> All mine fromt eh 60's 70's and 80's are the same. After a few years they're
> pockmarked. New oens get pockmarked. I really don't think there's much if
> any difference in glass... but I think roads are different and so are drivers.
>> All mine fromt eh 60's 70's and 80's are the same. After a few years they're
>> pockmarked. New oens get pockmarked. I really don't think there's much if
>> any difference in glass... but I think roads are different and so are drivers.
>
>I said that it was a baseless theory, but it is my baseless theory, and
>I'm sticking to it.
And a fine baseless theory it is.
>Also, roads and drivers do not explain the difference in wear between
>windshields. My parents drove the same roads at the same time, and my
>father mostly drove them a little faster. The two windscreens showed
>definitively different results. Some do wear more than others under the
>same circumstances.
Huh. I don't even know if the glass came from the same manufacturors. Could
is be the shape and aerodynamics of the car coming into play as well?

Signature
Need Mercedes parts? http://parts.mbz.org
Richard Sexton | Mercedes stuff: http://mbz.org
1970 280SE, 72 280SE | Home pages: http://rs79.vrx.net
633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | http://aquaria.net http://killi.net
Hazey - 11 Sep 2006 06:57 GMT
> Huh. I don't even know if the glass came from the same manufacturors. Could
> is be the shape and aerodynamics of the car coming into play as well?
It could be anything including the color of the paint. That's why it's
a baseless theory.
Martin Joseph - 15 Sep 2006 07:44 GMT
>>> All mine fromt eh 60's 70's and 80's are the same. After a few years they're
>>> pockmarked. New oens get pockmarked. I really don't think there's much if
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> And a fine baseless theory it is.
Actually it's not, it basic aerodynamics.