Mail Archive Search: <+from:jemitchell@compuserve.com>

Results:

References: [ +from:jemitchell@compuserve.com: 461 ]

Total 461 documents matching your query.

381. Re: meditation (score: 1): Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 10:17:05 -0500; sense no none. Not yet It's worth considering just how much time HAS gone by and also how much BETTER things are w/r/t autox tires and classes than they were in the 70s. How many folks have to recoun; /html/autox/1999-04/msg01278.html (9,983 bytes)
382. Re: FW: The tire thing^n and personal responsibility (score: 1): Author: Jay Mitchell <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 09:02:03 -0700; There continue to be errors of fact in this thread that I believe need to be cleared up: 1. The "Salina compound" tire that BFG had at Nationals in 1989 was not a 22x, it was a 206. And they didn't c; /html/autox/1999-04/msg01370.html (8,348 bytes)
383. Re: National Tour points (score: 1): Author: Jay Mitchell <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 19:19:42 -0700; Pro Solo has pretty well proven that premise false. With a points system that makes running in, but not necessarily winning, the season finale essential to win your class, I'm not aware of any class; /html/autox/1999-04/msg01391.html (10,310 bytes)
384. Re: National Tour points (score: 1): Author: Jay Mitchell <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 19:59:36 -0700; If that's how you feel, then precisely WHY are you wasting so much time bitching on team.net? You haven't been forced to compete in autox. Maybe you should go play with the "REAL" racers. You've cert; /html/autox/1999-04/msg01393.html (8,587 bytes)
385. Re: National Tour points (score: 1): Author: Jay Mitchell <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 21:28:36 -0700; No anger. Those were honest questions. You have a low opinion of Solo II, yet you obviously spend a lot of time bitching about the elements in it that you don't like, almost as if you have a similarl; /html/autox/1999-04/msg01400.html (10,375 bytes)
386. Re: National Tour points (score: 1): Author: Jay Mitchell <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 07:02:48 -0700; OK, so you can be Walter Mitty then. Vroom, vroom. I hear there are some pretty good computer racing simulation games. You might wanta try one of those, too. ;<) You can do that now. Why do you keep; /html/autox/1999-04/msg01409.html (9,651 bytes)
387. Re: Estimating camber? (score: 1): Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 12:16:40 -0600; Brian asked: accurately? Yep: 1. Park the car on a level surface, preferably a finished concrete slab. The closer to level, the more accurate your results. 2. Make a plumb bob using a piece of thread; /html/autox/1999-03/msg00100.html (8,750 bytes)
388. Re: Estimating camber? (score: 1): Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 13:23:39 -0600; I typed: Oops. The formula should contain arcsin rather than arctan. The difference for small values of camber will be negligible, however. If you have -2 degrees, then the error due to use of arctan; /html/autox/1999-03/msg00106.html (7,506 bytes)
389. Re: Mustang vs Camaro (score: 1): Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 10:00:08 -0600; even glass unloaded nearly so Is there a difference in wheel rates between live axle and IRS cars? This would be the only means whereby this could happen. There's nothing intrinsic in IRS that would; /html/autox/1999-03/msg00254.html (8,104 bytes)
390. Re: Lotus Europa ?'s (score: 1): Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 12:17:18 -0600; Eric sez: Me, too. Had mine since 1987, and I still like 'em. "must-have" book No single book that I know of, although there is a new Europa book out (by Robinshaw, I believe) about which I've heard; /html/autox/1999-03/msg00651.html (8,101 bytes)
391. Re: Sipe's angst? (score: 1): Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 15:12:39 -0600; Mark salvos, in part: I've got no dog in watever fight this is, but team.net is most definitely not the place to have it. Please keep flagrant accusations regarding course safety and other such issue; /html/autox/1999-03/msg00749.html (7,689 bytes)
392. Re: New car classifications (score: 1): Author: Jay Mitchell <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 04:07:02 -0800; First, a new car is NOT needed "every four years" in order to be competitive in Stock. Look at event results at the higher levels, and you will see that, in a number of classes, it is possible to win; /html/autox/1999-03/msg00958.html (9,942 bytes)
393. Re: older cars in stock (score: 1): Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 10:04:58 -0600; the case the best often isn't I'd go along with that 100%. When you can't buy shocks or front bars for a car, your options for a successful Stock Solo II setup are pretty limited. And even after thos; /html/autox/1999-03/msg00971.html (8,549 bytes)
394. Re: New car classifications (score: 1): Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 12:54:46 -0600; allowed more That's just not a workable idea, and it's based on an incorrect premise: that older cars are intrinsically less competitive in Stock. I cited several cases to point out the incorrectness; /html/autox/1999-03/msg00992.html (10,024 bytes)
395. Re: New car classifications -- I'M done. (score: 1): Author: Jay Mitchell <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 17:54:14 -0800; Possibly because it's in error, and those of us with some experience recognize the error. So how would one explain the steady increase in participation levels, particularly at higher-level events? I; /html/autox/1999-03/msg01007.html (11,091 bytes)
396. Re: New car classifications -- I'M done. (score: 1): Author: Jay Mitchell <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 21:55:08 -0800; I did that earlier. Although the neither the tone nor the organization of your response are calculated to motivate one to pay close attention, I'll take the trouble to reply. Read the Solo II Rules,; /html/autox/1999-03/msg01027.html (13,059 bytes)
397. Re: WARNING humer alert! tree hugging hippy crap (score: 1): Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 11:34:26 -0600; above. I'd like being You can do that now. One option you have is to install a high-flow catalyst. In the case of lots of the newer cars, even that won't be necessary, as the newer cats tend to flow; /html/autox/1999-03/msg01113.html (8,728 bytes)
398. SP rules on catalytic converters (score: 1): Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 08:35:54 -0600; We need to clear up a major misconception here: it seems that lots of folks believe that, just because a car passes the state(or city- or county- ) mandated sniff test that it's not a polluter. To my; /html/autox/1999-03/msg01169.html (11,286 bytes)
399. Re: SP rules on catalytic converters (score: 1): Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 09:44:40 -0600; the wearing moderately Let me get this straight: you claim that your cars are in full compliance with EPA standards for Nox, Co, and HC emissions without the catalytic convertor? I'm very skeptical.; /html/autox/1999-03/msg01179.html (9,375 bytes)
400. Re: SP rules on catalytic converters (score: 1): Author: "Jay Mitchell" <jemitchell@compuserve.com>; Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 11:14:24 -0600; who state to Those are not the same as the EPA test cycle, and that does not mean that the cars are in compliance with Federal limits, only that they have passed an abbreviated test cycle and that th; /html/autox/1999-03/msg01193.html (11,115 bytes)

Current List: 381 - 400
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20]