Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Fot\]\s+SCCA\s+Archives\s+$now\s+bore\s+size$\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Fot\]\s+SCCA\s+Archives\s+$now\s+bore\s+size$\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [Fot] SCCA Archives (now bore size) (score: 1): Author: Tony Drews <tony@tonydrews.com>; Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 15:14:06 -0600; If my calculations are correct, based in 1.2 HP per cu in, 89 MM would make 6.7 HP more than 87 MM. 92 MM would make 17.3 HP more than 87 MM. I'm not sure I could feel 6 HP. I could probably feel 17,; /html/fot/2006-12/msg00451.html (7,403 bytes)
2. Re: [Fot] SCCA Archives (now bore size) (score: 1): Author: "Kas Kastner" <kaskas@cox.net>; Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 13:24:24 -0800; I suppose the power per inch reduces as you keep increasing the capacity and do nothing for the volumetric efficiency. But, the bigger bore does help with the compression ratio and allows a reduction; /html/fot/2006-12/msg00452.html (8,304 bytes)
3. Re: [Fot] SCCA Archives (now bore size) (score: 1): Author: <triumph_marx@freenet.de>; Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 22:29:50 +0100; Would rise torgue a little. Better coming out of the corner. MM. about close _______________________________________________ Fot mailing list Fot@autox.team.net http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo; /html/fot/2006-12/msg00453.html (8,038 bytes)
4. Re: [Fot] SCCA Archives (now bore size) (score: 1): Author: Bill Babcock <billb@bnj.com>; Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 14:56:16 -0800; I'd say that's about right. I know that the biggest horsepower gain on a TR3/4 is in the head, and that's not easy to get. The biggest performance gain is tires--the difference between Dunlop L secti; /html/fot/2006-12/msg00455.html (8,145 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]