Mail Archive Search: <+from:Ghsharp@aol.com>

Results:

References: [ +from:Ghsharp@aol.com: 132 ]

Total 132 documents matching your query.

61. Re: Z06 Corvette and Nationals? (score: 1): Author: Ghsharp@aol.com; Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 17:31:30 EDT; << Where would the Z06 Corvette be classed at National's? They are already hitting the streets, and I was wondering if they would fall under the non-classed car rule and go to SS? >> "Sec. 3.1 Eligib; /html/autox/2000-08/msg00329.html (7,962 bytes)
62. Re: Need help; FJr drivers allowed to work??? (score: 1): Author: Ghsharp@aol.com; Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 02:00:06 EDT; My interpretation of this paragraph is that 8-12 year old Jr Drivers are "exempt from this prohibition during their run group" because when they are driving they obviously_have_to be in staging, grid; /html/autox/2000-08/msg00449.html (8,938 bytes)
63. Re: Z06 Corvette and Nationals? (score: 1): Author: Ghsharp@aol.com; Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:10:26 EDT; Didn't the '99 Miata come out in the spring of '98? Most "mid-year" new model introductions are classed by SCAC and SEB if they are popular Solo II cars. The purpose of the rule in question is to pre; /html/autox/2000-08/msg00600.html (8,824 bytes)
64. Re: new classifications (score: 1): Author: Ghsharp@aol.com; Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 15:15:06 EDT; It's the_entrant's_responsibility to properly classify his car, not the National office (or Tech either, for that matter). The E30 M3 is_not_in GS this year. Someone will have to ask TC about his ent; /html/autox/2000-08/msg00643.html (7,384 bytes)
65. TireRack SCCA National Solo Championships Alert (score: 1): Author: Ghsharp@aol.com; Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 20:09:24 EDT; This is the press release issued yesterday from the SCCA Rally/Solo Dept in Denver for anyone who has not yet seen it: For immediate release 15 August 2000 SCCA National Office Announces First Time E; /html/autox/2000-08/msg00691.html (10,117 bytes)
66. Re: BFG Team T/A SEDiv Solo2 - We Did It!!! (score: 1): Author: Ghsharp@aol.com; Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 20:48:26 EDT; Mark, You deserve some recognition, too. With the first 2 SEDIV events unavoidably cancelled, you've had a lot of additional headaches this year as the SEDIV Solo II Steward, as if serving in that po; /html/autox/2000-08/msg00693.html (7,507 bytes)
67. C5 Corvette wheels and tires FS (score: 1): Author: Ghsharp@aol.com; Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 15:33:07 EDT; I have some C5 Corvette wheels and tires, and since I don't presently own a C5 Corvette, I don't really need them taking up space in my garage, so... (4) factory OEM aluminum wheels for C5 Vette, $60; /html/autox/2000-08/msg01023.html (6,620 bytes)
68. FasTrack item about underdrive pulleys (score: 1): Author: Ghsharp@aol.com; Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 16:01:05 EDT; I've had several people ask me about this item. Here's how it reads: "TECH BULLETIN <snip> 4) Street Prepared: the allowance in Section 14.10.U for the use of alternate pulleys does permit pulleys of; /html/autox/2000-07/msg00181.html (7,935 bytes)
69. Re: FasTrack item about underdrive pulleys (score: 1): Author: Ghsharp@aol.com; Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 17:00:33 EDT; asking. The Street Touring rules (Appendix K) require the engine and transmission to be unmodified except for specific allowances, and I see no separate allowance for replacement pulleys of any kind.; /html/autox/2000-07/msg00190.html (7,689 bytes)
70. Re: Sequential Stock Classes (score: 1): Author: Ghsharp@aol.com; Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 19:05:02 EDT; OK, so take the cars in the current proposal and show us where you would put them. Not just a few of them, but all of them. If it's simple it shouldn't take very long, right? GH; /html/autox/2000-07/msg00205.html (9,041 bytes)
71. Re: FasTrack item about underdrive pulleys (score: 1): Author: Ghsharp@aol.com; Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 19:05:01 EDT; OK, I didn't have my stack of FasTracks close at hand. That specifically allows pulley replacement in ST under the same limits as stated in 14.10.U in the SP rules. GH; /html/autox/2000-07/msg00206.html (7,393 bytes)
72. Re: Sequential Stock Classes (score: 1): Author: Ghsharp@aol.com; Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 12:54:28 EDT; Be my guest. I'd REALLY like to see where you'd start. Making older cars more competitive is one of the goals of this sort of classing method, right? How do you decide where to put cars that were pre; /html/autox/2000-07/msg00268.html (13,162 bytes)
73. Re: Stock class rules was (Re: Sequential Stock Classes) (score: 1): Author: Ghsharp@aol.com; Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 13:22:50 EDT; Alignment "adjustability" is just another thing you have to consider if you're trying to pick a certain car for a certain class. It's one of the advantages or disadvantages that are part of the "pack; /html/autox/2000-07/msg00270.html (9,855 bytes)
74. Re: Classing by Potential (score: 1): Author: Ghsharp@aol.com; Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 15:28:02 EDT; stuff solo, drive It's logical and simple, and I'd love to be one of the people involved in it...but how do you come up with shocks and the other things the rules allow us to do to all of these cars; /html/autox/2000-07/msg00297.html (10,709 bytes)
75. Re: Sequential Stock Classes (score: 1): Author: Ghsharp@aol.com; Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 15:28:01 EDT; No, I didn't take it that way on either account. But while it's fairly easy to come up with new classing methods that might address real or perceived inequities within the current system, I've never; /html/autox/2000-07/msg00298.html (8,288 bytes)
76. Re: Stock class rules was (Re: Sequential Stock Classes) (score: 1): Author: Ghsharp@aol.com; Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 15:49:18 EDT; Suspension adjustability (or lack thereof) IS taken into consideration when classing a new car, because we understand how important it is in making some cars handle on a Solo II course. As to a cambe; /html/autox/2000-07/msg00300.html (10,431 bytes)
77. Re: Stock class rules was (Re: Sequential Stock Classes) (score: 1): Author: Ghsharp@aol.com; Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 16:17:43 EDT; now, moved classes? And Mike replied: I'm glad you asked that question! Let's take a look at AS: BMW M3 ~1.0deg neg for '95's, ~0.6-0.7deg neg for '96+ (like my '98) Porsche 968 over 2.0deg neg Porsc; /html/autox/2000-07/msg00309.html (11,288 bytes)
78. Re: Stock class rules was (Re: Sequential Stock Classes) (score: 1): Author: Ghsharp@aol.com; Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 16:29:01 EDT; But it would work even better if you allowed it 2.0deg negative camber. After all, that's one of the first things you would do if you took the car to SP. GH; /html/autox/2000-07/msg00316.html (9,797 bytes)
79. Re: Classing by Potential (score: 1): Author: Ghsharp@aol.com; Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 16:45:05 EDT; The "vested interest" you're referring to includes the majority of Solo competitors who feel the current system isn't broken. Again, with only 9 Stock classes in which to class every car made, how do; /html/autox/2000-07/msg00324.html (9,113 bytes)
80. Re: Stock class rules was (Re: Sequential Stock Classes) (score: 1): Author: Ghsharp@aol.com; Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 17:01:17 EDT; Well, for one thing we don't weigh every Stock class car in impound now. Enough folks would want everyone checked that it would have to become part of the routine. Except spring perch heights don't c; /html/autox/2000-07/msg00331.html (10,620 bytes)

Current List: 61 - 80
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]