Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 19:38:51 -0600, dpb wrote:

Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:35:15 -0600, dpb wrote:


Again, I wish many things were the way they used to be, including
casting foundry in McMinnville, but it's a different world...


Why on earth......

We've discussed this before as well, Frank. Delta isn't only place
where changes have occurred, not all to our liking...

--

"Frank Boettcher" wrote in message
...



Transverse engine, back side of block, up in a pocket? I've never
actually seen that spot, just always hope I got the seat clean before
putting the new filter on.

Yup, that's the location. Hopefully if you get a little dirt in there the
filter will get it immediately. I retired from the automotive industry 12
years ago and started in it when I was going to school. I changed lots of
oil in cars while working part time. NUMBER 1 rule, look to make sure the
filter gasket came off of the engine. Never had a problem with that until,
;~) I did not check the filter on the Acura. I never realized just how
fast an engine can pump oil out of the engine when you use 2 gaskets on the
oil filter. About 6 seconds as I recall.

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 09:54:25 -0600, dpb wrote:

Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 19:38:51 -0600, dpb wrote:

Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:35:15 -0600, dpb wrote:


Again, I wish many things were the way they used to be, including
casting foundry in McMinnville, but it's a different world...


Why on earth......

We've discussed this before as well, Frank. Delta isn't only place
where changes have occurred, not all to our liking...


I mean why the McMinnville foundry?

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 10:03:14 -0600, "Leon"
wrote:


"Frank Boettcher" wrote in message
.. .



Transverse engine, back side of block, up in a pocket? I've never
actually seen that spot, just always hope I got the seat clean before
putting the new filter on.

Yup, that's the location. Hopefully if you get a little dirt in there the
filter will get it immediately. I retired from the automotive industry 12
years ago and started in it when I was going to school. I changed lots of
oil in cars while working part time. NUMBER 1 rule, look to make sure the
filter gasket came off of the engine. Never had a problem with that until,
;~) I did not check the filter on the Acura. I never realized just how
fast an engine can pump oil out of the engine when you use 2 gaskets on the
oil filter. About 6 seconds as I recall.

LOL. Similar experience. While blindly trying to install the new
filter, knocked off the gasket. But it didn't fall out. Thought that
it had a different feel when I tried to seat the filter hand tight.
Cranked up to check for leaks. Oil going everywhere. shut down
immediately, massive cleanup followed. Lot's of cussing the filter
manufacturer for the cheesy way the gasket was set.

Maybe I'm 'late for the party' - I just saw the heading . . . with only one
'comment'.

Mine is not so much about 'Sears', but the original question.

I care quite a bit where my tools come from . . . and am ruefully aware that
'we' don't seem to 'manufacture' ANYTHING in the US anymore. In another
sense it's 'Horses for Courses', and I HATE getting 'Ripped Off'.

NO, my 'rant' isn't about 'cheap goods' - it's about those 'Old Line',
well-recognized named ones that push their historical 'high quality' image.
While the 'image' is portrayed by the Logo, the 'fine print' {usually hidden
on the bottom, back of the packaging . . . says 'Made in China'.

If I need a SPECIFIC tool, for a 'one-time' use, it's financially foolish to
get one of the 'Lifetime Quality' cost. {Agreed - there are exceptions}.
Similarly, if you know a certain tool will not be 'worn out' but 'beat to
death' by the environment of it's use - think of it as a 'semi-consumable' .
.. . like specialized sanding 'disks'. So, Yes - I do buy from Harbor
Freight, knowing the stuff is typically 'Made in China', and of lower
quality. BUT the cost is equally LOW - especially if I use the SALES.

While I do feel twinges of guilt, I know what is going on - from the start.
What REALLY P****S me off is going into either one of the few hardware
stores, or the huge 'Emporiums', and looking at the racks of 'High Quality,
High Price, 'All-American' Brand's, and seeing that fine print. I can put
the two items side-by-side and in many cases they are IDENTICAL !! In most
the only MATERIAL difference is in 'final finish / polish' and color. The
PRICE difference can be a factor of 10x !!

You can't blame the Chinese for THAT !!

{Rant . . Off}

Regards & Thanks {for the soapbox - again}
Ron Magen
Backyard Boatshop

"Bonehenge (B A R R Y)" wrote ...
Bob the Tomato wrote:

Sears used to mean quality... the best.

While it was plenty "good enough", especially for the DIY world, I don't
think Sears was ever "The Best". In many cases, Sears was simply the only
game in town.

Maybe I'm 'late for the party' - I just saw the heading . . . with only one
'comment'.

Mine is not so much about 'Sears', but the original question.

I care quite a bit where my tools come from . . . and am ruefully aware that
'we' don't seem to 'manufacture' ANYTHING in the US anymore. In another
sense it's 'Horses for Courses', and I HATE getting 'Ripped Off'.

