Sent from my iPhone

> On May 20, 2018, at 2:20 PM, Alistair Bell <albell@SHAW.CA> wrote:
> 
> Hey Steve,
> 
> I just quickly turned down a bit of aluminum stock to check fit in table leg receiver. Turned to 1.375. 
> 
> Yeah, I must have been on goofballs when I thought no imperial sized tubing would work. The 1.375 is a tad sloppier fit but I think it would be acceptable .
> 
> Mind you, I have turned down flanged sleeves to fit in both front and rear table holders. Did that to improve the fit of the stock set up. So my female parts are a tad closer fit than stock.
> 
> Won’t say that last sentence out loud any time soon :-)
> 
> Alistair
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>>> On May 20, 2018, at 9:35 AM, Steve Williams <sbw@SBW.ORG> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 5/20/2018 9:17 AM, Alistair Bell wrote:
>>> ... I measured the stock leg tubing as 35mm. Yeah, 0.003” difference than the 1.375 stuff you mention doesn’t sound like a deal breaker...
>>> 
>>> But I’m almost 100 percent sure I’ve tried all the pipe and tubing I’ve had access to and none were a satisfying fit. I’ll see if I can double check that in the next day or so.
>> 
>> Thanks.  I'd be interested to know where the fit is a problem.  I can't
>> think of a reason that should matter.
>> 
>> Well, maybe the receiver on the floor inside the lower cabinet.  My van
>> has the plastic receiver ring that fits inside the tube.  So it's
>> possible that'll have to be modified.
>> 
>> But where else?