By Erik Snarr (Eriks) on Thursday, November 08, 2001 - 10:44 pm: Edit

From what I've seen and heard the cones give you better articulation but are noisy and the retainer brackets are silent but don't allow as much droop. Anybody seen both of these next to each other in action and have opinions? Also does it really matter when the axel is that low without the weight of the vehicle to aid in traction or is the weight of the axel enough to give good traction?

By Axel Haakonsen (Axel) on Thursday, November 08, 2001 - 10:56 pm: Edit

There was a lengthy thread on this a while back. Do a search on Krispy Kreme Challenge and KKC.

By Eric N (Grnrvr) on Friday, November 09, 2001 - 08:30 am: Edit

What I did was buy both.. So that I could make up my own mind on the differences of the two and see which ones I like better and for what.. I may use the retainers for the street and the cones for wheeling.. But, having both allows me to put them on whenever I want and make up my own mind. I think that they both have advantages.. Plus, you can use the lower E.E. retainer with the cones on the top.. This way you have a stronger lower retainer then the stock one.

By Rob Davison (Pokerob) on Friday, November 09, 2001 - 10:22 am: Edit

Damn eric, what the hell do you need retainers for on the street?? you must be a maniac at the mall..

that sounds like a royal pain to switch that stuff out everytime you want to go wheeling. just get a locker and Some HD axels and that 1.5" of drop that everyone is worring about doesnt matter anymore.

rd

By Eric N (Grnrvr) on Friday, November 09, 2001 - 11:14 am: Edit

Hehe.. Watch where you park the honda civic around me. Really though around here with all the pot holes the cones make noise. The retainers give a more solid feel over bumps and make less noise since the spring doesn't move around as much. Since I've already changed them out three times I have gotten pretty good at it. Plus, I was shown a trick that makes it pretty easy. It only takes me about an hour to change them out with very little effort. I'm getting lockers when I re-gear which will be after I get a bumper and winch.

By Rob Davison (Pokerob) on Friday, November 09, 2001 - 12:08 pm: Edit

heheh.. it's your truck, that hour is a long ass time for me. if your springs are unseatijng when you hit a pothole then there is something wrong. cones should make a noise until about a 6" difference between wheel hieght.

but you will learn all of this since you have both setups.. i know i would not have made my own conclusions if i had not owned both styles.

also retainers creak a little on bumpy brick roads

rd

By Eric N (Grnrvr) on Friday, November 09, 2001 - 12:23 pm: Edit

Well there isn't anything wrong that I know of.. What I think is happening is that I don't have that rubber/plastic disc on top of the springs anymore. So when I hit a bump with no weight in the rear and RTE HD springs it bounces up a little causing the springs to make a little noise with the cones. Please note hitting pot hole is at 50mph. The cones weren't making any noise reseating the springs.. That was quiet. Just every day driving that they are a little chatty and I don't think that it is the cones either. I think that it is just the springs against the upper perch. I also pulled the rear sway bar off which I haven't even noticed a difference from when it was on. Even on the highway.. Going to pull the front off as well and see how that rides. Will do that when I get the 3 inch springs next weekend I hope.

By Tony on Saturday, November 10, 2001 - 11:16 am: Edit

I have the RTE cones and had to do some grinding on the edges to keep them silent. The cones use to like playing music while driving down the road, squeak, squeak.... now they are truly silent.

I recommend removing the cones and where the spring has made marks along the side from rubbing, grind down or bend in that portion of the cone.

By clarance on Saturday, November 10, 2001 - 05:20 pm: Edit

Anyone try the $G Drop Kit?

By RVR OVR (Tom) on Saturday, November 10, 2001 - 06:05 pm: Edit

What are you guys doing? My cones are totally silent on the street. A bit of noise on the trail, but silent on the street. I left the rubber on, maybe that's why mine are fine.

I've wacked potholes at 50 mph as well. I don't get it.

Tom

By Eric N (Grnrvr) on Saturday, November 10, 2001 - 06:41 pm: Edit

Yup, that rubber on the top is what is keeping the springs quiet. It's not the cone it is the spring rubbing on the upper perch that is making the extra noise.. Have you looked at that plastic spacer in a while? I'm wondering how bad (if at all) it is chewed up? I still have mine lying around here some where.. It doesn't fit quite right on the springs though.