NO, my 'rant' isn't about 'cheap goods' - it's about those 'Old Line',
well-recognized named ones that push their historical 'high quality' image.
While the 'image' is portrayed by the Logo, the 'fine print' {usually hidden
on the bottom, back of the packaging . . . says 'Made in China'.

If I need a SPECIFIC tool, for a 'one-time' use, it's financially foolish to
get one of the 'Lifetime Quality' cost. {Agreed - there are exceptions}.
Similarly, if you know a certain tool will not be 'worn out' but 'beat to
death' by the environment of it's use - think of it as a 'semi-consumable' .
.. . like specialized sanding 'disks'. So, Yes - I do buy from Harbor
Freight, knowing the stuff is typically 'Made in China', and of lower
quality. BUT the cost is equally LOW - especially if I use the SALES.

While I do feel twinges of guilt, I know what is going on - from the start.
What REALLY P****S me off is going into either one of the few hardware
stores, or the huge 'Emporiums', and looking at the racks of 'High Quality,
High Price, 'All-American' Brand's, and seeing that fine print. I can put
the two items side-by-side and in many cases they are IDENTICAL !! In most
the only MATERIAL difference is in 'final finish / polish' and color. The
PRICE difference can be a factor of 10x !!

You can't blame the Chinese for THAT !!

{Rant . . Off}

Regards & Thanks {for the soapbox - again}
Ron Magen
Backyard Boatshop

"Bonehenge (B A R R Y)" wrote ...
Bob the Tomato wrote:

Sears used to mean quality... the best.

While it was plenty "good enough", especially for the DIY world, I don't
think Sears was ever "The Best". In many cases, Sears was simply the only
game in town.

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 00:34:47 GMT, Ralph wrote:


Have to agree with you Mac. Remember when "J.A.Pan & Co." meant junk or
popcorn toys (must be dating myself there). Their first cars into North
America were a joke, but they did their homework and now they are
forerunners in industry. It seems that China may be following the same
route.

That brought back a dim memory... when I was a kid, I got some kind of little
toy out of a gumball machine and it broke.. I asked my dad if he could fix it
and he said "nope, it's potmetal.. must be made in Japan"..
Not sure if there really is something called pot metal, but I've always
remembered him saying that..


mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 20:23:51 GMT, Brian Henderson
wrote:

Precisely. They succeed because they want to succeed, they're hungry
for success. You get a lot of American companies who think that
because they bother to open their doors in the morning, they deserve
success and the world will beat a path to their door because they're
Americans.

Ain't so.

As I understand it, the US automakers thought that as long as they changed the
size and shape of the tail fins every few years, people would continue to want
and buy the "latest model"..
The Japanese spend a couple of million bucks (a huge amount at that time) doing
market research and found that what a large amount of the folks that were
interviewed in the US wanted was an affordable car the was reliable and didn't
cost a lot to run... 180 degrees from the Detroit marketing plan..
Look at the cars today (ok, except for the suv/yuppie assault vehicle) an it's
kind of easy to see who was right..


mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:51:17 GMT, John Horner wrote:

Cooniedog wrote:
The answer to wasted superiority is simple - cheaper labor equals more
and much bigger profits for the U.S. companies, who happen to be the
cronies of the current administration.


You can't lay this all on the current administration alone as this trend
has been going along for a very, very long time. If you want to see a
family which is unduly friendly with the Chinese, check out the Clintons.

Exactly.. if business was going to do well in any regime, it would be repub's..

Business are going to do business no matter which figurehead is in power...
That's what business is, right?


mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 12:54:34 -0800 (PST), Charlie Self
wrote:

On Nov 25, 10:02 am, Cooniedog wrote:
The answer to wasted superiority is simple - cheaper labor equals more
and much bigger profits for the U.S. companies, who happen to be the
cronies of the current administration.

mac davis wrote:
On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 21:06:27 GMT, Brian Henderson
wrote:

On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 12:09:52 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

Uh, you missed their taking over the entire consumer electronics
industry.
Because the Japanese could make a better product for less money, why
shouldn't they take over the industry? They earned it!

The question you should be asking is why the U.S. completely wasted
their superiority.

I watched the transition in the quality of Japanese steel.. from tin can quality
to better than ours (US)..
One of the reasons is that the Japanese government underwrites research and
renovation..

Back maybe 10 or 15 years, I watched a documentary on the steel industry and
they were pointing out that Japan was tearing down it's oldest steel mill and
rebuilding it to be better and efficient... and that the newest steel mill in
the US was almost 100 years old...
Same thing happened to our auto industry... the Japanese did their homework and
found out what the American people wanted and made it..


Sorry, Mac. As much as I dislike Bush, and his bunch of vicious
clowns, this has been going on for FAR longer than he's been a power
in national politics. We might start by blaming Nixon who opened up
modern China to trade. Or go way back and blame, lessee, nearly 60
eyar old history, Commodore Peary for opening up Japan, which
eventually led the way into the rest of Asia. This one has no
political ties of any real importance, though the past seven years
might have seen a bit of a speed boost.

Hang on, Charlie... you're replying to someone that replied to MY post..lol


mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 13:14:12 GMT, "Bonehenge (B A R R Y)"
wrote:

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 12:22:11 GMT, Bob the Tomato
wrote:

Sears used to mean quality... the
best.

While it was plenty "good enough", especially for the DIY world, I
don't think Sears was ever "The Best". In many cases, Sears was
simply the only game in town.

for sure... and had a good guarantee..

But afaik, Sears/Craftsman has never made their own tools... Just takes the best
bid like any other business would/wood..


mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:09:47 GMT, Bob the Tomato wrote:

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 13:14:12 GMT, "Bonehenge (B A R R Y)"
wrote:

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 12:22:11 GMT, Bob the Tomato
wrote:

Sears used to mean quality... the
best.

While it was plenty "good enough", especially for the DIY world, I
don't think Sears was ever "The Best". In many cases, Sears was
simply the only game in town.

I mean "the best" in terms of what was readily available to the
average guy walking in off the street. I have never been to a snap-on
dealer, or ever purchased one of their tools, because we simply run in
different circles. I'm not a professional mechanic. (I'm talking
hand tools in this instance, although the same argument could be made
for hand held power tools, but probably not for heavy stationary
tools... since Sears really didn't try to get into that market.)

You sure see a lot of old Craftsman table and radial arm saws that still work..
I've got 2 craftsman routers that are older than some folks in this group and
you can't kill the damn things...
No idea who made them, though.. The older one actually says "Made in USA"..


mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:40:39 GMT, Bob the Tomato wrote:

Do you know the "Harbor Freight Smell"? That's the smell of lead
paint mixed with cheap plasticizers, or something. Anyhow, it's very
distinctive, and Sears didn't have it until a couple of years ago.
The HF power tools have this cheap plastic housing that is usually
orange or something. It actually has a bit of an oily film on it when
you first take the tool out of the box. It might be mold release, or
it might be plasticizer oozing out of the plastic, I don't know. And
they *always* have that strong smell. Then you have the cardboard
box. I keep the old boxes from my purchases. That way I can locate
by Craftsman jigsaw from 1985 quickly, and keep all the accessories
and the manual together with it. Those cardboard boxes are sturdy and
have a real solid feel about them. The new ones feel like a wet
cereal box. I don't know how to describe it, they just do.

I guess my nose is too old to tell the difference...
I tried a HF biscuit jointer to see if that was a tool worth adding.. when made
a few things with it and realized that biscuits were a good thing, I bought the
Dewalt one with the craftsman name on it..

It's been working great for years but just to be safe I better get a neighbor or
someone to smell it..


mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 21:15:00 GMT, "Bonehenge (B A R R Y)"
wrote:

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 12:50:45 -0800 (PST), Charlie Self
wrote:


As a general statement, I think there has been a basic upgrading of
quality in the past two decades, with more and more woodworkers
demanding better tools.

Do you remember when people would complain about a body rattle in a
pickup, and be told "It's a pickup truck, who cares?"

_All_ vehicles are better than they were 20 years ago.

Thank Toyota and Nissan. G

But sadly, they aren't better because folks complained about fit, they were made
a lot better because (in the case of Japanese cars) the technology for building
them got better..


mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 21:49:22 GMT, "Leon" wrote:


"Bonehenge (B A R R Y)" wrote in message
.. .

Do you remember when people would complain about a body rattle in a
pickup, and be told "It's a pickup truck, who cares?"

I remember in the late 70's when GM could not put a bed on a pick-up that
aligned with the back glass. New trucks on the lot looked like thay had
been wrecked when looked at from the rear.


_All_ vehicles are better than they were 20 years ago.

Thank Toyota and Nissan. G

Yes, and partial thanks goes to Detroit and the labor unions that had the
strangle hold. Had they not charged too much for poor quality the Japanese
would not be quite as far along as they are today.

There were a lot of Dodge trucks going back to the dealer in the 90's to get the
bed aligned with the road..lol


mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 20:50:54 GMT, (Doug Miller) wrote:

In article , Brian Henderson wrote:
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 12:22:11 GMT, Bob the Tomato
wrote:

I don't mind paying for quality. Once in a while I buy cheap, if it
passes the grade. But I will pass the junk every time. If there is a
quality tool available, I will buy it if I can.

