Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tazza" data-source="post: 26472" data-attributes="member: 82">^^ what Ken said <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />Any issues, just send them to Ken or myself.It makes me wonder why they would change from something that worked just fine to this new coupling. The old JIC fitting setup worked just fine, it was cheap and worked. Why change to something that is more expensive? with anything that can be *easily* un-coupled you are just asking for trouble.I guess its like car makers, they get an engine and transmission that works really well, but decide lets re-design the whole lot for the next model.... I have never understood that logic, would save millions in R&D.... But what would i know rite?</blockquote>