By RVR OVR (Tom) on Saturday, November 10, 2001 - 11:31 pm: Edit

Just looked at mine when I did the KKC. They were still fine. My rear end is very quiet.

Tom

By Eric N (Grnrvr) on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 10:17 am: Edit

Really.. I'll have to try that again then as the first time I put them on it looked like the spring was going to destroy that inner lip while sliding up and down on the cone and reseating.

By RVR OVR (Tom) on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 10:28 am: Edit

maybe my cones are in a slightly different position?

tom

By Eric N (Grnrvr) on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 10:31 am: Edit

Spring inner diameter may be different. It just doesn't fit quite right on top of the spring. I'll play with it some more once I get the new springs..

By Kyle on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 10:31 am: Edit

How the cone is on and how the spring is turned is important. Ofcourse , the best position for the cone is......... well , you already know that....

Kyle

By RVR OVR (Tom) on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 11:39 am: Edit

Out the window???!!! LOL

Tom

By Diesel on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 11:55 am: Edit

I decided not to use the rubber rings on the top of the RTE 3" rear springs. The rear end is silent with the cones. I notice more noise from the front than anything else(my tires rub on that ARB piece of junk). Just my experience.

Diesel

By Kyle on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 11:58 am: Edit

And do you notice that you are running away from the unconed trucks on the trails you run Diesel ?

Kyle

By Diesel on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 01:16 pm: Edit

Actually, I haven't run with many other discoverys, and those that I have wheeled with have been stock. So, to answer your question, I can't say whether my vehicle performs better than unconed (modified) vehicles. But I do know it is better than stock. Also, if I am "running away" from the other trucks on the trail, I am probably going too fast. Speed kills trucks. I treat the stupid pedal with respect, and I get where I need to go.

Diesel

By Kyle on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 01:26 pm: Edit

Thats not what I mean by "Running away" from them. You are down in VA right ? We will have to find us a trail to get a few coned and unconed trucks on and see what is what.. The last KKC didnt really do a damned thing...


Kyle

By Mike D1 on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 02:41 pm: Edit

Erik Snarr (Eriks),

Go to this link (below), enter "disco" in password and go to image #56. This is my truck with EE retainers, RT 3" springs and quick release sway bars front and rear and bilstein 12" travel 5100 shocks ($65 each). I think the EE retainers allow awesome flex out of RT springs. See for yourself


http://www.imagestation.com/album/?id=4292279691&cod

By Eric N (Grnrvr) on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 04:00 pm: Edit

Ok, so how do you keep your drive shaft off of the sway bar in the front? I have seen what Tom used but, how did you do it?

By RVR OVR (Tom) on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 04:09 pm: Edit

Mike,

Yes, that is good. Cones give you more in the back if you want it, that's all.

Set your resolution large:

http://tompearson.net/flex/pics.htm

Wether or not that is useful is the big ole debate.

Tom

By Erik Snarr (Eriks) on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 05:32 pm: Edit

Ok the debate can go on forever but the second part of my original question was "does it really matter to have that much axel drop without the weight of the vehicle to aid in traction or is the weight of the axel enough?"

By Kyle on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 05:47 pm: Edit

Thats the debate in a nutshell.. The ones that have it say it does. The ones that dont say it dont. I have both here. One disco that is set up for flex and does it better then any others you see here every day. And one that is just a plain brown bag with a lift and lockers. The slinky truck here does one thing better and that is stuffage. The bumpstops have been removed and the axle ends up about 1/2 from the frame under full compression. Thats about where the pros end. The cons get argued here almost daily and you will have to pick though the posts to find your own answer.In short my opinion is NO , once you have some lockers in the truck ,searching for any down travel beyond what you lost with your lift is a bad investment. There are better areas to spend it in... You have the lockers yet?

Kyle

By Diesel on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 05:48 pm: Edit

Kyle,

Let me clarify. If I was "running away" from a non-coned truck on the trail, it is probably because I am going too fast, not necessarily because my coned rig is out performing the non-coned rig.

And yes, we should find a trail and let the coned and nonconed trucks show their stuff. Do you have something in mind?

Diesel

By Kyle on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 05:52 pm: Edit

I will see what I can come up with. You locked yet? It should be a fair comparison, and if you arent locked it wont be. Both trucks here are locked. Niether have cones... How far down in VA are you ?

