Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Rotoflex\s+vs\.\s+swing\-spring\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Rotoflex\s+vs\.\s+swing\-spring\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. Rotoflex vs. swing-spring (score: 1): Author: Joe Curry <spitlist@gte.net>; Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 21:29:16 -0700; This one is directed particularly to Kas, but anyone else who wnats to offer an opinion is welcome to chime in. There has been a discussion on the Spitfire Mail list about which is better. Rotoflex S; /html/fot/2000-06/msg00047.html (7,194 bytes)
2. Re: Rotoflex vs. swing-spring (score: 1): Author: "R. Kastner" <kaskas@earthlink.net>; Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 07:22:53 -0700; I find it hard to believe that I would have at any time recommended changing from a independant rear suspension to a swing axle type. I have said some silly things along the way but I'd sure like to; /html/fot/2000-06/msg00052.html (7,972 bytes)
3. Re: Rotoflex vs. swing-spring (score: 1): Author: Ted Schumacher <tedtsimx@q1.net>; Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 10:40:18 -0400; a good solution is use the rotoflex axle but get trid of the rotoflex joint. convert it to a shortened datsun 510 half shaft giving a true irs. ted -- Ted Schumacher tedtsimx@q1.net http://www.tsimpo; /html/fot/2000-06/msg00053.html (7,867 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]