Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*SP\s+turbo\s+rules\,\s+DG\'s\s+solution\s+\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*SP\s+turbo\s+rules\,\s+DG\'s\s+solution\s+\?\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. Re: SP turbo rules, DG's solution ? (score: 1): Author: GSMnow@aol.com; Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 01:35:34 EDT; < Here's my proposed wording: < Turbocharger units may not ported, clipped, or otherwise modified from stock. < Turbochargers may be updated/backdated, provided that: < the donator and target car wer; /html/autox/1999-06/msg01360.html (10,888 bytes)
2. Re: SP turbo rules, DG's solution ? (score: 1): Author: dg50@daimlerchrysler.com; Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 09:18:21 -0400; When you say "overclassed" you mean "they're the class lightweights" right? Aside from the ESP Supra (which is in the wrong class) and the ASP RX-7, all the other SP turbo cars are classed very conse; /html/autox/1999-06/msg01370.html (11,736 bytes)
3. Re: SP turbo rules, DG's solution ? (score: 1): Author: "Fedja Jeleskovic" <Fedja_Jeleskovic@pictel.com>; Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 18:11:33 -0400; I agree with a lot of things that you wrote, but I can not let boost amounts for 1G and 2G cars to stay as you mentioned them. If you would hook a boost gauge in the intake manifold, both 1G cars wil; /html/autox/1999-06/msg01404.html (8,427 bytes)
4. Re: SP turbo rules, DG's solution ? (score: 1): Author: "Mac Crossett" <delta-v@kscable.com>; Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 19:32:01 -0500; KeS sez: Well, you said it better than I did. I can see perfectly valid arguements for restricting turbo backdates to full engine swaps (although I think Dennis' proposal is better, allowing it with; /html/autox/1999-06/msg01416.html (10,678 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]