Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*older\s+cars\s+in\s+stock\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*older\s+cars\s+in\s+stock\s*$/: 10 ]

Total 10 documents matching your query.

1. older cars in stock (score: 1): Author: "Mari L. Clements" <mlc4@psu.edu>; Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 10:35:32 -0500; O.K., I think I'm missing something. I think that it is often the case that it takes a year or two (or more) for people to figure out the best set-ups for cars, and so the FIRST year a new car comes; /html/autox/1999-03/msg00969.html (9,945 bytes)
2. 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)
3. Re: older cars in stock (score: 1): Author: Joshua Hadler <jhadler@rmi.net>; Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 10:15:54 -0700; Jay definitely has a good point here. I think that car choice and preference has a lot more to do with the statistics of "newer cars winning" than it appears. Are earlier 3-series BMW's still competi; /html/autox/1999-03/msg00979.html (8,325 bytes)
4. Re: older cars in stock (score: 1): Author: "Mari L. Clements" <mlc4@psu.edu>; Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 12:12:35 -0500; Gee--now I really want to know what you claimed first. Guess I'll have to wait and see when the digest comes. I'm a little worried, though, since my point was (intended to be) that one does NOT need; /html/autox/1999-03/msg00980.html (8,128 bytes)
5. Re: older cars in stock (score: 1): Author: Craig Blome <cblome@yahoo.com>; Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 10:12:32 -0800 (PST); I'd tend to agree with Jay here. Looking at the performance of the folks who trophy at Topeka, who are the statistical outliers of Solo II _drivers_, is IMHO a less than reliable gauge of the potenti; /html/autox/1999-03/msg00986.html (8,487 bytes)
6. Re: older cars in stock (score: 1): Author: "Mari L. Clements" <mlc4@psu.edu>; Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 16:07:26 -0500; Certainly. All I was trying to say was that it doesn't necessarily take the newest model/make of car to be competitive. I'd even go farther and say (as I did later) that some drivers would be fast ev; /html/autox/1999-03/msg01003.html (9,112 bytes)
7. Re: older cars in stock (score: 1): Author: "Justin Hughes" <ka1ult@channel1.com>; Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 16:58:33 -0500; OK, here's a concept I'll just toss out for discussion... So far I've competed mainly in the local BMWCCA autocrosses. They're run mostly like SCCA Solo II events, but the classification is very diff; /html/autox/1999-03/msg01004.html (10,625 bytes)
8. Re: older cars in stock (score: 1): Author: Joshua Hadler <jhadler@rmi.net>; Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 16:15:59 -0700; [snip] Good point. Many Porsche Club regions use the same (or similar) principle. But to do it for one marque, that has a very limited number of models, is if not trivial then at least doable. To do; /html/autox/1999-03/msg01010.html (8,403 bytes)
9. RE: older cars in stock (score: 1): Author: Tom Gentry <tgentry@execpc.com>; Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 17:17:10 -0600; I think I may have had a hand in starting this ball rolling, so I'll throw in one last word, just to see what the hard core SCCA guys think. I generally autocross with the Madison Sports Car Club und; /html/autox/1999-03/msg01011.html (8,887 bytes)
10. Re: older cars in stock (score: 1): Author: "richard nichols" <rnichol1@san.rr.com>; Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 15:33:45 -0800; Tom, I'm sure you'll get plenty of responses telling you what's WRONG with your system, but personaly I LIKE it. Keep up the good work. And don't blame yourself. You may have set out the wood, but I'; /html/autox/1999-03/msg01013.html (9,656 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 10
Page: [1]