<div dir="ltr">Now Ron, I really expected you to take&nbsp;umbrage at the reference to your &quot;two-bit method.&quot;<br>AnonAnon<div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 9:11 PM, Ron Nossaman <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:rnossaman@cox.net">rnossaman@cox.net</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
To ream or not to ream, that is the question.<br>
<br>
I seem to recall from the initial post that there were two sizes<br>
of pins in this block.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Correct, which precludes ignoring the reaming pass.<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
In that case you would have to determine the appropriate<br>
drill bit to use to suit your new pins.<br>
<br>
I would also encourage you to look into Ron&#39;s two-bit method.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
The first pass hole&#39;s already there. This would be pass two.<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
If 2/0 were in there and were comfortably secure, I&#39;d go with<br>
3/0 throughout and ream accordingly to the density of the block.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
A reasonable approach.<br>
Ron N<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>