Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*need\s+clarification\s+on\s+a\s+rule\,\s+please\.\.\.\s*$/: 30 ]

Total 30 documents matching your query.

1. need clarification on a rule, please... (score: 1)
Author: "Scott M. Stone" <sstone@foo3.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 12:31:35 -0800 (PST)
i remember this was somewhat debated last time i was a part of this sport, so let me ask here and see if it's been clarified any since i last was involved :) My Rx7 had 124,000 miles on it when the w
/html/autox/2003-01/msg00040.html (9,297 bytes)

2. Re: need clarification on a rule, please... (score: 1)
Author: "Charles" <cfgold@intrex.net>
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 15:52:30 -0500
I believe you are correct on all counts sir. The downpipe moves you into street prepared, a programmable CPU puts you in SM. You will not be competitive in ASP. See if your local group runs a paxed s
/html/autox/2003-01/msg00042.html (10,115 bytes)

3. Re: need clarification on a rule, please... (score: 1)
Author: "Scott M. Stone" <sstone@foo3.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 13:11:07 -0800 (PST)
yeah, apparently they do in the bay area.. hmm i'm going to need a lot of magnetic material to put in "274 SM2-ST-N" (street-mod 2, street tire, novice).. i believe i'm allowed to run in novice since
/html/autox/2003-01/msg00043.html (11,130 bytes)

4. Re: need clarification on a rule, please... (score: 1)
Author: "Mark J. Andy" <marka@telerama.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 16:30:46 -0500 (EST)
Yeah, both are still illegal for stock. In ASP, I don't think you can do anything to the boost controllers, but I don't know for sure. Well, you're kinda saying two things here... On the one hand yo
/html/autox/2003-01/msg00044.html (10,735 bytes)

5. RE: need clarification on a rule, please... (score: 1)
Author: "Bruce Haden" <bhaden@ucsd.edu>
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 13:51:46 -0800
was very plugged, as they tend to get after 124k. My mechanic put on a down-pipe to replace the precat, which is a fairly common thing to do on these cars....... even though it's still smog-legal in
/html/autox/2003-01/msg00045.html (8,886 bytes)

6. RE: need clarification on a rule, please... (score: 1)
Author: "Scott M. Stone" <sstone@foo3.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 13:57:32 -0800 (PST)
still has *a* cat, though, and should still pass the tailpipe emissions... i hope anyway heh -- Scott M. Stone <sstone@foo3.com> Cisco Certified Network Associate, Sun Solaris Certified Systems Admin
/html/autox/2003-01/msg00046.html (9,290 bytes)

7. RE: need clarification on a rule, please... (score: 1)
Author: "Bruce Haden" <bhaden@ucsd.edu>
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 15:34:08 -0800
on still has *a* cat, though, and should still pass the tailpipe emissions... i hope anyway heh That is kinda what I was getting at. The state inspectors (sometimes) just look for "a" cat and if the
/html/autox/2003-01/msg00047.html (9,308 bytes)

8. Re: need clarification on a rule, please... (score: 1)
Author: "Scot Zediker" <roadsterboy@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 17:18:32 -0800
in paxed Actually, I think the programmable CPU will only move him into SM2 if it controls boost. Otherwise, it would still be legal for ASP. Anyone who knows the correct answer is free to jump in he
/html/autox/2003-01/msg00048.html (9,503 bytes)

9. Re: need clarification on a rule, please... (score: 1)
Author: "Scot Zediker" <roadsterboy@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 17:20:52 -0800
Unfortunately, here in California, you can be clean at the pipe and still fail for missing equipment. Don't ask me how I know. Scot /// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net
/html/autox/2003-01/msg00049.html (9,420 bytes)

10. Re: need clarification on a rule, please... (score: 1)
Author: "Scott M. Stone" <sstone@foo3.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 18:02:28 -0800 (PST)
fortunately, most mechanics have never worked on a 3rd gen rx7 due to their rarity, and do not know that these cars are supposed to have a precat. Last time i had mine smogged they didn't even look u
/html/autox/2003-01/msg00050.html (10,226 bytes)

11. Re: need clarification on a rule, please... (score: 1)
Author: "Cheryl and Jim Fossum" <fossum@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 23:22:37 -0500
A "piggyback" computer that only modifies the output signals from the CPU (i.e. fuel injector pulse width and ignition timing signals) but doesn't control boost should be legal. A replacement or rep
/html/autox/2003-01/msg00070.html (9,963 bytes)

12. Re: need clarification on a rule, please... (score: 1)
Author: "Scott M. Stone" <sstone@foo3.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 14:29:10 -0800 (PST)
hm, maybe i'll keep 2 computers around just in case. Then again it'll be a long time before my driving skills get up to the point where anyone would protest me :) -- Scott M. Stone <sstone@foo3.com>
/html/autox/2003-01/msg00077.html (10,582 bytes)

13. Re: need clarification on a rule, please... (score: 1)
Author: "Scott M. Stone" <sstone@foo3.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 15:32:44 -0800 (PST)
ok wait a minute... does it become illegal for ASP if it *can* control boost, or if it *is being used to* control boost? ie, i know the programmable f-con *can* control boost. But if i left it set at
/html/autox/2003-01/msg00078.html (10,659 bytes)

14. Re: need clarification on a rule, please... (score: 1)
Author: Kevin Stevens <Kevin_Stevens@pursued-with.net>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 16:07:35 -0800 (PST)
RTFM - you can make any changes electronically in SP that have a mechanical equivalent. Legally, you can bolt in a computer that transforms your car into an Imperial cruiser, as long as you don't use
/html/autox/2003-01/msg00079.html (10,125 bytes)

15. Re: need clarification on a rule, please... (score: 1)
Author: "Patrick Washburn" <washburn@dwave.net>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 18:10:08 -0600
There's the funny thing about rules...they don't account for your intentions or integrity. If it *can* control boost, it is illegal. I doesn't matter if you swear on a stack of bibles that "Honest..
/html/autox/2003-01/msg00080.html (9,903 bytes)

16. Re: need clarification on a rule, please... (score: 1)
Author: Kevin Stevens <Kevin_Stevens@pursued-with.net>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 16:28:35 -0800 (PST)
Hmm - looks like we disagree, I guess there is room for interpretation on this? KeS /// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try /// http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/html/autox/2003-01/msg00081.html (10,050 bytes)

17. RE: need clarification on a rule, please... (score: 1)
Author: "Eric Salem" <eric@mail.brown911.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 18:36:48 -0600
RTFM - you can make any changes electronically in SP that have a mechanical equivalent. Legally, you can bolt in a computer that transforms your car into an Imperial cruiser, as long as you don't us
/html/autox/2003-01/msg00082.html (9,709 bytes)

18. RE: need clarification on a rule, please... (score: 1)
Author: Kevin Stevens <Kevin_Stevens@pursued-with.net>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 17:01:22 -0800 (PST)
You're driving a freakin' Imperial Cruiser and you care about a lousy 4 second penalty?! What a tool. And that would affect the quality of your life how? ;) KeS /// unsubscribe/change address request
/html/autox/2003-01/msg00083.html (9,728 bytes)

19. Re: need clarification on a rule, please... (score: 1)
Author: "Scott M. Stone" <sstone@foo3.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 18:02:35 -0800 (PST)
I'm just going to run the car in ASP until my driving skills improve to the point where i feel it warrants more money. At which point i'll have my mechanic, who does a fair bit of racing himself, bui
/html/autox/2003-01/msg00084.html (10,775 bytes)

20. RE: need clarification on a rule, please... (score: 1)
Author: "Eric Salem" <eric@mail.brown911.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 20:20:02 -0600
Besides, an Imperial cruiser would get its butt spanked by a TIE fighter any day of the week. Well actually an Imperial Cruiser would have a whole staff of people on the Fire Deck and the Tie Fighte
/html/autox/2003-01/msg00085.html (9,513 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu