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

Results:

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

Total 10 documents matching your query.

1. Car Classifications (score: 1): Author: "Ken Breza" <kenandjanet@gosfgiants.com>; Date: 3 Jan 2001 14:21:24 -0000; I am new to solo 2. I need some help determining which class my car runs. It is a stock 1993 Mazda Miata. The SCCA solo 2 web site has it classed in E stock. However, I recently read in Grassroots Mo; /html/autox/2001-01/msg00027.html (7,408 bytes)
2. Re: Car Classifications (score: 1): Author: "Mark J. Andy" <marka@telerama.com>; Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 09:45:15 -0500 (EST); Its classed in CS. There's a proposed re-structuring of the classes out there, but that has been confirmed by the SCCA as not being adopted for the 2001 season. Other cars in CS (that seem competiti; /html/autox/2001-01/msg00028.html (7,794 bytes)
3. Re: Car Classifications (score: 1): Author: Smokerbros@aol.com; Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 10:47:01 EST; IMHO, there are no competitive RX-7s in C/Stock. The best of that group is the '84-5 GSL-SE, and it's not up to the task. I tried one for several years, as did several others. By 1998, none of us cou; /html/autox/2001-01/msg00031.html (7,836 bytes)
4. Re: Car Classifications (score: 1): Author: "Mark J. Andy" <marka@telerama.com>; Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 13:51:12 -0500 (EST); Yeah, I should have clarified that the list was "regionally competitive cars" primarily. Lately it seems you need an MR2 to win nationals and if you're good you can trophy at nationals in a 1.6 miat; /html/autox/2001-01/msg00035.html (8,151 bytes)
5. Re: Car Classifications (score: 1): Author: "davidschwabe" <davidschwabe@hotmail.com>; Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 14:23:33 -0600; Just out of curiousity, why is the 2nd Gen Rx-7 GTU or GTUs uncompetitive in CS?? *On paper* it looks to be a great car for CS, but it must not play out that way on the track... why? BTW, the 1.6 Mia; /html/autox/2001-01/msg00042.html (8,396 bytes)
6. Re: Car Classifications (score: 1): Author: Andrew_Bettencourt@Kingston.com; Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 12:29:05 -0800; A great regional car but a touch heavy at 2700-2800 lbs and a soft torque curve from the 13B. Wheels a little narrow for the weight.. AB "davidschwabe" <davidschwabe@hotmail.com>@autox.team.net on 01; /html/autox/2001-01/msg00043.html (8,867 bytes)
7. Re: Car Classifications (score: 1): Author: "davidschwabe" <davidschwabe@hotmail.com>; Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 09:37:49 -0600; I thought with the GTUs' alloy hood and 16-inch wheels that it could be good. But, why reinvent the wheel, right? Better off to stick with what's proven... I've learned that the hard way :-) --Dave; /html/autox/2001-01/msg00056.html (9,823 bytes)
8. Re: Car Classifications (score: 1): Author: "Chris Walton" <carguycw@flash.net>; Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 18:44:23 -0600; uncompetitive play <snip> <deactivate lurk mode> It's a little heavy, and the wheels are a little narrow, but mostly it's because of the wacky stock toe-control rear suspension. The RX-7's suspensio; /html/autox/2001-01/msg00065.html (8,076 bytes)
9. Re: Car Classifications (score: 1): Author: "Phil Ethier" <pethier@isd.net>; Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 23:13:04 -0600; Yes. I speak from experience. Bill Kempe had a stock 2nd-gen RX-7. I drove it in an autocross. The rear suspension drove me nuts. Bill decided that he hated the rear-steer enough to go Street Prepare; /html/autox/2001-01/msg00070.html (8,888 bytes)
10. Car classifications (score: 1): Author: "Pat Salerno" <psalerno@ix.netcom.com>; Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 09:19:17 -0400; I know I will probably hear about this for ever but here goes. No matter how the car classes are set up there WILL be one car that is more competitive than the other cars. I don't care how the classe; /html/autox/2000-07/msg01343.html (6,916 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 10
Page: [1]