Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*HS2\s+vs\s+HS4\'s\s+on\s+a\s+Spit\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*HS2\s+vs\s+HS4\'s\s+on\s+a\s+Spit\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. HS2 vs HS4's on a Spit (score: 1): Author: "wizardz" <wizardz@maxinter.net>; Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 09:55:43 -0400; So... what's the consensus... which runs better on a totally stock 1500 Spit? HS2's or 4's Paul Tegler wizardz@toad.net http://www.teglerizer.com; /html/spitfires/2000-08/msg00046.html (7,253 bytes)
2. Re: HS2 vs HS4's on a Spit (score: 1): Author: "Edward Hamilton" <hamilton@ptd.net>; Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 10:52:13 -0400; 4's -- no question. Standard equipment on european versions. Ed Hamilton -- Original Message -- From: "wizardz" <wizardz@maxinter.net> To: <triumphs-owner@autox.team.net>; <triumphs@autox.team.net>;; /html/spitfires/2000-08/msg00047.html (7,849 bytes)
3. Re: HS2 vs HS4's on a Spit (score: 1): Author: "alemen@pop.ftconnect.com" <alemen@pop.ftconnect.com>; Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 11:10:06 -0400; Paul, I would have thought that the HS4 since they pass some more cfm than the HS2. Also someone even suggested HS6!. I am going for the HS4. Alan '76 Spitfire So... what's the consensus... which run; /html/spitfires/2000-08/msg00049.html (8,086 bytes)
4. Re: HS2 vs HS4's on a Spit (score: 1): Author: "Terry L. Thompson" <tlt@digex.net>; Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 12:59:22 -0400; I would assume that since there is a difference of about 21 cubic inches between a 1142cc and a 1493cc engine blocks, that the CFM requirements are a pretty minimal change between the two engines. HS; /html/spitfires/2000-08/msg00054.html (11,206 bytes)
5. Re: HS2 vs HS4's on a Spit (score: 1): Author: Douglas Braun & Nadia Papakonstantinou <dougnad@bellatlantic.net>; Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:06:41 -0400; Since SU and Stromberg carbs have pistons, if the flow gets high enough, the pistons will reach their upper limit of travel. After that point, I'm sure they will work poorly. But I have no idea how h; /html/spitfires/2000-08/msg00055.html (8,388 bytes)
6. RE: HS2 vs HS4's on a Spit (score: 1): Author: "Simmons, Reid W" <reid.w.simmons@intel.com>; Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 08:54:15 -0700; I talked to Ted Schumacher at VTR2000 about this very thing and he recommended the HS4 for my '79. Reid '79 Spitfire (original owner) --Original Message-- From: alemen@pop.ftconnect.com [mailto:aleme; /html/spitfires/2000-08/msg00156.html (8,427 bytes)
7. Re: HS2 vs HS4's on a Spit (score: 1): Author: "L&B Lubbers" <lubbers@sympatico.ca>; Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 18:01:55 -0400; So, Terry, beyond your opinion in your last paragraph, I didn't understand much (well ok, after the third read it began to make sense; of course, with what I know about carbs, you could have said jus; /html/spitfires/2000-08/msg00413.html (8,769 bytes)
8. Re: HS2 vs HS4's on a Spit (score: 1): Author: Dave Chu <dave@ece.concordia.ca>; Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 14:27:30 -0400; Hi Len, I have converted the single ZS on my 78 Spitfire to a dual HS2 from a 67 SPitfire. It made a big difference for me in terms of performance and gas milage. That is mainly due to the ZS's auto; /html/spitfires/2000-08/msg00424.html (9,722 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]