disk brake debate - summary II

On 29 Oct 2005 15:39:52 -0700, "
wrote:

Got logic? Obviously not.

The test can be rigged in a way to make it fail. The reverse is not
true.

Uhh, what? Your whole point seems to be that you can rig the test to make
it not fail. That's what you're betting on.

Neither of these facts are in dispute by anyone reasonable, including
yourself. The question is whether the one rig is somehow more acceptable
than the other.

Jasper

Jasper Janssen wrote:
On 29 Oct 2005 15:39:52 -0700, "
wrote:

Got logic? Obviously not.

The test can be rigged in a way to make it fail. The reverse is not
true.

Uhh, what? Your whole point seems to be that you can rig the test to make
it not fail. That's what you're betting on.

Neither of these facts are in dispute by anyone reasonable, including
yourself. The question is whether the one rig is somehow more acceptable
than the other.

I think "gmschemist" is hoping we'll forget that his QR nuts are buried
in an unusual countersink, as well! IOW, the system he's "testing" has
far more resistance to ejection than most.

- Frank Krygowski