Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*1500\s+midget\s+crank\s+vs\.\s+spitfire\s+crank\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*1500\s+midget\s+crank\s+vs\.\s+spitfire\s+crank\s*$/: 2 ]

Total 2 documents matching your query.

1. 1500 midget crank vs. spitfire crank (score: 1): Author: "Aaron Johnson" <fpspitfire37@msn.com>; Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 21:12:32 -0800; A little clarification/help/information is needed. We've been doing a little research lately and are finding that 1500 midget crankshafts seem to be weighing about 7 lbs less than the equivalent 150; /html/fot/2004-04/msg00052.html (7,467 bytes)
2. Re: 1500 midget crank vs. spitfire crank (score: 1): Author: "John Kipping" <johnkipping@inet.net.nz>; Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2004 19:23:13 +1200; Somethings wrong, although the Spitfire and Midget engines had different part numbers for most/all of the individual items the engines were identical specification so the crank weights should be iden; /html/fot/2004-04/msg00054.html (8,829 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 2
Page: [1]