had not forgotten.
>
> Sunday morning it was up and out of there just like it was a week day.
> They marched us over to the parade field. A huge field covered every
> square inch with lush green grass. They lined us up in one looooong
line -
> 240 soldiers with our arms out straight from the shoulders long. Then
they
> told us to mow the parade field by breaking off individual stems of grass.
> I forget the language used, and the exact wording, but it was abundantly
> clear that it would be the worst thing imaginable for them to find we had
> pulled up any grass, or that we were not breaking them off individually.
>
> I have never said since then, "they can't do that". Because, trust me on
> this, "they" can!
>
> I'm probably more than a little radical in my thinking on compulsory
> military service. I know quite a few people that would have benefitted
> from being in the service - and frankly I'd support 100% drafting of
> everybody, including women, to do 9 months in the service. (Including
> those in wheel chairs and on crutches - they can do something suitable to
> their physical condition, and work in supply, or an office, but be there
> and have the experience). The key is there would be few or no exceptions
> to the draft (there would have to be some, but a heck of a lot less than
> most folks think).
>
> Your religion says you can't shoot, that's just fine, you can be a medic,
> or a cook, or do KP while the rest of us learn to shoot, or work the paper
> hassle, or be a permanent janitor at the training camp, but you go and
> march, and train, and crawl, and do everything but shoot - you can be the
> "go-fer" at the range. You want to vote and own property, you go.
Period.
>
> Learn to shoot both a rifle and a pistol, throw a grenade (that will have
> you changing your under ware if you do it wrong and survive), learn to
> follow orders, learn to respect and understand folks for what they are
> because you sure can't tell by the choice of clothes and hair cut, learn
> the meaning of team work, learn to pitch a tent, learn to crawl in the
dirt
> and mud and cold and snow and dust and heat. Learn the basics of compass
> navigation, covering terrain in the dark, get a heck of a good first aid
> course, learn to salute, learn what the flag stands for, and above all,
> learn to appreciate the true meaning of equality (there is nothing more
> equal than a bunch of recruits getting their heads shaved), and what you
> have as a civilian. Learn to be shouted at and take it when you have to.
> Learn some basic unarmed combat techniques. Go from basic to a school
> (mechanics, electronics, water purification, bridge building, I don't care
> - learn some practical skill) or to AIT - grow up a little or a lot
> depending ...
>
> It was a heck of a beneficial learning experience. I know I am a better
> man for it - and it is my personal opinion that it would be a better
> country if everybody had at least that minimum military experience. I
know
> it would have been good for all three of my kids - one was in the Marines
> for 7 years and it did him a lot of good. I know it will never happen,
but
> that doesn't change the fact that I would support it.
>
> Then I would say you take your weapons and your basic equipment, canteen,
> bayonet, entrenching tool (they still have them? Right?), home with you,
> and be responsible for them, and keep them cleaned and working order, and
> practice with them from time to time. Just like the Swiss do.
>
> That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
>
> Fitch"the radical"Williams
Mike Simmons
I too agree 100% with your philosophy! My stint in the Marine's was very
beneficial and it seems to be proving so with my oldest son as well. There
is a lot to be said for the "military experience".
Yeah, Parthe, you are right it was McClellan. I remember now that a lot of
the tree-huggers got their knickers in a knot when the announced they were
bringing chem/bio to Ft. Wood. They felt that the training would spoil the
Ozark wilderness forever.
Uncle Sam prevailed and the training is now here.
Mike
Parthe N. Ogenesis <parthen...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:saisbf...@news.supernews.com...
Parthe N. Ogenesis
rough to go back to all of the places I trained, Ft McClellan, Ft Ord, Camp
Hiealeah, Ft. Cimarrón and discover ghost towns that rival any gold rush
town. Ft. Ord depresses me the most, viewing all of those new facilities
built, that are going to waste. i.e the urban assualt city. You couldn't
even get to the training areas, but fortunately there is one patrolling
Federal police car, that couldn't follow me and know the back roads as well
as I.
Mike Simmons <mik...@fidnet.com> wrote in message
news:sak0n6...@corp.supernews.com...
Dave Carr
more with you. I had not thought of ALL required to serve but you are right,
everybody has something to offer no matter what handicap and the experience
will be great for them to. The biggest mistake the government made, was when
they killed the draft. I don't think there is any experience that is more
maturing and fulfilling as the Military one. Each branch of the service has
its methods of training and focused on the areas that affected the needs of
that branch. The marines were probably the most team and strength oriented
with the rest of the branches following similar regimens.I think it is a
loss two the present generation, that more didn't partake in the military
experience. If more of the parents had had a military background then the
kids of today might have been raised differently and just maybe this kids
killing kids disaster would not have happened. The parents of today never
learned to respect and trust people for there actions instead of there
dress. They never learned team work or how to get along to aid in the
preservation of the team. I look at Israel, a small country that has to
fight for its very existence and everybody has military training. I suspect
they are better team players then the same generation in the rest of the
world. There, everybody carries a weapon and I don't see the kids shooting
each other or the rantings of people wanting to ban private ownership of
guns.
Sorry for the rant, just my 2 cents worth.
Parthe N. Ogenesis <parthen...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:saln88s...@news.supernews.com...
Mike Simmons
the other day in USA Today (I believe). A study has shown that ex-military
personnel were 25% (don't quote me on this number, but it WAS a significant
percentage) LESS likely to commit crimes. This was the result of a survey
of felons is a national sampling of penal institutions. The only conclusion
reached by the group was that ex-military are more self-disciplined and have
a greater respect for authority. Two traits I might add that are in
increasingly short supply!
Semper Fi!
Mike
Dave Carr <dc...@uniontel.net> wrote in message
news:EtFq4.314$q2.13...@news.wctc.net...