Re: Rear Engine T's

To:	land-speed@autox.team.net
Subject:	Re: Rear Engine T's
From:	ARDUNDOUG@aol.com
Date:	Thu, 4 Jan 2001 11:51:09 EST

In a message dated 01/04/2001 5:32:49 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
dwarner@electrorent.com writes:

<< The answer would seem to be to build 'em like they were. Then the handling
 problem would return. Vintage is for the classic car - if you want to build
 a rear engine lakester then run in lakester class.
  >>
Dan,
    Good reasoning.............I agree...............Ardun Doug King

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: Rear Engine T's, (continued) Re: Rear Engine T's, FastmetalBDF Re: Rear Engine T's, ARDUNDOUG Fwd: Rear Engine T's, ARDUNDOUG Re: Rear Engine T's, tim cunha Re: Rear Engine T's, tim cunha Re: Rear Engine T's, tim cunha Re: Rear Engine T's, tim cunha Re: Rear Engine T's, ARDUNDOUG Re: Rear Engine T's, Dan Warner Re: Rear Engine T's, Dick J Re: Rear Engine T's, ARDUNDOUG <= Re: Rear Engine T's, ARDUNDOUG Re: Rear Engine T's, Rick Yacoucci Re: Rear Engine T's, Thomas E. Bryant Re: Rear Engine T's, Glen Barrett

Previous by Date:	Re: Rules/wankel engine size factor........., ARDUNDOUG
Next by Date:	Re: Rear Engine T's, ARDUNDOUG
Previous by Thread:	Re: Rear Engine T's, Dick J
Next by Thread:	Re: Rear Engine T's, ARDUNDOUG
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]