story and photos by John Hagerman
Again, we walked back to our archives for this week's featured article. This one comes from way back in the February issue of 1989. We were still known as Auto-X magazine then.
story and photos by John Hagerman
Again, we walked back to our archives for this week's featured article. This one comes from way back in the February issue of 1989. We were still known as Auto-X magazine then.
Do you guys realize how canoe like this looks from the outside before coming in here?
I used this to align a nephews quarter midget. He won his next race.
So thats how it works...
Am I missing something? How are you guys able to read these articles? They are all grainy and impossible to read for me.
It's easy to read. I just went down to the rec room and got out my hard copy of the February,1989 issue. 
I used to use strings until I figured out two 10 foot lengths of angle iron are easier to use. Not only do they not move when you measure from them to the rims, but the magnetic camber gauge sticks to them.
In reply to wvumtnbkr:
Click the link that says, "Read the rest of the story" and then click on the pictures, right click to "View Picture" so you can see it full size.
They may have to up the GRM document scanner budget.
Of course, the price has since risen to 20 cents.
What kinda flipping car is that in the article?
You don't recognize a Lotus Europa!
Very distinctive (and tiny) car, if you have seen one before of course.
So, if we have readers who don't recognize some vehicles from 30 years ago, and more, is there a "need" for the magazine to do a few articles on some of the better cars from the past? Or would that be the role filled by Classic Motorsports?
I always thought they were tiny ElCaminos but the beds are awfully shallow.
Wally wrote: I always thought they were tiny ElCaminos but the beds are awfully shallow.
And the cab is pretty small too. But boy are they fun!!
tr8todd wrote: I used to use strings until I figured out two 10 foot lengths of angle iron are easier to use. Not only do they not move when you measure from them to the rims, but the magnetic camber gauge sticks to them.
very smart. I'm going to steel that idea (couldn't resist).
But realistically, does everyone use the car centerline method like described here or do you all just shortcut and make the measurement from the center of the hub to the string the same on both side on each axle?
I guess if taking the shortcut you miss thrust angle issues, but it seems a lot faster to me.
The stock car was easy. With the straight frame rail I would make sure the string was parallel to the rail, adjust the rear end to be even with the rails then align the front wheels to where we wanted them.
wvumtnbkr wrote: Am I missing something? How are you guys able to read these articles? They are all grainy and impossible to read for me.
Sorry, didn't mean to make anything impossible to read. I always just hit command+ and it will zoom in and not be grainy. Next time I'll be sure to include that in the introduction. Sorry again.
Other than re-typing the complete articles, that's the only way to get it online (we don't have digital copies from back then). And I thought some readers would enjoy some of the older content. If everyone hates it, I can just start putting up more recent items.
Ed Higginbotham wrote:wvumtnbkr wrote: Am I missing something? How are you guys able to read these articles? They are all grainy and impossible to read for me.Sorry, didn't mean to make anything impossible to read. I always just hit command+ and it will zoom in and not be grainy. Next time I'll be sure to include that in the introduction. Sorry again. Other than re-typing the complete articles, that's the only way to get it online (we don't have digital copies from back then). And I thought some readers would enjoy some of the older content. If everyone hates it, I can just start putting up more recent items.
Sorry if my tone came out in a negative way. I am SUPER excited to read these articles. I just didn't know how on my computer.
So the command + thing. Huh. Lemme check that out.
Huh, learned something new today.
I tried using snip it tools and resizing it and everything else I could think of. Nothing was letting me see it.
Thanks for the tip!
DeadSkunk wrote: So, if we have readers who don't recognize some vehicles from 30 years ago, and more, is there a "need" for the magazine to do a few articles on some of the better cars from the past?
Yes, there is always that need, regardless of the name on the enthusiast publication.
Command + is the Mac zoom. If you're on a PC, hold down the control key and roll the scroll wheel forward.
You can also right click and do "View Image". They will appear in their full-resolution glory.
Wally wrote: The stock car was easy. With the straight frame rail I would make sure the string was parallel to the rail, adjust the rear end to be even with the rails then align the front wheels to where we wanted them.
Ed, you can also use software that has OCR (optical character recognition) to extract readable text. Adobe PDF (not reader) has this built in. There are other open-source or free software packages that do this. There are others as well:http://computers.tutsplus.com/tutorials/5-ways-to-ocr-documents-on-your-mac--mac-49683
jrubins wrote:Wally wrote: The stock car was easy. With the straight frame rail I would make sure the string was parallel to the rail, adjust the rear end to be even with the rails then align the front wheels to where we wanted them.Ed, you can also use software that has OCR (optical character recognition) to extract readable text. Adobe PDF (not reader) has this built in. There are other open-source or free software packages that do this. There are others as well:http://computers.tutsplus.com/tutorials/5-ways-to-ocr-documents-on-your-mac--mac-49683
I made a google docs version for you.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dgQuK00NrOmylM9SxtPPYGkD0cbWffYwItfZvLES3x0/pub
Share and enjoy, JR
You'll need to log in to post.