Same here, but the point I was making is that quality and "made in the
USA" are not always the same thing. In fact, they are not usually the
same thing most of time. Where a product is made should be irrelevant
to what the quality of the product is. A toy made with lead paint is
dangerous whether it's made in China or Chicago. Far too many people
act like "Made in the USA" is a stamp of quality, not location.

It's certainly more suggestive of quality than "Made in China". g

It used to be, anyway... I'm not sure any more, though I hope it still is..
I have a 99 Dodge ram that the VIN says is assembled in Mexico.. it's been a
damn good truck for me..
Better than in the USA? A lot of dodge owners think so..

Folks in Mexico don't have the job security that the US workers have... Screw up
a truck and they're back on the street..


mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 21:22:59 GMT, (Doug Miller) wrote:

In article , wrote:

I have a "little" Tacoma, which had no problem towing a 5000 lb. Volvo
fro Westchester airport to Meriden, CT a few weeks back.

Did I mention the oil filter is on top of the engine?

Where it belongs. Oh, how I hate changing oil on an engine with a filter
mounted open end up. What ever made anyone think that was a good idea?

Unless it's a Chevy S-10 or blazer with 4 wheel drive..
Instead of planning the filter on top, Chevy discovered that with 4x4, the
transfer case interfered with the oil filter..
Redesign the engine or T-case? Hell no..
They put an "adapter" on the oil filter port and ran lines to and from the new
filter mount under the hood..
As a result, the most often question inmost Chevy 4x4 groups is "how to fix
leaking oil filter lines"
My kid's blew out on him on the freeway.. fun..
Oh.. AFAIK, they never did do it right.. my '95 and a friends 97 blazer still
have it and we both carry a $100 replacement kit for when it goes..


mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

"mac davis" wrote in message
...

Oh.. AFAIK, they never did do it right.. my '95 and a friends 97 blazer
still
have it and we both carry a $100 replacement kit for when it goes..

They don't change because it is done right the first time. ;~)
If you recall the old Oldsmobile diesels engines back in the late 70's and
early 80's, the filter system was totally bogus and was the source of 50% of
its problems. The very last year the Olds diesel was built and used in the
early mid 80's they put an elaborate fuel filter system on. It should have
been put on the second year after all the problems in the first year.

mac davis wrote:
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 20:23:51 GMT, Brian Henderson
wrote:

Precisely. They succeed because they want to succeed, they're
hungry
for success. You get a lot of American companies who think that
because they bother to open their doors in the morning, they
deserve
success and the world will beat a path to their door because
they're
Americans.

Ain't so.

As I understand it, the US automakers thought that as long as they
changed the size and shape of the tail fins every few years, people
would continue to want and buy the "latest model"..
The Japanese spend a couple of million bucks (a huge amount at that
time) doing market research and found that what a large amount of
the
folks that were interviewed in the US wanted was an affordable car
the was reliable and didn't cost a lot to run... 180 degrees from
the
Detroit marketing plan..
Look at the cars today (ok, except for the suv/yuppie assault
vehicle) an it's kind of easy to see who was right..

Not quite. Cars are smaller today because of laws put in place to
encourage improvements in fuel consumption, and SUVs are in fact
primarily exploitation of a loophole in those laws--they fill the same
nice that station wagons used to fill.

None of the current generation of cars are "affordable" by 60s
standards--you pay more for a basic econobox than you paid for a Rolls
or Ferrari in 1960 and inflation is not the entire reason. As for
reliability, that is mainly the result of the emission laws that
require that cars pass emissions at 50,000 miles, but also is the
result of the nearly universal adoption of electronic fuel injection
to meet emission standards and the improvement of seals and lubricants
that occurred in industries only indirectly related to automobile
manufacture. Neither of these is the result of competition from
Japan.

And the popularity of SUVs, which fill the luxury sedan/station wagon
niche but exploit a loophole in the fuel economy laws, suggests that
the American public wants large cars when they can afford to own and
run them.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:28:41 -0700, Mark & Juanita
wrote:

Maybe because we know there are answers other than driving glorified
bubbles powered by lawn mower engines?

Maybe Americans need to grow up and deal with the reality that oil
reserves are rapidly running out.

We have ample opportunity, shale
oil in the west, Anwar to the north, oil off of Florida before the Chinese
and Cubans suck it dry, etc. The reserves are there, but the will to
overcome the resistance to developing our own sources seems to be weak.

It will be a stopgap measure at best, the fact is that China and India
are sucking up tons of gasoline now that they're becoming massively
industrialized and it will only get worse from here. Sure, you might
be able to suck another 10-20 years of oil out of Alaska but in the
end, we're going to be back in the same place with too much demand and
not enough oil to go around.

Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 09:54:25 -0600, dpb wrote:

Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 19:38:51 -0600, dpb wrote:

Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:35:15 -0600, dpb wrote:

Again, I wish many things were the way they used to be, including
casting foundry in McMinnville, but it's a different world...

Why on earth......
We've discussed this before as well, Frank. Delta isn't only place
where changes have occurred, not all to our liking...


I mean why the McMinnville foundry?

Then PM would still be manufacturing in TN, too...I figured you'd pick
up on that in a heartbeat...

I'm sure I've told the story of picking up stuff there directly years
ago and getting the cook's tour...

--

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 10:34:44 -0800, mac davis
wrote:

Folks in Mexico don't have the job security that the US workers have... Screw up
a truck and they're back on the street..

Or jumping the border.

On Nov 26, 2:39 pm, "J. Clarke" wrote:
[snipped for brevity]

And the popularity of SUVs, which fill the luxury sedan/station wagon
niche but exploit a loophole in the fuel economy laws, suggests that
the American public wants large cars when they can afford to own and
run them.

I suppose it is a rich man's option to drive 3 ton behemoth, spewing
insane amounts of sickening fumes into the faces of people who cannot
do anything about that?
Wouldn't it be nice that if those, with the brainpower to become rich,
would also apply their advanced thinking toward accepting the fact
that their behaviour is irresponsible, nay, short-lived? Don't they
give a **** what they leave behind for their grandkids?

"Smell my exhaust, you serfs!" "I am on this planet all by myself,
eating and drinking and driving what ""I"" want." " I have NO
responsibility to my fellow planet dwellers." "It is all for ME, ME,
ME *diabolical laughter*."
"And I will kill those who have more fuel for me to burn!!!!"

Nice.

On Nov 26, 3:18 pm, Robatoy wrote:
On Nov 26, 2:39 pm, "J. Clarke" wrote:
[snipped for brevity]



And the popularity of SUVs, which fill the luxury sedan/station wagon
niche but exploit a loophole in the fuel economy laws, suggests that
the American public wants large cars when they can afford to own and
run them.

I suppose it is a rich man's option to drive 3 ton behemoth, spewing
insane amounts of sickening fumes into the faces of people who cannot
do anything about that?
Wouldn't it be nice that if those, with the brainpower to become rich,
would also apply their advanced thinking toward accepting the fact
that their behaviour is irresponsible, nay, short-lived? Don't they
give a **** what they leave behind for their grandkids?

"Smell my exhaust, you serfs!" "I am on this planet all by myself,
eating and drinking and driving what ""I"" want." " I have NO
responsibility to my fellow planet dwellers." "It is all for ME, ME,
ME *diabolical laughter*."
"And I will kill those who have more fuel for me to burn!!!!"

Nice.

Ooops...what I was trying to say, was that just because one can afford
it, doesn't mean one has to be stupid about it.

Frank Boettcher wrote:

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 17:31:47 -0700, Mark & Juanita
wrote:

.... snip

Did the off-shoring decision occur before or after Pentair sold Delta?


Before. Pentair only starting looking for a buyer after the strategy
went very, very bad. The Tool Group, the most profitable part of
Pentairs business throughout my tenure, went south in a hurry. Stock
dropped to about half its pre consolidation/globalization level losing
about a billion bucks of shareholder value.

Public record. Annual reports. Glossy words, but you can't hide the
numbers. Also Fortune wrote an article about the disaster, 2000 or
2001. It was very accurate except for the parts that indicated the
"current Corporate management had a handle on the fix".


Thanks. I bought some Pentair stock in 2004 when things seemed to be
going up and shortly before the announcement to sell off Delta. Just got
out a few months ago; I didn't lose money, but could have done better if I
had bailed in 2005.


--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Brian Henderson wrote:

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:28:41 -0700, Mark & Juanita
wrote:

Maybe because we know there are answers other than driving glorified
bubbles powered by lawn mower engines?

Maybe Americans need to grow up and deal with the reality that oil
reserves are rapidly running out.

Only if the currently active tapped reserves are taken into account.


We have ample opportunity, shale
oil in the west, Anwar to the north, oil off of Florida before the Chinese
and Cubans suck it dry, etc. The reserves are there, but the will to
overcome the resistance to developing our own sources seems to be weak.

It will be a stopgap measure at best, the fact is that China and India
are sucking up tons of gasoline now that they're becoming massively
industrialized and it will only get worse from here. Sure, you might
be able to suck another 10-20 years of oil out of Alaska but in the
end, we're going to be back in the same place with too much demand and
not enough oil to go around.

You really don't have a grasp on the amount of coal and shale reserves in
the US, do you?

While deliberate waste is never justified, the idea that having us all
drive Prius's will save the world is hardly a rational approach.

--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 17:31:47 -0700, Mark & Juanita
wrote:

Frank Boettcher wrote:
....

