X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2007 17:35:37 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from bay0-omc1-s29.bay0.hotmail.com ([65.54.246.101] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.11) with ESMTP id 2284218 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 25 Aug 2007 12:25:48 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=65.54.246.101; envelope-from=joscales98@hotmail.com Received: from hotmail.com ([65.55.135.14]) by bay0-omc1-s29.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2668); Sat, 25 Aug 2007 09:25:10 -0700 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat, 25 Aug 2007 09:25:10 -0700 X-Original-Message-ID: Received: from 75.81.226.134 by BAY130-DAV4.phx.gbl with DAV; Sat, 25 Aug 2007 16:25:09 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [75.81.226.134] X-Originating-Email: [joscales98@hotmail.com] X-Sender: joscales98@hotmail.com From: "Jim Scales" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: ES Strut issues X-Original-Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2007 11:25:14 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0063_01C7E70A.9B66E710" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: MSN 9 X-MimeOLE: Produced By MSN MimeOLE V9.50.0039.1900 Seal-Send-Time: Sat, 25 Aug 2007 11:25:14 -0500 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Aug 2007 16:25:10.0173 (UTC) FILETIME=[81959CD0:01C7E734] X-Original-Return-Path: joscales98@hotmail.com This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0063_01C7E70A.9B66E710 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I installed new Cleveland rotors during this annual. The shake that I = am describing is with brand new rotors. I checked the old rotors and = found them to be .015" out (running, not thickness). The new ones are = out a little but not near as much. It is hard for me to believe that = small amount would be a problem. If the system is so delicate that any = part of it being out of spec, no matter how little, can cause this = shake, then the shake will never be eliminated. Thanks, Jim ----- Original Message -----=20 From: n98pb@sbcglobal.net=20 To: lml@lancaironline.net=20 Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2007 9:07 AM Subject: [LML] Re: ES Strut issues Jim Have you looked at your brake rotors? I had a shimmy in what I = thought was my nose wheel but found it to be the rotors deforming with = braking, (heat). Check them cold and they appeared perfect. Final = success was to go the high energy Cleveland brakes and replace the = rotors. No problems for 300 hours. Pat Brunner IVP ------=_NextPart_000_0063_01C7E70A.9B66E710 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I installed new Cleveland rotors during this annual.  The = shake that I=20 am describing is with brand new rotors.  I checked the old rotors = and found=20 them to be .015" out (running, not thickness).  The new ones are = out a=20 little but not near as much.  It is hard for me to believe that = small=20 amount would be a problem.  If the system is so delicate that = any=20 part of it being out of spec, no matter how little, can cause = this=20 shake, then the shake will never be eliminated.
 
Thanks,
 
Jim
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2007 = 9:07=20 AM
Subject: [LML] Re: ES Strut = issues

Jim

Have you looked at your brake=20 rotors?  I had a shimmy in what I thought was my nose wheel but = found it=20 to be the rotors deforming with braking, (heat).  Check them cold = and=20 they appeared perfect.  Final success was to go the high energy = Cleveland=20 brakes and replace the rotors.  No problems for 300=20 hours.

Pat Brunner

IVP

 

 

------=_NextPart_000_0063_01C7E70A.9B66E710--