Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Anti\-Sway\s+Bar\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Anti\-Sway\s+Bar\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. Anti-Sway Bar (score: 1): Author: "Ross A. Goldberg" <loki@computek.net>; Date: Thu, 7 Mar 1996 10:48:49 -0600; On my 66 MGB I have no anti-sway bars and I am 'thinking' of installing one or both. I one or both came standard on some years, but obviously not mine <g> Which is needed more -- the front or rear?; /html/mgs/1996-03/msg00215.html (7,233 bytes)
2. RE: Anti-Sway Bar (score: 1): Author: "REICHLE, CHRISTOPHER" <CREICHLE@nsc.msmail.miami.edu>; Date: Thu, 07 Mar 1996 12:07:00 -0800 (PST); Moss' catalog has a section on tuning the suspension. let me read it to for a 66 Stage 1 stock springs new armstrong or tube kit for shocks stock 9/16" front sway bar Stage 2 stock springs 3/4" front; /html/mgs/1996-03/msg00222.html (8,429 bytes)
3. Re: Anti-Sway Bar (score: 1): Author: Johnmowog@aol.com; Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 14:21:31 -0500; A front bar on a pre-big-bumper B is all most of us need. Go 3/4 inch for best compromise between handling and harshness. If you want to go racing, you might want the rear bar, but on the street it g; /html/mgs/1996-03/msg00266.html (6,698 bytes)
4. Re: Anti-Sway Bar (score: 1): Author: Glenn Schnittke <glenns@edge.ercnet.com>; Date: Sat, 9 Mar 1996 12:45:18 -0600; Since your shocks have changed from the original, so your other needs have changed. As with other systems, if you change one part, the work load on the other parts will change. 1. I would heartily r; /html/mgs/1996-03/msg00292.html (8,439 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]