Kyle

By Eric N (Grnrvr) on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 05:56 pm: Edit

I think he's in Richmond or Ronoake (sp).

By Diesel on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 09:17 pm: Edit

Kyle,

I am not locked yet. I will be in Februrary, sooner if GBR gets the R&Ps before that. I realize that it won't be a fair comparison, but there is no harm in a fun run to set a baseline for myself against you fellows. I live in Roanoke, and don't mind driving.

Diesel

By Kyle on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 09:25 pm: Edit

Agreed . You know of anything half way? I am up near DC ? We need some long trails with varying terrain...


Kyle

By Diesel on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 10:34 pm: Edit

The only thing I can think of is the George Washington National Forest. I don't know what the trails are like. You have been there I believe, what do you think? I will give it more thought as well.

Diesel

By Kyle on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 10:37 pm: Edit

Yeah , there is an area down there but nothing to get excited over.. We can do that if you like...

Kyle

By Mike D1 on Sunday, November 11, 2001 - 08:37 pm: Edit

Tom,

I don't see any more flex in that truck than in my EE retained springs. Maybe there is an inch or two. I must say I don't think that matters much. On a steep side hill with dips and rocks I think retained seems like a good idea. By the way, thanks for your ideas in months past.

Kyle,

I would like to propose another plus to flex when locked. I am locked F&R and have been for some time. When I am on rocks or very flexy ground and locked, I feel that the big flex keeps both of my tires (most often rear) on the ground and lowers the chance of breaking an axle or some other part. If you have less flex, and you're locked on rocks the chance of putting all the torque on one wheel dramatically increases pressure on fewer parts, a bad thing. This is my theory and I think it follows logic, but I haven't seen it posted on D Web.

By Kyle on Monday, November 12, 2001 - 05:52 am: Edit

That one tire doesnt have enoug wieght on it to make that valid. If that was the case the truck would be just as capable without the locker....

Kyle

By RVR OVR (Tom) on Monday, November 12, 2001 - 12:25 pm: Edit

Mike - It's actually about 3-4 inches according to my tape measure.

Kyle,

It can't help even a little? Can even 5 lbs of downward force can give that little grab to take some stress off? Or, do axles tend to not have a fine line of thier break point, but more of a range?

Not arguing one way or the other, asking a question here.

Tom

By Mike D1 on Monday, November 12, 2001 - 12:45 pm: Edit

Kyle,

I think the flex helps. If the tire is just touching the ground, then it won't help much and you are right. The flex also allows you to use a locker less, a good thing.

Tom,

That photo of my truck is 235/85s with 4.5" bump stops. I had 245/75s with stock bump stops and the tires were rubbing bad in the wheel well and dropping way below the rock slider. How could you have 3" more drop?? You would be tearing the lugs off in the wheel well. I would think.

By RVR OVR (Tom) on Monday, November 12, 2001 - 12:53 pm: Edit

What kind of rims do you have? I have the GBR's which stick out 1 1/2" wider than stock. I also have stock bump stops. The wider rims allow me to stuff w/out any internal rubbing w/my swampers that are taller than 235/85's.

Tom

By Kyle on Monday, November 12, 2001 - 01:00 pm: Edit

Yeah , Tom , I think you are right. It will help some with a little drop. My argument isnt against drop completely. I completely agree that you should have what you had in the first place if you can get it. Anything past that and the benefits are just getting less and less as the axle drops further... I also think I remember John saying he has a 1/4 twist in an HD axle. So maybe that answers the question.


Kyle

By Kyle on Monday, November 12, 2001 - 01:03 pm: Edit

The rims will help definately. Both trucks here will rub the upper spring perches under a hard cross axle...


Kyle

By Moe on Monday, November 12, 2001 - 01:31 pm: Edit

Erik, you will not likely find a solution to the cones vs retainers debate.

When I ran stock diffs and recovered some of the drop I had lost from my heavier springs, I noticed quite a bit of difference in performance. I extended my rear shocks, and retained the springs (EE retainers) and returned to a familiar area for testing. Running the same trails, the flexier rear end did help a lot. But there must be a clear point when any additional flex provides decreasing returns--and that point probably depends on what you are running underneath and what you are doing with the vehicle

By John Lee on Monday, November 12, 2001 - 01:44 pm: Edit

Moe,

Was this increase with open diffs, before you fit the DL/TT combo?

