Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 2009 21:27:27 -0700
Reply-To:     Bruce Todd <beeceetee@GMAIL.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Bruce Todd <beeceetee@GMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Nominations are now open: Top 10 Ugliest Parts to Fail
Comments: To: Rocket J Squirrel <camping.elliott@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To:  <4A9D7817.6060105@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Rocket J Squirrel <
camping.elliott@gmail.com> wrote:

> Well, that Friday thread generated only 9 posts, most of which were a
> debate about the availability of the plastic coolant tower thing, and two
> nominations by Jim Arnott for the the 1.9 "H" pipe and the 1.9 upper
> thermostat housing. That post garnered no comments.
>
> So . . . would it be fair to say that the 1.9 "H" pipe and upper thermo
> housing are the only parts on the Vanagon which are effectively unobtanium
> and without them the van would be effectively immobilized?
>
> Well maybe this might spawn some discussion:  What about the 2.9 metre long
> / 9' brakeline which runs from front to rear - getting one of those made up
> and bent into shape is not a typical saturday walk in the park - heaven
> forbid finding a good used one and or installing it!  Without brakes you
> can't really operate a vehicle - unless your on a farm.
>

BT