Did the off-shoring decision occur before or after Pentair sold Delta?


Before. ...

Who currently owns the Tupelo and other manufacturing facilities and
what is being done with them, if anything, Frank?

(Would it be possible to line up a set of investors and try to make an
"All-American" brand?)

Where is Saw-Stop manufacturing, do you know? I always presumed they
were using offshore contracted production, but don't actually know...

--

mac davis wrote:

On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 00:34:47 GMT, Ralph wrote:


Have to agree with you Mac. Remember when "J.A.Pan & Co." meant junk or
popcorn toys (must be dating myself there). Their first cars into North
America were a joke, but they did their homework and now they are
forerunners in industry. It seems that China may be following the same
route.

That brought back a dim memory... when I was a kid, I got some kind of
little toy out of a gumball machine and it broke.. I asked my dad if he
could fix it and he said "nope, it's potmetal.. must be made in Japan"..
Not sure if there really is something called pot metal, but I've always
remembered him saying that..

Remember the same thing. I think "pot metal" was reference to a very low
grade of metal casting that would neither weld, braze, nor glue well after
it was made.


--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Robatoy wrote:
On Nov 26, 2:39 pm, "J. Clarke" wrote:
[snipped for brevity]

And the popularity of SUVs, which fill the luxury sedan/station
wagon
niche but exploit a loophole in the fuel economy laws, suggests
that
the American public wants large cars when they can afford to own
and
run them.

I suppose it is a rich man's option to drive 3 ton behemoth, spewing
insane amounts of sickening fumes into the faces of people who
cannot
do anything about that?

One doesn't have to be rich to afford an SUV, and SUVs have to meet
the same emission laws as any other vehicle, so if they are "spewing
insane amounts of sickening fumes" then so are little econoboxes. In
California they are now putting emission controls on motorcycles and I
understand that lawn mowers are going to be next--they've reached the
point of diminishing returns with cars, SUVs, and trucks.

Wouldn't it be nice that if those, with the brainpower to become
rich,
would also apply their advanced thinking toward accepting the fact
that their behaviour is irresponsible, nay, short-lived? Don't they
give a **** what they leave behind for their grandkids?

How is "their behavior" "irresponsible, nay, short-lived"? If you are
talking about consuming fuel, if everybody drove a mo-ped it would
still run out, just might take a little longer. There is no level of
consumption that will result in the oil lasting forever. Might be the
great grandkids instead of the grandkids who have to transition to a
different fuel, but it's still going to happen.

"Smell my exhaust, you serfs!" "I am on this planet all by myself,
eating and drinking and driving what ""I"" want." " I have NO
responsibility to my fellow planet dwellers." "It is all for ME, ME,
ME *diabolical laughter*."
"And I will kill those who have more fuel for me to burn!!!!"

Nice.

OK, now you've officially lost it.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Robatoy wrote:
On Nov 26, 3:18 pm, Robatoy wrote:
On Nov 26, 2:39 pm, "J. Clarke" wrote:
[snipped for brevity]



And the popularity of SUVs, which fill the luxury sedan/station
wagon niche but exploit a loophole in the fuel economy laws,
suggests that the American public wants large cars when they can
afford to own and run them.

I suppose it is a rich man's option to drive 3 ton behemoth,
spewing
insane amounts of sickening fumes into the faces of people who
cannot
do anything about that?
Wouldn't it be nice that if those, with the brainpower to become
rich, would also apply their advanced thinking toward accepting the
fact that their behaviour is irresponsible, nay, short-lived? Don't
they give a **** what they leave behind for their grandkids?

"Smell my exhaust, you serfs!" "I am on this planet all by myself,
eating and drinking and driving what ""I"" want." " I have NO
responsibility to my fellow planet dwellers." "It is all for ME,
ME,
ME *diabolical laughter*."
"And I will kill those who have more fuel for me to burn!!!!"

Nice.

Ooops...what I was trying to say, was that just because one can
afford
it, doesn't mean one has to be stupid about it.

So get the laws changed so that station wagons and old-style luxury
cars aren't unduly penalized and you'll see SUVs mostly go away.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Mark & Juanita wrote:


Remember the same thing. I think "pot metal" was reference to a very low
grade of metal casting that would neither weld, braze, nor glue well after
it was made.



Also known as white metal. See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pot_metal

--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA

"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
...
Brian Henderson wrote:

You really don't have a grasp on the amount of coal and shale reserves in
the US, do you?



From what I understand, Colorado has 10 times the shale oil that all of the
middle east has produced. We have it but we don't want to risk loosing
"the cure for smoking" while going after it and it would certainly cause
more global warming.

