Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Fot\]\s+FOT\:\s+Commerical\s+Posts\s+\-\s+YES\s+or\s+NO\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Fot\]\s+FOT\:\s+Commerical\s+Posts\s+\-\s+YES\s+or\s+NO\?\s*$/: 21 ]

Total 21 documents matching your query.

1. [Fot] FOT: Commerical Posts - YES or NO? (score: 1): Author: n197tr4@cs.com; Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 09:09:59 -0400; When looking at the website, the seller states that "Triumph TR Series : 1953 to 1976 (Front) Fade Stop Brake Cooler fitment has not been verified for this vehicle!" So... Do they need FOT to do eva; /html/fot/2010-07/msg00335.html (11,402 bytes)
2. Re: [Fot] FOT: Commerical Posts - YES or NO? (score: 1): Author: n197tr4@cs.com; Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 11:02:53 -0400; I am on this list to learn from others and for the entertainment value. I think it's helpful to hear about an unusual product or a great deal on a car or parts - I bought a TR4 roller this year becau; /html/fot/2010-07/msg00337.html (7,630 bytes)
3. Re: [Fot] FOT: Commerical Posts - YES or NO? (score: 1): Author: Justin Wagner <jmwagner@greenheart.com>; Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 12:50:18 -0700; If you are looking for ideas, I saw something interesting on the wife's non-LBC the other day. It has a plate near the disc, much like the original "dust shields" on TRs. The difference is that the; /html/fot/2010-07/msg00338.html (11,334 bytes)
4. Re: [Fot] FOT: Commerical Posts - YES or NO? (score: 1): Author: "macdonaldp" <macdonaldp@rogers.com>; Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 16:11:14 -0400; My opinion : This is MJB's forum, he gets first chance at dictating any rules or guidelines. Presumably, these apply: http://www.team.net/www/corp-use.html IMO, Justin's post fit perfectly within th; /html/fot/2010-07/msg00340.html (8,395 bytes)
5. Re: [Fot] FOT: Commerical Posts - YES or NO? (score: 1): Author: Scott Janzen <s.janzen@comcast.net>; Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 16:27:49 -0400; I never had a problem with your posting the product, only that you endorsed it then suggested that it might not actually work on a TR. Why endorse it then? And the line " I'm hoping some of you will; /html/fot/2010-07/msg00341.html (8,937 bytes)
6. Re: [Fot] FOT: Commerical Posts - YES or NO? (score: 1): Author: "Randall" <tr3driver@ca.rr.com>; Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 13:29:11 -0700; _______________________________________________ fot@autox.team.net http://www.fot-racing.com Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html Archive: http://www.team.net/archive Forums: http://www.team.net/f; /html/fot/2010-07/msg00342.html (8,430 bytes)
7. Re: [Fot] FOT: Commerical Posts - YES or NO? (score: 1): Author: "Bob Kramer" <rkramer3@austin.rr.com>; Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 15:42:15 -0500; Seemed in line to me. Last week I tried to have a discussion concerning what is a very relevant Triumph racing topic and no one really had anything to add except Terry Setler (thanks Terry). Even if; /html/fot/2010-07/msg00343.html (11,422 bytes)
8. Re: [Fot] FOT: Commerical Posts - YES or NO? (score: 1): Author: "Randall" <tr3driver@ca.rr.com>; Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 13:44:11 -0700; Sounds to me like that is best for everybody! Joe C. --Original Message-- From: fot-bounces@autox.team.net [mailto:fot-bounces@autox.team.net] On Behalf Of Bob Adams Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 2:06; /html/fot/2010-07/msg00344.html (8,695 bytes)
9. Re: [Fot] FOT: Commerical Posts - YES or NO? (score: 1): Author: "Jim Gambony" <jgambony@gcecisp.com>; Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 15:50:42 -0500; Sounds like it's time for me to ungracefully bow out of FOT. Been intesting overall, althought all the technical information for Spitfire racing is in "Kas's" books. So not much of value on this list; /html/fot/2010-07/msg00345.html (8,004 bytes)
10. Re: [Fot] FOT: Commerical Posts - YES or NO? (score: 1): Author: Bob Adams <adams910@gmail.com>; Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 17:05:41 -0400; Having recently posted the availability of some free Spitfire parts and a for sale (NFI), I obviously have no problem with such postings. How else are we to hear about such items, some of which have; /html/fot/2010-07/msg00347.html (7,405 bytes)
