Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:jemitchell@compuserve.com: 461 ]

Total 461 documents matching your query.

101. Re: NASCAR officials say Earnhardt's belt ripped (score: 1)
Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:42:04 -0600
I'm in partial agreement with that. Nonetheless, it's undeniable that F1 and CART have made major strides in driver safety, while NASCAR - which not long ago was statistically the "safest" major form
/html/autox/2001-02/msg00627.html (11,086 bytes)

102. Re: Coolant? (long response, contains technical neepery) (score: 1)
Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 12:56:44 -0600
<snip lots of good stuff> Here's a question you may be able to aswer: what about VW's G10 and G11 antifreeze? It's blue in color, contains no phosphates (which degrade the anticorrosion protection ov
/html/autox/2001-01/msg00220.html (7,863 bytes)

103. Re: Saturns on two wheels! (score: 1)
Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 14:05:43 -0600
Yep. I didn't see the event occur, but the photo looks exactly like the descriptions of the incident I heard from eyewitnesses. Jay
/html/autox/2001-01/msg00307.html (7,717 bytes)

104. Re: Saturns on two wheels! (score: 1)
Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 17:08:43 -0600
this is >possible. Well now, it really doesn't matter much what you _believe_, as what's in the photo is what actually _happened_. Physics has notoriously little sympathy for personal belief structur
/html/autox/2001-01/msg00321.html (8,378 bytes)

105. Re: English? (score: 1)
Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 19:08:23 -0600
Ending a sentence with a preposition is a butchery of English up with which we will not put. ;<) Jay
/html/autox/2001-01/msg00375.html (7,354 bytes)

106. Re: SM PAX (score: 1)
Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 07:28:59 -0600
be legally That means that they are required to have cats. No, in ALL places that mandates retaining the cat. Federal law prohibits modification to the emission control system on _any_ car driven on
/html/autox/2001-01/msg00399.html (8,054 bytes)

107. Re: SM PAX & 'Street Legal?' (score: 1)
Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 10:06:56 -0600
quote) creativity while maintaining streetability. The following modifications are allowed beyond those allowed for STR I understand perfectly well the stated purpose of the rules, even though it has
/html/autox/2001-01/msg00408.html (8,573 bytes)

108. Re: Fwd: Re: SM PAX & 'Street Legal?' (score: 1)
Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 15:53:01 -0600
Dennis rants: require things. That's not in question in this discussion. The intent and the actual wording of the rules are mutually exclusive, but the intent has been clear all along. current Which
/html/autox/2001-01/msg00446.html (9,620 bytes)

109. Re: Fwd: Re: SM PAX & 'Street Legal?' (score: 1)
Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 18:08:36 -0600
parkways I understand where you're going, and I agree to some extent. there's No, but is the intent of the rules to _allow_ emission equipment to be removed or defeated? I'd have to say it is, given
/html/autox/2001-01/msg00459.html (10,188 bytes)

110. Re: Fwd: Re: SM PAX & 'Street Legal?' (score: 1)
Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 10:39:36 -0600
legal enough requires of you. Exactly WHY should that requirement be in the rules, when it's not in the rules for ANY other Solo II class? That's the question that nobody has wanted to answer. Jay
/html/autox/2001-01/msg00497.html (8,790 bytes)

111. Re: Fwd: Re: SM PAX & 'Street Legal?' (score: 1)
Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 07:45:44 -0600
<speaking of the SM street licensing requirement> I do. render a car Correct. But you're STILL not required to license a Stock-Category car. And one option you have in Stock is to _not_ license your
/html/autox/2001-01/msg00540.html (10,391 bytes)

112. Re: Fwd: Re: SM PAX & 'Street Legal?' (score: 1)
Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 21:31:05 -0600
the cars! Then we all agree that the more-restrictive-than-SP "street legal" wording should be removed from the SM rules. Glad you got it figured out. Jay
/html/autox/2001-01/msg00566.html (8,105 bytes)

113. Re: Fram Deal (score: 1)
Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 17:10:08 -0600
The Lyles ask: FWIW, Consumer Reports did an oil filter report back in the late '80s sometime. They may have done one since, but I wasn't able to find one on their web site. The oil filters were all
/html/autox/2001-01/msg00579.html (8,305 bytes)

114. Re: Fram Oil Filters (score: 1)
Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 19:06:49 -0600
reasons in cold to force or more The higher pressure isn't (or shouldn't be) caused by forcing oil through the filter. At least not through a clean one. It's all the other restrictions - orifices in
/html/autox/2001-01/msg00630.html (9,263 bytes)

115. Re: A funny little Lotus tale! (score: 1)
Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 13:57:43 -0600
Ok, here goes: "Yeah, the Lotus? It's actually a Donnelly, built in Canada from the original plans. Plans? Lotus didn't need no stinking plans to build Sevens. ;<) It's Mr. Chapman. Chuckle. Rumors o
/html/autox/2001-01/msg00727.html (8,960 bytes)

116. Re: What's wrong with this picture? (score: 1)
Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 15:08:32 -0600
<snip the Poochie stuff> A Dave Bean Stage 3 engine makes 150 hp. To get there, Bean uses non-SP-legal camshafts, pistons, valves, and valve springs. He also does a full port job, matches the combust
/html/autox/2000-12/msg00056.html (8,055 bytes)

117. Re: Street Mod exclusions (score: 1)
Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 15:18:55 -0600
pretty much see the http://www.legendaryslack.com/inclusion.html Interesting. It would be nice if the person who struck through the excluded cars and typed in the excuses ...errr, reasons ... actuall
/html/autox/2000-12/msg00093.html (9,429 bytes)

118. Re: Street Mod exclusions (score: 1)
Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 16:31:43 -0600
NOT. So how, then, do you justify allowing Honda Civics in SM? Lots of them weigh less than 2k. My '86 VW GTI in ES-legal trim weighed just over 2100, which is no more than any of the excluded "rare,
/html/autox/2000-12/msg00100.html (9,663 bytes)

119. Re: Street Mod exclusions (score: 1)
Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 19:46:21 -0600
Yep. Front engine, RWD, Chrysler 383, real 2 + 2 seating. Curb weight 4020 lb. (R&T, October 1973). 10.4 sec. 0-60. Definitely no threat to SM. Jay
/html/autox/2000-12/msg00106.html (8,663 bytes)

120. Re: Street Mod exclusions (score: 1)
Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 19:56:39 -0600
I wasn't. It's on the SM excluded list, however, along with Shelby Cobras. Presumably to keep the world safe for DSMs, ponycars, and "non-sports-car-derived" vehicles. Whatever they are. Yep. Definit
/html/autox/2000-12/msg00107.html (9,913 bytes)

Current List: 101 - 120
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20]
This search system is powered by Namazu