Re: SM/2 a go for 2001

To:	nxracer@mediaone.net
Subject:	Re: SM/2 a go for 2001
From:	Matt Murray <mattm@optonline.net>
Date:	Mon, 26 Mar 2001 14:54:16 -0500

Mark:

What would you recommend?

Matt Murray

mattm@optonline.net
.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mark J. Hirt" <nxracer@mediaone.net>

> A PAX number of .875 wow can you make it any tougher?
> 
> So you actually think a SM2 car can beat AP.
> 
> IMHO a PAX number of .854 or RTP number of .847 is tough enough.
> 
> 
> > > The Pax number will be .875
> 
> -- 
>  Regards,
> 
>  Mark J. Hirt

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: SM/2 a go for 2001, Matt Murray Re: SM/2 a go for 2001, Mark J. Hirt Re: SM/2 a go for 2001, Matt Murray <= Re: SM/2 a go for 2001, Mark J. Hirt Re: SM/2 a go for 2001, Matt Murray RE: SM/2 a go for 2001, Paul Zahornasky Re: SM/2 a go for 2001, Kevin Stevens Re: SM/2 a go for 2001, Brad Cox RE: SM/2 a go for 2001, Eric Salem Re: SM/2 a go for 2001, Scot Zediker Re: SM/2 a go for 2001, Paul Foster RE: SM/2 a go for 2001, Paul Foster Re: SM/2 a go for 2001, Murray, Matthew D.

Previous by Date:	Re: Tow vehicle Question, Don Miller
Next by Date:	Re: SM/2 a go for 2001, Mark J. Hirt
Previous by Thread:	Re: SM/2 a go for 2001, Mark J. Hirt
Next by Thread:	Re: SM/2 a go for 2001, Mark J. Hirt
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]