Boxerworks.com

ME 109 wrote: Chuey, I bet you used two condoms at once when you were a young buck.

PLUS a diaphragm.

You will note that Chuey has never mentioned anything about having any little Chuettes. Can't argue with success.

Yes, two condoms. I actually have to use two condoms made of shrink tubing to squeeze "El Huapo" down to a normal size. I never used a diaphragm (except in my Bings.

Thanks for bringing that up. (Said the actress to the Bishop)

Chuey

Major Softie wrote:You will note that Chuey has never mentioned anything about having any little Chuettes. Can't argue with success.

Spawn of Chuey lives at the North entrance to Yellowstone National Park. That's why I've made so many trips up there on my motorbikes. She and her hubby have two kids, a 5year old, Rowan and a 3year old, Piper.

Chuey

Chuey wrote:

Major Softie wrote:You will note that Chuey has never mentioned anything about having any little Chuettes. Can't argue with success.

Spawn of Chuey lives at the North entrance to Yellowstone National Park. That's why I've made so many trips up there on my motorbikes. She and her hubby have two kids, a 5year old, Rowan and a 3year old, Piper.

Chuey

So....

even two condoms isn't foolproof.

I bugged Sibbo to get going again (and post results) on this project intending to copy him. At least in the choice of lights. But I now need to let my savings account recover from the impending R65 heads rebuild, and the recent transplant of a Marlin Crawler rebuilt tranny into my Toyota pickup. Ouch. I'll keep those lights in my Ebay watch list, though. And keep trying to drive in the daytime, until then.

I was thinking of installing the lights lower than Sibbo's, on the forks right below my fork gaitors. Is that too low for "to see" lights, as opposed to "to be seen" lights?

enigmaT120 wrote: I was thinking of installing the lights lower than Sibbo's, on the forks right below my fork gaitors. Is that too low for "to see" lights, as opposed to "to be seen" lights?

Ed, I think that mounting them on the fork lowers would be problematic. They would bounce with every bump in the road and would also add to unsprung weight.

Airbear wrote:......and would also add to unsprung weight.

Not if they're light.

ME 109 wrote:

Airbear wrote:......and would also add to unsprung weight.

Not if they're light.

Would they be lighter when switched on or off?

Airbear wrote:

ME 109 wrote:

Airbear wrote:......and would also add to unsprung weight.

Not if they're light.

Would they be lighter when switched on or off?

Definitely on. The brighter the lighter.

ME 109 wrote: Definitely on. The brighter the lighter.

Makes sense, but I think you are overlooking the impact on your forward progress that results from shooting all those photons forward. I know they are mass-less, but if there is a whole lot of them.....