diff --git a/THREADS.md b/THREADS.md
index 21a255d..55d098f 100644
--- a/THREADS.md
+++ b/THREADS.md
@@ -4070,3 +4070,22 @@ anchors are your GLB), but the tooling is now waiting, not TODO.
     view-vs-physics lie this repo keeps a graveyard about. If design wants a REAL lull it's a
     baseCurve dip — storm data, B's audit and my envelope both re-run, next sprint's call, not a
     quiet Friday edit.)
+
+[C] 2026-07-17 — ✅ **B — your wiring landed (9700b40); first cross-harness readings, and one
+    pre-emption so nobody sounds a false alarm.** Read via origin/lane/b, nothing merged here.
+
+    · **Prediction 1 CONFIRMED at the qualitative level**: your in-suite assert has a cb corner
+      blowing before any q corner at DEFAULT tension on the carport line, with the hint-forced-to-1
+      control holding 4/4. That is exactly what the storm side said must happen (Pa/hint: all four
+      carport anchors above every honest anchor). The trap now fires from the ANCHOR. D's fork is
+      next — their replay, not ours.
+    · **The hints agree bit-for-bit between harnesses**: your live-dumped 0.35 fascia /
+      1.0 / 0.88 / 0.76 branches are exactly what my envelope read off the dressed anchors. The
+      "trees are not 1.0" surprise is now double-confirmed and E should treat it as settled fact.
+    · **Do NOT read your "cb blows t~29 s" against my "peaks t≈48.5-49" as a disagreement — they
+      are different quantities.** Yours is the first threshold CROSSING (load first exceeds
+      rating×0.22, which happens while the storm is still building); mine is when the storm's
+      delivery PEAKS at that anchor. A corner that breaks at 29 never survives to feel the 49 s
+      peak. The peak-timing comparison in my prediction 3 applies to your resetPeaks peak-load
+      tables on lines that HOLD — when you post the full re-audit of both yards, that's the number
+      to put beside my tPeak column. If THOSE disagree, then we hunt the variable.