11. Re: [Fot] FOT: Commerical Posts - YES or NO? (score: 1): Author: "Joe Curry" <spitlist@cox.net>; Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 14:25:30 -0700; Hi Justin...I welcome info such as websites....that's one of the ways we help each other...Do not let yourself feel 'guilty'. Regards.. Racer Bud..Spitfire #21 -- Original Message -- From: "Justin Wa; /html/fot/2010-07/msg00348.html (8,373 bytes)
12. Re: [Fot] FOT: Commerical Posts - YES or NO? (score: 1): Author: "Jim Gambony" <jgambony@gcecisp.com>; Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 16:50:11 -0500; I say Yes, even if you have an interest as long as it is stated and it is Triumph related. Paul Like all the other posts that we get, if you don't like it hit delete...before you type out a crapgram.; /html/fot/2010-07/msg00349.html (9,263 bytes)
13. Re: [Fot] FOT: Commerical Posts - YES or NO? (score: 1): Author: Bill Babcock <billb@bnj.com>; Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 18:22:30 -0700; I followed the thread closely and never once did occur to me that anything inappropriate was going on. I welcome news on products being provided by FOT members or any vendors they encounter. ________; /html/fot/2010-07/msg00350.html (9,148 bytes)
14. Re: [Fot] FOT: Commerical Posts - YES or NO? (score: 1): Author: "Joe Boruch" <jaboruch@netzero.net>; Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 02:11:08 GMT; So.... if I recommended Quantum Mechanics for our transmissions and the forgiving and honorable efforts made by them to get something that I can actually use, is that OK? I've mentioned all my proble; /html/fot/2010-07/msg00351.html (9,232 bytes)
15. Re: [Fot] FOT: Commerical Posts - YES or NO? (score: 1): Author: "RACER BUD" <budscars@comcast.net>; Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 13:00:11 -0700; Having recently posted the availability of some free Spitfire parts and a Spitfire for sale (NFI), I obviously have no problem with such postings. How else are we to hear about such items, some of wh; /html/fot/2010-07/msg00352.html (14,011 bytes)
16. Re: [Fot] FOT: Commerical Posts - YES or NO? (score: 1): Author: "macdonaldp" <macdonaldp@rogers.com>; Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 16:07:38 -0400; Thanks Kas. Yes folks, let's call it done. I appreciate the posts. It's one of those issues that comes up, now and then, and it just needs a little discussion to put it to rest until someone else cri; /html/fot/2010-07/msg00353.html (13,207 bytes)
17. Re: [Fot] FOT: Commerical Posts - YES or NO? (score: 1): Author: "riverside" <riverside@southslope.net>; Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 15:49:44 -0500; AMICI - I am working on a narrow belt conversion using the stock TR4/3 crank pulleys. If any of you have crank pulley pieces and parts that you could part with for my experiment - bring them to Topek; /html/fot/2010-07/msg00354.html (14,445 bytes)
18. [Fot] FOT: Commerical Posts - YES or NO? (score: 1): Author: Bob Kramer <rkramer3@austin.rr.com>; Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 09:36:25 -0500; Somebody asked about why we just don't use a bigger water pump pulley. the answer is there isn't any room because of the thermostat neck cast into the head. There might be a little room for upsizing; /html/fot/2010-07/msg00359.html (7,584 bytes)
19. Re: [Fot] FOT: Commerical Posts - YES or NO? (score: 1): Author: "Enquiries Road & Track" <enquiries@roadandtrack.net.au>; Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 08:00:33 +1000; If it weren't for this list I would not even know John Nikas, much less have him as my guest for the afternoon. John is on the verge of some great news for the Kastner Cup of 2011. When he is ready h; /html/fot/2010-07/msg00362.html (8,380 bytes)
20. Re: [Fot] FOT: Commerical Posts - YES or NO? (score: 1): Author: "Greg \"Lunker\" Hilyer" <Lunkercars@earthlink.net>; Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 11:01:40 -0600; I'm startled to find (or not actually) that I have no brake backing plates for the rotoflex rear suspensions. Anyone have a cheap set laying around? At present I only need one pair but I better buy; /html/fot/2010-07/msg00371.html (8,203 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]