On Nov 26, 3:54 pm, "J. Clarke" wrote:


How is "their behavior" "irresponsible, nay, short-lived"? If you are
talking about consuming fuel, if everybody drove a mo-ped it would
still run out, just might take a little longer. There is no level of
consumption that will result in the oil lasting forever. Might be the
great grandkids instead of the grandkids who have to transition to a
different fuel, but it's still going to happen.

Might as well blow it all out of our asses and get it over with, huh?
I tend to support the viewpoint that if we conserve, we might buy
ourselves enough time to find alternate solutions. If you were in a
life-boat, you wouldn't eat everything on board in one day, would you?
No you wouldn't. You would conserve in the hope that there would be a
rescue.
This ball of dirt on which we float about in space, will not get
rescued by an outside source. Our resources are finite.
Conserving what we have is nothing but smart.


"Smell my exhaust, you serfs!" "I am on this planet all by myself,
eating and drinking and driving what ""I"" want." " I have NO
responsibility to my fellow planet dwellers." "It is all for ME, ME,
ME *diabolical laughter*."
"And I will kill those who have more fuel for me to burn!!!!"

Nice.

OK, now you've officially lost it.

LOL... you think? Naaa, my sense of the absurd has its own way to
illustrate things.
You probably wouldn't understand why I broke out laughing when I saw a
Lincoln pick-up truck.

r

Robatoy wrote:
On Nov 26, 3:54 pm, "J. Clarke" wrote:

How is "their behavior" "irresponsible, nay, short-lived"? If you are
talking about consuming fuel, if everybody drove a mo-ped it would
still run out, just might take a little longer. There is no level of
consumption that will result in the oil lasting forever. Might be the
great grandkids instead of the grandkids who have to transition to a
different fuel, but it's still going to happen.

Might as well blow it all out of our asses and get it over with, huh?
I tend to support the viewpoint that if we conserve, we might buy
ourselves enough time to find alternate solutions. ...

Tell that to the Chinese and the other developing nations -- whatever
changes in our actions can realistically make will so far in the noise
of their changes as to make no discernible difference.

Options are there, they're just not yet economically viable. When they
become so, then they'll take off.

--

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 14:43:16 -0600, dpb wrote:

Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 17:31:47 -0700, Mark & Juanita
wrote:

Frank Boettcher wrote:
...

Did the off-shoring decision occur before or after Pentair sold Delta?


Before. ...

Who currently owns the Tupelo and other manufacturing facilities and
what is being done with them, if anything, Frank?

The Tupelo facility is just an empty building, currently owned by
Journal Enterprises a charitable arm of the local newspaper, who have
it available for lease. All the machinery was auctioned off and the
tooling scrapped out for the most part.

The rest of the tool group facilities were transferred to B & D when
the business was sold. I've not fully kept up with that, but I
believe the Oldham facility was closed and Biesemeyer in Mesa, AZ may
be in the process. Jackson, TN, is still open but with an ever
shifting charter.

(Would it be possible to line up a set of investors and try to make an
"All-American" brand?)

Virtually impossible at this point, in my opinion. We continued to be
successful before the consolidation/globalization because, among other
factors, the invested capital was so low. The facility, machinery,
and tooling were, for the most part fully depreciated but well
maintained and continuously upgraded. Capital was spent only as
necessary to maintain quality, improve efficiency and introduce new
products. Which is how it should be.

It takes a tremendous range of equipment and tooling to be a full
product line woodworking machinery manufacturer and the invested
capital to start from nothing would be very large, and put the firm in
an immediate position of being not competetive. While the market for
the higher quality product was slowly but steadily growing when we
were in operation, I believe the premium for product from a start up
operation in the U. S. would be too high to be attractive.

Where is Saw-Stop manufacturing, do you know? I always presumed they
were using offshore contracted production, but don't actually know...

Don't know, have not kept up with Saw Stop except for threads here
relating to whether the technology should be mandated which I am not
in favor of.

Frank

On Nov 26, 4:34 pm, dpb wrote:
Robatoy wrote:
On Nov 26, 3:54 pm, "J. Clarke" wrote:

How is "their behavior" "irresponsible, nay, short-lived"? If you are
talking about consuming fuel, if everybody drove a mo-ped it would
still run out, just might take a little longer. There is no level of
consumption that will result in the oil lasting forever. Might be the
great grandkids instead of the grandkids who have to transition to a
different fuel, but it's still going to happen.

Might as well blow it all out of our asses and get it over with, huh?
I tend to support the viewpoint that if we conserve, we might buy
ourselves enough time to find alternate solutions. ...

Tell that to the Chinese and the other developing nations -- whatever
changes in our actions can realistically make will so far in the noise
of their changes as to make no discernible difference.

Options are there, they're just not yet economically viable. When they
become so, then they'll take off.

--

It is the fact that we over-consume that makes us vulnerable to making
mistakes.

