Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*R\&P\s+ratios\s+TR4\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*R\&P\s+ratios\s+TR4\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. Re: R&P ratios TR4 (score: 1): Author: "John Macartney" <jonmac@ndirect.co.uk>; Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 21:11:05 -0000; John McEwen wrote: Greg, the Brits loved to install overdrives, then defeat the purpose by using higher numeric axle ratios instead of going the other way. They felt that the OD simply offered more g; /html/british-cars/2001-11/msg00037.html (8,151 bytes)
2. RE: R&P ratios TR4 (score: 1): Author: "Kerr, Paul TNO:EX" <Paul.Kerr@gems7.gov.bc.ca>; Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 13:27:20 -0800; I wouldn't dispute any of the below but would also add that the British have a strong preference for actually "driving" their cars and tend to use the extra performance that a manual box gives the dr; /html/british-cars/2001-11/msg00038.html (8,580 bytes)
3. Re: R&P ratios TR4 (score: 1): Author: John McEwen <mmcewen@ualberta.ca>; Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:06:22 -0700; Hi John, nice to hear from you again. I certainly won't argue the point about frugality being a watchword of the British motorist. Part of the problem was the poor automatics which were chosen for us; /html/british-cars/2001-11/msg00039.html (15,155 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]