Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 12:38:06 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from ncsmtp02.ogw.rr.com ([24.93.67.83] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0b8) with ESMTP id 1790755 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 25 Sep 2002 12:33:57 -0400 Received: from mail7.carolina.rr.com (fe7 [24.93.67.54]) by ncsmtp02.ogw.rr.com (8.12.5/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g8PGYJup002902 for ; Wed, 25 Sep 2002 12:34:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from computer ([24.74.36.249]) by mail7.carolina.rr.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.757.75); Wed, 25 Sep 2002 12:33:55 -0400 From: "Matt & Bobbi Hapgood" X-Original-To: Subject: RE: [LML] CO detectors X-Original-Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 12:33:55 -0400 X-Original-Message-ID: <000101c264b1$5768a520$6401a8c0@HappyDesktop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 I have an installed COGuardian. First unit went defective, second seems to be working fine (new and improved version with a fan). Never have to think about it anymore. Great if you have space to put it. I mounted mine on the rear baggage bulkhead. Matt > > As far as a reliable and reasonably priced electronic CO detectors > go...which one is the best bang for the buck. I'm going to pick one > up...tired of that little tab always flying around the cockpit. > >