Subject	Eh, I reluctantly conceed. Retarded Brits, figures. (n/m)
Posted by	BigTDogg (MA) on January 12, 2004 at 11:47 AM
	This message has been viewed 23 times.
In Reply To	No, they actually aren't interchangable for references sake. posted by SooperZ95 on January 12, 2004 at 10:50 AM
Message
Follow Ups	ft/lbs - skaterltj69 09:04:14 01/12/04 Torque is measured in ft*lbs, not ft/lbs (n/m) - therinL 09:12:34 01/12/04 If you want to get real technical it is in "lb-ft" - SooperZ95 09:47:17 01/12/04 Ft*lb, and Lb*ft are interchangeable, because they are - BigTDogg (MA) 10:45:10 01/12/04 No, they actually aren't interchangable for references sake. - SooperZ95 10:50:31 01/12/04 brilliant! (n/m) - Z_PREPared 11:30:03 01/12/04 Eh, I reluctantly conceed. Retarded Brits, figures. (n/m) - BigTDogg (MA) 11:47:11 01/12/04 funny too because the FSM uses the incorrect ft-lb unit (n/m) - Z_PREPared 01:47:20 01/13/04 Communicative axiom? x*y = y*x? duh? - therinL 10:53:20 01/12/04 There's a bit more to it than that: - SooperZ95 11:08:05 01/12/04 Understood. Thanks =) (n/m) - therinL 15:30:17 01/12/04 it's in your factory service manual... - ni[X]it 09:22:15 01/12/04 I *think* it was 12-15, but I'm not positive. Like Nixit - whitepearlz 09:48:16 01/12/04
Post a Followup	You cannot reply to this message because you are not logged in.