Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*HS4\'s\s+vs\.\s+HIF\'s\s+for\s+RB\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*HS4\'s\s+vs\.\s+HIF\'s\s+for\s+RB\s*$/: 2 ]

Total 2 documents matching your query.

1. Re: HS4's vs. HIF's for RB (score: 1): Author: "Paul Hunt" <paul.hunt1@virgin.net>; Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 09:40:24 -0000; IMHO HIFs are more tricky to maintain as the carb has to be removed to maintain the float valve and jet, and the float chamber cover seal is perpetually in petrol and hence can leak. I've no idea on; /html/mgs/1999-11/msg00006.html (7,247 bytes)
2. HS4's vs. HIF's for RB (score: 1): Author: "Erich" <erich@mail.NGBM.COM>; Date: Sun, 31 Oct 1999 16:35:37 -0500; Hello all, I am looking at converting my 1980 RB to dual SU's. Does anyone know what the differences are between HS4 and HIF carbs? Are there any pro's or con's for the use of either in an RB convers; /html/mgs/1999-10/msg01365.html (6,359 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 2
Page: [1]