At 03:01 PM 5/10/99 -0700, you wrote:
>Jim,
>
>I was skeptical of that weight too. Would be less than half what my Taurus
>weighs. Is it possible you were looking at weight range figures in
>kilograms rather than pounds?
Bob,
Now that is possible. If so then the HP reading would be 2.52 X 39
= 98 HP. However, they did not use KWhr in place of HP. Of course I
previously had an 83 Mustang that had both metric and US bolts on it.
As I turned the car back in to Hertz I will never know. In any case,
the car was a slug. It is sad when you are drag racing and no one passing
you knows it.
James Barrett Tiger II 351C and others
|