- 1. Proposed Rules Change (score: 1)
- Author: "anne & greg" <gvav27@home.com>
- Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 21:34:33 -0400
- I noted that Fastrack in the April SportsCar has a proposed rule change that would impact CMod. It would eliminate the requirement to have an operational reverse gear. See item 11 on page F-48. Perso
- /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00003.html (7,765 bytes)
- 2. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1)
- Author: Hottvr@aol.com
- Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 21:59:58 EDT
- It doesn't really impact me much. I can never find reverse anyway????????? And if I could find it? I would be afraid of backing over a little guy like Dick R in the paddock!!!!! I still wanna hear ab
- /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00004.html (8,581 bytes)
- 3. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1)
- Author: Mark Sirota <msirota@isc.upenn.edu>
- Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 22:17:25 -0400
- I agree with you, Greg. It also seems counter to the preface of the class listing in Appendix A, which discusses the desire to prevent Solo-only Formula Fords. I'll write a letter. I'm surprised nobo
- /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00005.html (8,472 bytes)
- 4. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1)
- Author: washburn <washburn@dwave.net>
- Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 21:20:04 -0500
- To be perfecty honest, I didn't know they could be had with reverse gears. :) They allow other things, like fire systems, to be left off. Is this in-consistent with that? You have reverse, how many d
- /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00006.html (8,490 bytes)
- 5. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1)
- Author: Mark Sirota <msirota@isc.upenn.edu>
- Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 22:23:26 -0400
- Reverse is a fundamental part of the gearbox that comes installed in any Formula Ford. There are a few different common gearboxes, but they all include reverse, as reverse is required by the FF1600 r
- /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00007.html (8,423 bytes)
- 6. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1)
- Author: washburn <washburn@dwave.net>
- Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 21:31:27 -0500
- Thanks for the info, I was not sure and thought that perhaps most FF's did not have it. Given that this is a normal and common thing, I agree that there is no motivation to eliminate the requirement,
- /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00008.html (8,596 bytes)
- 7. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1)
- Author: Dick Rasmussen <rasmussend@mindspring.com>
- Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 22:36:40 -0400
- My "problem" is somewhat different. I can find reverse, but thanks to the mirrors I have, I can avoid cutting giants like Mike B off at the kneecaps with that nasty rear spoiler on my car or impaling
- /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00009.html (9,368 bytes)
- 8. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1)
- Author: Hottvr@aol.com
- Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 23:18:05 EDT
- << I'm surprised nobody has commented that neither of my class-related proposals (to move the SR/SRF to FM and to eliminate the weight allowance for S2) were taken forward. Mark >> I wanted to, but h
- /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00010.html (8,518 bytes)
- 9. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1)
- Author: Hottvr@aol.com
- Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 23:32:42 EDT
- << My "problem" is somewhat different. I can find reverse, but thanks to the mirrors I have, I can avoid cutting giants like Mike B off at the kneecaps with that nasty rear spoiler on my car or impal
- /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00011.html (8,999 bytes)
- 10. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1)
- Author: Dick Rasmussen <rasmussend@mindspring.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 06:01:53 -0400
- with don't I personally cannot imagine not having reverse available. I have paid good money to replace broken mirrors so that I can see when I need to back up without a "guide" available to direct me
- /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00012.html (9,404 bytes)
- 11. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1)
- Author: VDieman@aol.com
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 09:12:46 EDT
- << I noted that Fastrack in the April SportsCar has a proposed rule change that would impact CMod. It would eliminate the requirement to have an operational reverse gear. See item 11 on page F-48. Pe
- /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00014.html (9,492 bytes)
- 12. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1)
- Author: Sam & Greg Scharnberg <samandgreg@qwest.net>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 11:19:30 -0500
- I sent the following response to Jr's post a couple of hours ago and it seems to be in E-mail purgatory. The 5 speed cars (MK9, FT200, and Staffs) all have a problem if they miss a shift. First is to
- /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00017.html (9,219 bytes)
- 13. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1)
- Author: Mark Sirota <msirota@isc.upenn.edu>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 13:13:54 -0400
- My 914 had the same pattern, and a truly horrible linkage -- you didn't so much select a gear, you recommended one. Whenever Josh drove it, he used to say "start in first, go straight up to second, g
- /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00018.html (9,661 bytes)
- 14. RE: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1)
- Author: "Chessick, Mark" <Mark.Chessick@fmr.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 05:51:53 -0400
- As long as its legal with the GCR's at the moment. I have to think at some point the GCR's may be unrealistic for older cars. I like backing up instead of pushing right now. Mark Chessick /// /// aut
- /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00019.html (8,633 bytes)
- 15. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1)
- Author: Charlie Mathews <cmathews@theramp.net>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 12:51:03 -0500
- Apparently this did not get out. Forgot to delete bottom of email. /// /// autox-cm@autox.team.net mailing list ///
- /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00020.html (10,275 bytes)
- 16. Proposed Rules Change (score: 1)
- Author: Sam & Greg Scharnberg <samandgreg@qwest.net>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 12:56:43 -0500
- Charlie, the proposed rule was not just for CM. I understand what you are saying but I don't think I understand why. There is no performance advantage to removal of reverse and it is easily replaced
- /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00021.html (10,570 bytes)
- 17. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1)
- Author: Mark Sirota <msirota@isc.upenn.edu>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 14:01:55 -0400
- Okay, that still is "disabling reverse" rather than removing the requirement. Asked and answered. Mark /// /// autox-cm@autox.team.net mailing list ///
- /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00022.html (8,862 bytes)
- 18. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1)
- Author: Dick Rasmussen <rasmussend@mindspring.com>
- Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 21:55:15 -0400
- with don't I personally cannot imagine not having reverse available. I have paid good money to replace broken mirrors so that I can see when I need to back up without a "guide" available to direct me
- /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00023.html (8,453 bytes)
- 19. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1)
- Author: Dick Rasmussen <rasmussend@mindspring.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 19:04:56 -0400
- Now that is a VERY good reason for removing/disabling reverse! Dick Rasmussen CM 85 85 Van Diemen RF-85 Formula Ford /// /// autox-cm@autox.team.net mailing list ///
- /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00024.html (9,207 bytes)
- 20. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1)
- Author: VDieman@aol.com
- Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 09:34:20 EDT
- << > on Now that is a VERY good reason for removing/disabling reverse! Dick Rasmussen CM 85 85 Van Diemen RF-85 Formula Ford That is exactly why this proposal has been made. Since CM cars do not have
- /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00025.html (9,726 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu