On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 02:15:34 -0500, J. Clarke
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 23:44:40 -0500, Clare Snyder
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 21:50:11 -0500, J. Clarke
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 20:45:33 -0500, Clare Snyder
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 16:30:47 -0500, J. Clarke
wrote:


Except in the case of surface mount components solder should NEVER be
the primary connection. All soldered joints should be "mechanically
secure" before soldering. In other words, crimp AND solder, or twist
AND solder. On battery cables you crimp to make the electrical and
mechanical connection, then you solder to seal and protect the joint.
(gas tight joint - which is also the aim of a properly crimped (or
"crimp-welded" electrical connector.
Even then, if the soldered cable end came loose, you had other
problems - like a loose or corroded bolt-on connection that caused the
connection to heat up. A properly connected and soldered cable end
does NOT heat up enouigh to melt the solder.

The problem with that statement is "properly connected and soldered".
If it's "properly connected" it doesn't need solder and if it's
soldered you can't tell if it's being held together by the "proper
connection" or by the solder. In any case, it was a Volvo cable that
came on the car, the car was bought new, so if you have a problem with
its manufacture don't point fingers at _me_, point them at Volvo.

Never seen a soldered battery cable from the factory on ANY Volvo.
540, 122, 240 or P1800 series

Note, Swedes must have mad driving skills--I've had two Volvos and
they were both horrible winter cars. Got stuck at the drop of a hat,
didn't like to start, the heater froze on one (not the coolant in the
heater core, the _fan_ managed to get full of ice, freeze, and burn
out the motor).

Where are you driving?? The Volvo was no worse than - and in many
cases much better than - any other compact or midsized rear wheel
drive vehicle in the winter handling department

Ohio, Connecticut, points in between. And I did not have near as much
trouble in the winter with a Lincoln Town Car, Toyota Supra, or
Corvette as I did with the Volvos. None of those struggled to get up
the hill on the way to work and all of them started first time every
time. Hell, there were days when I rode my motorcycle to work because
the Volvo wouldn't move (not wouldn't start, wouldn't _move_--there
was a half an inch of ice on the parking lot and it couldn't manage to
climb up on top of it).
A continental is a TANK,

Except that it wasn't a Continental.

OK - so ANY Lincoln was a tank.

not a compact or mid-size - and your supra
(talking second or third gen) outweighed the Volvo significantly and
most likely also had limited slip.

Care to show me the weight figures, oh mighty Toyota and Volvo expert?

Well , a 164 outweighed a Supra G2 (about 3000) by about 300 lbs.
A 142 was about 300 lbs lighter than the G2 Supra.
The G3 Supras were pigs, outweighing the 164 by a good 300 at about
3800
The G4 was about 300 less than the G3

If the Townn Car wasn't a Conti, it had to be newer than 1981.
!981-89 weighed about 4000-4200 lbs. (About 400 lbs heavier than the
heaviest Supra, and 1400 lbs heavier than the 1st gen Supra at 2800)
The 1998 Corvette was only about 100 lbs LIGHTER than a G3 Supra at
about 3250 -roughly half a ton lighter than the Towne Car
The G4 was about 300 less than the G3

When you get up into the 2000s, and the Volvo S60 etc you are into
FWD and AWD - a totally different story - and they are fatter at
about 3500 - 3900 lbs - still lighter than a Lincoln Town Car and
about on par with the Supra G3


Go back to a PV544 and they barely tipped the scales at a ton.
The 122 Amazon was about 200 lbs heavier at 2200.
The P1800 wagon was about 300 pounds heavier than the Amazon at about
2500.

Tp put it in perspective, 2 122 Amazons weighed marginally more than a
later model TowneCar.


What tires did yhou have on the
Volvo?

The ones that came on it. Just like the Corvette and the Supra and
the Lincoln all had the tires that came on them.

and what model Volvo?..

You should have asked that before spouting off schmott guy. But I'll
give you a hint--bother were heavier than the Supra and weighed about
the same as the Corvette.

Still haven't said what kind of Volvo.
My brother's Volvo outweighed a lincoln too - but it had a 984 cubic
inch D16 under the hood that weighed a ton and a half without
transmission or fluids and put 600 HP to the twin screw rear end..

ANd without a load it was USELESS in snow too - - -

As for limited slip, Volvos are supposed to be good in snow, if they
need limited slip why don't they have it? And the Lincoln did not
have it.

NO car is good in snow without snows - and a second gen or newer Supra
in particular. Don't try BSing me. I was Toyota Service Manager - and
the low profile tires they came with were less than useless in snow
(Dunlop performance radials) They were like 4 flying saucers strapped
to the corners of the car. With narrow snow tires they handled and
went pretty good.
The lincoln had enough weight on the rear wheels to make any tire
grip at least a LITTLE bit - - -
WHen I was rallying the Volvo 242 was right up there with the 2002
Bimmers and the 510 Datsuns for 2wd (even winter) rallying. (I
successfully campaigned a Renault R12 Fwd - the lowest powered car on
the circuit at the time) A good set of Haks or Metzlers made them into
pretty darn good "rubber on ice" ice racers too - - -

Corvettes are also extremely poor in snow with the stock "steam
rollers" on them. (and up here they virtually ALL get taken off the
road around Thanksgiving. ANyone with the bucks to drive a vette has
the money, if not the brains, to also have a "winter beater" - often
an Audi Quatro or aAWD BMW (if not a 4WD Sierra or an old H3)

If you drove a motorcycle when you
couldn't move with a Volvo you've got ROCKS in your head - and below
your belt.

Yep, it took big ones. But once it was out of the parking lot and
onto the plowed and salted road it was fine.

My bikes were always put away sometime about Thanksgiving and they
stayed away 'till at least Easter.