By Moe on Monday, November 12, 2001 - 02:52 pm: Edit

John, yes with open diffs. I know everyone wants to do the flex comparison with locked rigs, but where you really notice the benefits of a little more flex is with the open diffs.

By RVR OVR (Tom) on Monday, November 12, 2001 - 03:24 pm: Edit

Moe,

Actually, most folks on this list feel that flex doesn't matter, even with open diffs. I started out with open diffs and my extra drop. However, it would be tough to say how much it helped because I went from bald michelins to new super swampers and a 3" lift all at the same time. Anyway, I then upgraded to 4.10's and lockers. However, I still haven't experienced a compelling reason to loose the cones with the wheeling I do, so I leave them on.

What is really needed is another thing like the KKC with the appropriate rig setups and enough people who care to participate in an objective manner. The problem is it is so time consuming and people would rather just wheel. For my test, I needed a lot of outside input in terms of observers and the like. However, who wants to give up a weekend to watch somebody else wheel? Either some magazine that can make money off it needs to do it, or the manufacturers of the different components have to pony up time and resources to objective parties to make it all happen. EE did this by giving me some retainers, and I already had the RT cones. However, it is the people resources that are most required.

Tom

By Slider on Monday, November 12, 2001 - 04:37 pm: Edit

without droop...you couldn't do this:




but then again...who'd want to...
I was having a testosterone filled day!!!

Slider

By Slider on Monday, November 12, 2001 - 04:37 pm: Edit

without droop...you couldn't do this:




but then again...who'd want to...
I was having a testosterone filled day!!!

Slider

By Kyle on Monday, November 12, 2001 - 04:43 pm: Edit

http://www.discoweb.org/barrens2k7/img26.JPG


You sure ?


Kyle

By RVR OVR (Tom) on Monday, November 12, 2001 - 05:01 pm: Edit

LOL!!

Monster truck challenge.

Tom

By Kyle on Monday, November 12, 2001 - 05:03 pm: Edit

No , mine still had sway bars and stock shocks on it..... WATDROOP ? I thought drooping was something that all males tried to avoid like the plague........

Kyle

By Slider on Monday, November 12, 2001 - 05:25 pm: Edit

guess I stuck my foot in my mouth...

HOWEVER:

Kyle...didn't you have wheels off the ground?
If my spring didn't drop out in the above photos...my LF and RR wheels would be off the ground rendering CDL useless...

Cheaper than lockers for now...

Also everyone...Cones are really never quiet!
unless you have some sort of roller bearings in there...METAL again METAL without lube will always be noisy!

Slider

By Kyle on Monday, November 12, 2001 - 05:29 pm: Edit

Tires were on the ground..... There is another shot of it somehwere from the other side...


Kyle

By John Lee on Monday, November 12, 2001 - 06:52 pm: Edit

Slider,

Take a look at the trucks on this page:
http://www.expeditionexchange.com/retainers/indexpics.htm

The trucks in those pics have the same amount of flex as you do, without the clanking/banging of spring cones and without the cost and weakness of extended shock mounts.

By chrisvonc on Monday, November 12, 2001 - 07:25 pm: Edit

http://www.discoweb.org/pa/pb01.jpg
"When retained springs go droped without warning"

By Mike D1 on Monday, November 12, 2001 - 10:03 pm: Edit

John Lee,


I agree, I don't see any flex I don't get with the EE retainers. I have seen springs "drop" off the cones. Bend a rear link or break a shock and off it falls.

By Brian Jackson (Nerover) on Monday, November 12, 2001 - 10:17 pm: Edit

Retained is the way to go. Cones will fail. It's like Jeep vs Rover. Work on it all the time or wheel it? Your choice...you'll have to always watch cones, especially when your springs start to sag. I ghet all the flex I need, but it still isn't really crap when it all comes down to it with open diffs. So save your money, strap your springs or leave evrything stock and get a rear locker if you want to go farther.

http://www.discoweb.org/brianjackson/suspension/leftview.jpg

Retained from the beginning,
Brian

By Mike D1 on Tuesday, November 13, 2001 - 12:14 am: Edit

Brian,

Did you check with tirerack.com or etires.com like I suggested? Buy anything? I love my GY MTRs from the tire rack.