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 13:51:38 -0600, dpb wrote:

Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 09:54:25 -0600, dpb wrote:

Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 19:38:51 -0600, dpb wrote:

Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:35:15 -0600, dpb wrote:

Again, I wish many things were the way they used to be, including
casting foundry in McMinnville, but it's a different world...

Why on earth......
We've discussed this before as well, Frank. Delta isn't only place
where changes have occurred, not all to our liking...


I mean why the McMinnville foundry?

Then PM would still be manufacturing in TN, too...I figured you'd pick
up on that in a heartbeat...


What you're looking for in gray iron castings is consistent adherence
to specification for chemistry and mechanical properties. Castings
vary by size and complexity of geometry and the best castings come
from foundries that have specialized processes that perfectly fit the
size and complexity. They are usually very large, high tonnage
foundries and have multiple processes (Disamatic, match plate, cope
and drag, etc.) or they specalize in just one process and one size
range.

Small, product dedicated, foundries that try to do a full size range
without the highly automated equipment for the smaller castings, or
the overall pouring tonnage, find it difficult to compete. I think
the McMinnville foundry fell into that category, although, I believe
the foundry actually outlived the PM manufacturing facility. Delta
had foundries in the past, closed them in favor of sourcing from the
large specialists, improving quality and lowering cost.

I think they still assemble in the Nashville area, but source their
parts from wherever. The contract facility that machines their
tables, also makes the tables for the Unisaw. At least that's how it
was a year or two ago.

The closing of their McMinville operations was sad. I had always
considered them a worthy competitor with great products, not an import
copycat company.

Frank


I'm sure I've told the story of picking up stuff there directly years
ago and getting the cook's tour...

Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 19:38:51 -0600, dpb wrote:

Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:35:15 -0600, dpb wrote:


Again, I wish many things were the way they used to be, including
casting foundry in McMinnville, but it's a different world...


Why on earth......

Frank

You probably know some/all of these guys:

http://www.steelcitytoolworks.com/

I know their manufacturing is done in Chiwan, but does anyone have any
comments on their quality?

On Nov 26, 5:41 pm, Doug Winterburn wrote:
Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 19:38:51 -0600, dpb wrote:

Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:35:15 -0600, dpb wrote:

Again, I wish many things were the way they used to be, including
casting foundry in McMinnville, but it's a different world...

Why on earth......

Frank

You probably know some/all of these guys:

http://www.steelcitytoolworks.com/

I know their manufacturing is done in Chiwan, but does anyone have any
comments on their quality?

I think there are some Delta/Guelph Canada people in there too.

Robatoy wrote:
On Nov 26, 3:54 pm, "J. Clarke" wrote:


How is "their behavior" "irresponsible, nay, short-lived"? If you
are talking about consuming fuel, if everybody drove a mo-ped it
would still run out, just might take a little longer. There is no
level of consumption that will result in the oil lasting forever.
Might be the great grandkids instead of the grandkids who have to
transition to a different fuel, but it's still going to happen.

Might as well blow it all out of our asses and get it over with,
huh?
I tend to support the viewpoint that if we conserve, we might buy
ourselves enough time to find alternate solutions.

We "found alternate solutions" more than 50 years ago. Right now they
aren't economically attractive and aren't going to be economically
attractive until the price of what we are using now rises to a point
that is higher than the cost not only of the alternatives but of
making the transition including building the necessary infrastructure.

If you were in a
life-boat, you wouldn't eat everything on board in one day, would
you?

In a life boat one hopes to be rescued or to reach land. We are not
in a life boat, nobody is going to rescue us, there is no land to be
reached.

No you wouldn't. You would conserve in the hope that there would be
a
rescue.

By who, space aliens?

This ball of dirt on which we float about in space, will not get
rescued by an outside source. Our resources are finite.
Conserving what we have is nothing but smart.

So what level of conservation to you want to require? Do you want to
just ban SUVs? Then people who want big vehicles will start driving 2
ton trucks instead. Or city buses. Or something else that gives them
the room that they want. Or do you think that I'm consuming
excessively riding my 650 and want me to ride a Vespa instead?

"Smell my exhaust, you serfs!" "I am on this planet all by myself,
eating and drinking and driving what ""I"" want." " I have NO
responsibility to my fellow planet dwellers." "It is all for ME,
ME,
ME *diabolical laughter*."
"And I will kill those who have more fuel for me to burn!!!!"

Nice.

OK, now you've officially lost it.

LOL... you think? Naaa, my sense of the absurd has its own way to
illustrate things.
You probably wouldn't understand why I broke out laughing when I saw
a
Lincoln pick-up truck.

Nahh, I'd have thought it was funny too. By the way, do you have a
problem with pick up trucks or is it just SUVs?


--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)