[Richard Hudgins]

Folks,

I thought for sure that Rick D. had a link to his spreadsheet.

(I did not pay enough attention, he had sent me an early edition of this work and I made the mental leap that it was there. I would be pleased to host the spreadsheet on our servers if Rick doe not have the means.)


Sorry. That was the information that I was referring to. Not the technical bits in the thread. (They would bore most humans to death.)

Turk wrote:

” "everyone SHOULD be reading this thread" WHY?
Just because you find it interesting, everyone should be reading it?”

No Turk, that was not my point. You see, there are over 1000 threads on this forum about brakes. That should indicate a high interest in Rick’s thread. In those threads you will not find much good information and they do not really answer the original questions.

(Please note: brakes really do not interest me very much. Only when I have to use them or they are part of a design that I am working on do I even consider them.)

Rick's thread (meaning spreadsheet) answers just about all of the questions and would point folks in the right direction as to what is needed to make their car work.

It is not about my interest, but rather that it is very good information and a tool that any builder should use prior to buying brake parts in the normal haphazard manner. This type of tool would save folks lots of dollars and a lot of confusion. It would also make their cars a lot safer and more enjoyable to drive.

Turk, you also said, ” Your somewhat scolding of those who either failed to, or were not interested in reading that thread left me wondering if you are trying to say a little bit more than what you actually said...

What do you suggest? Maybe some of the clicks on threads that seem to be of higher interest to members be automatically diverted to that thread for mandatory reading, or better yet, deny access to other areas of the forum unless one has read the technical threads first?”

No. I think that your statement misses my point a bit. I was not scolding or criticizing anyone on this forum. Nor was I attempting to say anything more than what I wrote. It is typically best not to try to read into what I write any hidden meanings or innuendoes. I am really not smart enough to do that effectively.


But you do bring up a valid point about mandatory reading, it might well be a very good idea to have a technical FAQ section, that everyone could refer to before they ask the same old questions and get a lot of answers that are incorrect or that do not address the issue. There is a great amount of excellent information that has been posted in the past and is buried here.

Maybe it could be something as simple as pre-defined searches on things like:

1. Holley Carburetors
2. 15 inch tires
3. Springs
4. Ceramic coating sidepipes
5. Rivet patterns on hood scoop
6. How to set toe in.
7. etc. etc. etc.

Turk, you also said:

” Your own participation as an Old Timer seems rather limited with 441 post for as long as you claim to have been here.”

I certainly agree. My participation is limited to me having something to offer to the subject at hand. And as you can see by my post count, I seldom have anything of value to contribute to the forum. (I am sure that many here would say that I never have anything of value to contribute, therefore 441 posts is 441 too many.)

The bottom line is just this: There are a great many threads here with very valuable information that seldom are read. The knowledge base and the resulting data that are on CC are invaluable. It should be used.

That is it often ignored does indeed appall me.