By Brian Jackson (Nerover) on Tuesday, November 13, 2001 - 12:45 am: Edit

Hey Mike,

I did thanks...but I actually found a great deal locally. Bought some BFG M/T KMs. They wanted $189.99 and I talked Costco down to $146, which was the best I found in the Jeeper mags. Then I went to Sears and the guy said it was over $200...but when I told him about Costco, he beat it by 10%!!! I ended up getting them for $131/tire! Absolutely ecstatic about the purchase. In fact, I bought ten..five for a friend, cause the deal was so good!

Brian

By Matt Milbrandt (95discovery) on Tuesday, November 13, 2001 - 12:12 pm: Edit

3" RTE springs, EE spring retainers





Matt

By Bluegill (Bluegill) on Tuesday, November 13, 2001 - 12:29 pm: Edit

235/85 swampers? what shocks? just a couple inches of dropping completely clear of the sills...nice.

By RVR OVR (Tom) on Tuesday, November 13, 2001 - 12:59 pm: Edit

Hey matt, what swampers ya got? Those the 32x9.5x15's?

tom

By Kyle on Tuesday, November 13, 2001 - 01:03 pm: Edit

Um , whats wrong with the front end?


Kyle

By Eric N (Grnrvr) on Tuesday, November 13, 2001 - 01:09 pm: Edit

Sway bars still on maybe? Or bad picture angle. Doesn't look like it wants to flex much in the front though does it.

By RVR OVR (Tom) on Tuesday, November 13, 2001 - 01:12 pm: Edit

you can't blame that on the cones this time!

tom

By Matt Milbrandt (95discovery) on Tuesday, November 13, 2001 - 01:14 pm: Edit

Yeah they're the 32x9.50s, shocks are Rancho 9005s in the rear and 9207s in the front. I hope nothing is wrong with the front end??

Matt

By Eric N (Grnrvr) on Tuesday, November 13, 2001 - 01:17 pm: Edit

Matt, do you still have your front anti-sway bar on and connected in that picture?

By Kyle on Tuesday, November 13, 2001 - 01:22 pm: Edit

Yeah , you can Tom , the rear directly affects the front. The easier the rear moves the less the front will.


Kyle

By Matt Milbrandt (95discovery) on Tuesday, November 13, 2001 - 01:26 pm: Edit

Yeah, the front sway bar was connected in that picture.

Matt

By John Lee on Tuesday, November 13, 2001 - 01:28 pm: Edit

Matt,

Do you know the rate of your front and rear springs?

By RVR OVR (Tom) on Tuesday, November 13, 2001 - 01:30 pm: Edit

ah! front sway bar was on! ok, just take the pics as some fun wheeling and not for flex debate.

tom

By Kyle on Tuesday, November 13, 2001 - 01:31 pm: Edit

Yes , the bar is the deal there...... But thats exactly the situations I am talking about...


Kyle

By Matt Milbrandt (95discovery) on Tuesday, November 13, 2001 - 01:35 pm: Edit

I just wanted to show how much the rear would drop when retained. Springs are 189 front, 300 rear.

Matt

By Kyle on Tuesday, November 13, 2001 - 01:38 pm: Edit

Great pics Matt... take that bar off the front and do it again....LOL and lets see the squashed side of the rear...


Kyle

By Mike D1 on Tuesday, November 13, 2001 - 08:39 pm: Edit

Kyle, John Lee, Tom,


Why am I getting more flex in the rear than Matt's truck?? Is it the RT springs? Or his front sway bar, would it efect the rear that much? The Bilsteins? It seems like I have 3"-4" or so more drop with the same EE retainers. Very nice tires Matt!

By Kyle on Wednesday, November 14, 2001 - 08:39 am: Edit

Probably the springs not being a stretchy....

Kyle

By Simon. on Wednesday, November 14, 2001 - 10:57 am: Edit

OPS..
sorry it the next one!!!

http://www.discoweb.org/video/barrens4.rm


simon.

By Simon. on Wednesday, November 14, 2001 - 11:06 am: Edit

LOL.. the first post didn't WTF?... wel what ever...

in the last post you have Mickey and Axel in the same crossed axel situation..

