Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*choice\s+of\s+rear\s+end\s+ratios\s+$the\s+car\,\s+that\s+is$\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*choice\s+of\s+rear\s+end\s+ratios\s+$the\s+car\,\s+that\s+is$\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. choice of rear end ratios (the car, that is) (score: 1): Author: Daniel Thompson <dthompson@gbc.ca>; Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 10:13:24 -0400; I have a decision to make with respect to the restoration of my bugeye. I am replacing the differential anyway, and was wondering if it would be a good idea to deviate from the original ratio. The c; /html/spridgets/1998-05/msg00317.html (7,608 bytes)
2. Re: choice of rear end ratios (the car, that is) (score: 1): Author: Ulix Goettsch <ulix@u.washington.edu>; Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 09:19:45 -0700 (PDT); You car came with a 4.22 rear end. this was used throughout early 1275s and then replaced by a 3.9 which was also kept for the 1500 except for the last two years which had the 3.7. One thing to cons; /html/spridgets/1998-05/msg00324.html (9,370 bytes)
3. Re: choice of rear end ratios (the car, that is) (score: 1): Author: Frank Clarici <spritenut@Exit109.com>; Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 18:50:56 -0400; A bugeye with a 3.9 is the way to go. It will lower the rpms for those freeway drives at speed. Since the bone stock Bugeye was no rocket, you will hardly know the difference on take off but wil appr; /html/spridgets/1998-05/msg00331.html (9,118 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]