I think the idea is not to split off, but rather give more options. I also
agree that pulling traffic off of this mailing list would be a detriment.
My goal is to put up a site that will fill in alot of the holes left out on
the U-20 dominated Roadster sites. The thought of a R-16 wing is cool, we
can "Fly" with the U-20's but have a style all our own. I think that
staying on this list is the proper thing to do, if I have anything to do
with another list being formed, it will be for R-16 Wing banter and not
another technical forum. I have received a very warm welcome into this list
and did not intend to make waves. Please understand my idea was only to
have a little fun.
John Cooney
67.5 Roadster 1600
77 280ZTR
Houston TX
-----Original Message-----
From: shifty [SMTP:shifty@well.com]
Sent: Friday, July 16, 1999 3:25 PM
To: Datsun Roadsters
Subject: Re: are 1600's the Red headed Step-children?
Go ahead and do what you like, but I think that splitting this list into
1600 and 2000 groups is a bad idea. Granted, we have a BADROC list, but
that is for local stuff like where to meet, what time, etc. It just keeps
the noise traffic down on the main list. (Which I must say is one of the
best lists I've ever seen. The signal-to-noise ratio is very good, and it
is a fantastic resource.)
Most of the differences in the cars are in the engines, but information
about the U20 is generally applicable to the R16 and G-series. (Heck,
I've bought quite a few books about L series engines to learn general
information about rebuilding my G). There are very few posts that I don't
find interesting.
A 1600 website would be a great idea. I've been toying with the idea of
1500-specific site myself.
Leigh Brooks
San Francisco
On 7/16/99 9:42 AM, eric gilbert wrote:
>i would be willing to start a 1600 sub list or club.
>
>i'm tired of reading the 2000 stuff. timing chain problems, etc.
>
>do you want to take the ball?
>
>i'll design something.
>
>and i'm not chopping the machine either. better original.
>
>eric
>67 1600
>
>
|