Mickey had cones, big 265's and no lockers
Ax had lockers, retained springs and smaller 245's

Simon..

By Boy Wonder on Wednesday, November 14, 2001 - 11:49 am: Edit

Holy locker capability Batman! The Joker's sinister plot involving open-diffs and sexy-flex cones really screwed Mickey, didn't it?

Yes Robin, it did. Now shuddup and get your orange tights off your head.

By John Lee on Wednesday, November 14, 2001 - 12:05 pm: Edit

Mike,

"Why am I getting more flex in the rear than Matt's truck??"

I was wondering the same thing, which is why I asked Matt what rate springs he was using. Frankly, I don't know the answer.

"Is it the RT springs?"

My first guess would be the same as Kyle's: that Matt's rear springs are not stretchy. I've seen this before with PK's and Tom Pearson's rear springs, both of whom have RTE springs fitted. Both of these guys' springs don't seem to stretch like Matt's, and all three seem to have the amount of flex such that the top of the tire is about even with the top of the rock sliders.

This is weird, because the RTE springs must have a relatively tall freestanding height and should not have to stretch that much. I admit that I have not seen RTE rear springs in person and dismounted, but they should be approximately 18" or more in height, as an OME 762 HD rear spring is about 16.3" tall and the RTE rear HD springs are the same rate but give an additional 2" of lift.

"Or his front sway bar, would it efect the rear that much?"

I would guess that, if anything, the fitment of the front sway bar would make the rear flex better, not worse.

"The Bilsteins?"

I don't think so. I don't know what shocks Matt is running, but it looks as though he fitted extended shock mounts and longer shocks. These shocks should be more than long enough to permit great amounts of flex.

"It seems like I have 3"-4" or so more drop with the same EE retainers."

Yes. So does Ho with his Bearmach Big Blue springs and so do I with my OME 764's (220 lbs. rate). The 764's are only 220 lb. rate, so they definitely stretch more readily. Still, Matt says his springs are only 300 lb. rate, and customers who have fitted the OME 781 spring (290 lb. rate) together with the EE retainers say their springs stretch easily, so Matt's 300 lb. rate can't be holding him back.

To add further to the confusion, Ho had no problems going at least to the bottom of the rock sliders with his old set-up (OME 762's and 1" spacers) when his springs were retained. And Rob Davison has the Armgeddon heavy OME 763 springs (360 lb. rate) with 1" spacers on his Disco with EE retainers, and his truck flexes very nicely too. I think Rob's wheels go to the bottom of the rock sliders as well. I'm sure Pokerob will chime in and let us know for sure.

What I can't explain is why the OME springs appear to stretch more readily than the RTE springs. After all, a spring is a spring is a spring, isn't it? Perhaps it's the larger number of coils in an OME spring? I noticed that Matt's rear springs didn't have that many coils in them, but that could be an optical illusion. Frankly, I have no credible explanation.

By Rob Davison (Pokerob) on Wednesday, November 14, 2001 - 01:12 pm: Edit

yes, i have the super heavy duty 763 in the rear and i have 1" rte spacers & RTE upper lower shocks and ranchoe 9000's. + EE retainers. i am still able to flex so that the tire is about to the bottom of the door sill maybe an 1 or 2 inches from it. (this is while ramping a front tire up)

i will say it is better than stock. it is actually exactly the amount i wanted. i had crazy rockware flex that was more trouble than it's worth.. now it is just where i want it. if i could free up a little in the front , that would improve the situation, but i am content for now.

now matt has the sway bar off , right?...


rob davison

By Matt Milbrandt (95discovery) on Wednesday, November 14, 2001 - 02:42 pm: Edit

The rear was off, the front was still on.

Matt

By gary on Saturday, November 17, 2001 - 10:34 pm: Edit

Hey Matt, was that photo from the Dayton outing? I must have missed that spot! Great shot!

Gary K

By Matt Milbrandt (95discovery) on Saturday, November 17, 2001 - 11:21 pm: Edit

Hey Gary, no that was from Combs Road in Story, IN. Here are the pics from the entire event...

Story Trail Ride

Matt

By Phillip Perkinson (R0ver4x4) on Saturday, November 17, 2001 - 11:42 pm: Edit

some awesome wheelin what happened to the defender